Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Various Dornier projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 09:09:05 am »
From Avions 101,

unfortunately the picture is not completed to know what was Dornier Do.22 took
from a "P" designation ?.
Early Aircraft Projects / Fairey Prototypes & Projects Pre-1945
« Last post by hesham on Today at 08:46:31 am »

We can talk here about Fairey and its prototypes and Projects,and here is early
drawing to Fairey single seat fleet fighter to Spec. D of R.6 and some drawings
to Fairey Flycatcher,I don't know if some of them still Projects only or not ?.

Model Aircraft Monthly 10/2003
An interesting distinction between the RB.153, RD-41 and F135 is that the first two used A/B in the hover. Also, by the looks of things, the RB.153 design put the burner in the final stage of the nozzle (hence its German name). How was that done on the Model 200 and the Yak-141?

As for the CL-84 in the background - GD owned Canadair until 1976.
Naval Projects / Re: never realized projects of Japanese destroyers ww2
« Last post by Tzoli on Today at 07:57:53 am »
Hi dear people I know that the Japanese navy was testing the IJN Shimakaze destroyer it stayed by one example, so she was one of a kind.
 Does somebody know there were more paper project destroyers or a further developed version of the IJN Shimakaze?

There are only a few projects.
Shimakaze (Project Number F-52) preliminary with 2x7 61cm torpedo tubes but the launchers deemed too large and heavy for the hull

The Super Shimakaze (Pre Project Number V-6) with somewhat slower speed due to standardised engines (68km/h rather 73) more AA guns compared to the original as launched, and 3 sextuple (6 barrel) torpedo tubes dated 1939

The Super Akizuki (Pre Project Number V-7) a modified Akizuki (Project Number F-51A (Akizuki), B (Fuyutsuki) and F-53 (Mitcitsuki)) with wider beam of 12 meters rather 11,2 meters but faster, 68km/h rather 61km/h and longer range of 14.800km rather 11.000km, heavier displacement of 3.030tons standard and 3.800tons full load otherwise the same armament as the Akizukis though a heavier torpedo armament might had been considered and dated 1941/42.

The Matsu and Tachibana (Project Numbers F-55A and B) would had originally a sextuple (6 barelled) 61cm torpedo tube, but due to production delays the simpler quad launchers were mounted.

These are all that I'm aware of. There should be at least one design which we lack information on and based on the number system:

F-48 - Asashio class (1934)
F-49 - Kagero class (1937)
F-50 - Yugumo class (1939)
F-51A - Akizuki class (1939)
F-51B - Fuyutsuki class (1941)
F-52 - Shimakaze class (1941)
F-53 - Michitsuki class (1942)
F-55A - Matsu class (1942)
F-55B - Tachibana class (1942)

The F-54 destroyer design is missing and if there are any post Matsu/Tachibana proposals.
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Avro Pre-1945 Projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 06:15:24 am »

Avro also submitted a proposal for Spec. B.20/40,but no more Info is available ?.
More about the Air Wibault 100, from Avions N97 and 99:

With the text.
Missile Projects / Re: Patriot SAM replacement
« Last post by bring_it_on on Today at 02:33:51 am »
Any idea on AN/TPQ-53 array dimensions?

9.3 ft by 9.3 ft as per Kelvin Wong at Jane's IDR although I'm not sure since it does not appear to have equal sides..If you adjust for the FMTV width you get a height of 9.3 ft (based on reporting below) and a width of 7.5-7.8 ft. This makes sense and is quite close to where I could ballpark based on vehicle dimensions.

 Assuming that Lockheed offers a fully populated array based on the Q-53s size, the Patriot AESA array will be approximately 60% larger while the TPS-80 would be about 20% larger than it. It is however quite likely that Lockheed offers multiple sizes much like the AMDR, EL/M-2084, and Giraffe 4A/8A. An extended FMTV could be considered ( like on MEADS MFCR) allowing for a larger radar and associated equipment to be fitted.

The radar unit itself is 6.93 m long, 2.84 m wide,2.84 m tall, and weighs 8,889 kg.

It's really sad the NAVY not took the Convair Model 200 and end up with the Rockwell XFV-12 fiasco.

I wonder, What if: USAF and NAVY took Model 200 as F-16 and FV-12  ?
Naval Projects / Re: HMS Eagle with Phantoms
« Last post by Geoff_B on Yesterday at 03:08:39 pm »
I think they would have retained the 984 radar if they had continued as Strike Carriers through the 70s, Hermes lost hers because she changed to a Command Carrier and no longer needed the expensive but advanced 984 system. Although its possible if CA-01 had continued past 1966 then the 988 radar might have replaced 984 during Eagle's refit but maybe without the protective dome.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10