Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Hi! Westland proposal pv.7 picture.
The article says the 30mm version uses radar to track the target.  Presumably pretty high frequency to provide good resolution on small targets like drones. 
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Batson Flying Boats
« Last post by hesham on Today at 03:10:14 pm »
From le Fana 197.
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: The Aviation Historian No.21 Magazine
« Last post by circle-5 on Today at 02:40:03 pm »
I disagree.

Sandys was Macmillan's Rosa Kleb.

Sandys cleared the decks in period of great flux and once the strategic situation had settled (UK withdrawal from Empire and more focused on NATO northern flank) Sandys' (or Macmillan's) cancellations made the implementation of RV Jones' recommendations much easier. Think dinosaurs/fissure eruptions/asteroids/mammals rather than pretty designs.

I'll be in the stocks at 4, Hamilton Place on the 24th if anyone fancies chucking tomatoes at me.


Let's agree to disagree on Duncan Sandys - he's your guy, after all.  But if you decide to similarly praise Robert McNamara, I'll be looking around for some really large American tomatoes (which are usually flavorless, I might add!)

In all seriousness, thank you for another great article!
I'm fairly well read on the interwar projects, yet seeing all the contenders pulled together I'm noticing stuff I hadn't seen before. The major competitors to these projects are well known, yet at the same time there are others that are less well known, so fully worthy of a place here, and placing them in context adds considerable information - were they more or less advanced than their competitors? Closer to the requirement, or less so? And so on. I think there's actually considerable value to a specification based thread in providing mutual context.

WRT Wikipedia, it's a useful aggregator of information. I could type in a summary of what the Putnam's volumes say on any of these aircraft and no one would blink, if I cut and paste someone else's summary of the same info from wiki, what's the difference?

And these aircraft may be reasonably well known to us, as followers of British interwar projects, but are they as well known to Blackkite, or other non-British contributors?

Couldn't have put it better myself . . .
ETA: And for that matter the P.66 in Hesham's post is new to me. I presume that's the Boulton Paul submission?

Yes, you are correct . . .

. . . The value of this site is that it aims to add new information, not just gives links to very obvious secondary sources. Things will decline very rapidly if we just become a summarised encylopedia of aircraft, we should aim for something better.

Agreed, which is why in my previous post I said we should be correcting and enhancing the generally available information . . .

As an example, Hesham's endless searching through old magazines has located a large amount of unusual projects etc. that go a long way to putting the aircraft we know into a broader context,

And vice versa! If for example, we just make a post about the Boulton Paul P.66 in isolation, we have no context within which to evaluate the design. Post it here, in the 'G.4/31' thread, and that information is here, where it's useful. Another example, in your excellent Schneider Trophy book (I have a copy), you don't just write about the unbuilt projects, you also include the 'well known', which you have to, in order to tell the complete story. It's the same in this situation, I believe . . .

. . . and that is surely the kind of thing we should champion. Its the unbuilt, unseen, unusual that lies at the heart of the forum.

Again, agreed, however, if we abandon the broader view, we risk disappearing ever more deeply down an ever narrowing rabbit hole . . .

Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: Luftwaffe: Secret Wings of the Third Reich
« Last post by Wurger on Today at 02:04:43 pm »
Finally I got my copy!!!! It`s another "must have" from Dan`s workshop, packed with brilliant airplane designs. Although Dan`s preference goes to the Messerschmitt Super 163, I got thrilled by the sheer suggestion of the massive Focke-Wulf flying wing, propelled by six Deutz Dz 720, each with 5000Hp. Also of my choice, a table with different aircraft layouts, revealing many unknown configurations considered by Heinkel. Finally, Gustav Staatz`s barrel engine. was he related to the Statax company, also involved in "trommel" engines?
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: The Aviation Historian No.21 Magazine
« Last post by Schneiderman on Today at 01:41:46 pm »
And you can always go here and download (free) many official Government documents on the subject.

Orbital ATK is developing a range of new advanced medium-calibre ammunition
variants for use with its 30/40 mm calibre MK44 XM813 and 30 mm calibre lightweight
XM914 Bushmaster Chain Guns. The new ammunition types – command-guided,
 proximity fuze, and air burst – are intended to deliver enhanced capabilities for a wide
range of land and air combat platforms.

Development of the 30ื173 mm command-guided round leverages technologies
evolved by Orbital ATK for the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) Extreme Accuracy Tasked Ordnance (EXACTO) programme.

The EXACTO effort has resulted in a guided .50 calibre round – equipped with real-time
optical sensors and aero-actuation controls – that improves sniping performance in
long-range, day/night engagements. The EXACTO system combines a manoeuvrable
bullet with a complementary laser designator-equipped fire-control system (FCS) to
compensate for weather, wind, target movement, and other factors that can reduce

The sniper uses the laser designator to determine and track the target. Once fired,
actuators inside the bullet – which can correct its movement up to 30 times per second
 in flight – receive data from the optical sensor to guide it to the target. For the new
30ื173 mm guided round, the target is locked with a radar sensor, while a networked
FCS delivers updated course correction and target information via a datalink to an
unspecified command guidance sensor located in the back of the munition.

“It’s a one shot, one kill capability in one round,” Tim Strusz, Director Business
Development, Precision Weapons at Orbital ATK told Jane’s .

“In terms of operational cost effectiveness, the round pays for itself with a single shot,” he added.

Uhm. . .yeah.  Let's see a human keep a laser designator on this long enough for a bullet to hit it.  Hell, even a machine.

And you can be CERTAIN they'll have AI capable of doing this (likely more as human reflexes will cease to be the limiter) in a few short years.   Imagine 100 of them heading toward your position, each with the equivalent of a 30mm round onboard, and all they're trained to do is blow up near a human, optical sight, radar array, etc.  Each individual member of the swarm communicating with the "cloud" it carries along with it, to make sure there isn't double-coverage on any one target unless needed.  Imagine that "30 mm round" has a small shaped charge, large enough to punch a hole in the wall of an artillery barrel if so desired.  Churn these things out in big factories like iphones.  The mind boggles at the implications.  Instead of ATACMs dropping a unitary warhead on the target, or a bunch of dumb submunitions, it comes in low and deploys a few hundred of these things.  Maybe a version of a USMC LVTP-7 ditches the meat compartment in the back and has a thousand or so of these at the ready to help clean the beach landing site.  Maybe the next time a "boat swarm" shows up to harass USN ships a thousand of these suckers go meet it.  The possibilities are endless. 
Space Projects / Re: Another Rocket Startup
« Last post by Hobbes on Today at 12:40:22 pm »
One of the nice things about 3D printing is you can reduce part count significantly (1/10 the part count of a traditional assembly is often feasible), and you get parts that are ready to go without lots of machining. Both are significant labor savers.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10