Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-20 news, pictures, analysis Part III
« Last post by kcran567 on Yesterday at 02:44:36 pm »
Nobody mentioned that maybe the Indians' did detect the J-20... But did the J-20 have the final definitive (F-35 type-chevron-axisymmetric) nozzle on during the supposed detection. That would make a big difference, no?

Flat nozzles were mentioned in an earlier post, doesn't the F-35s nozzle match or surpass the F-22s?

Did the Indians claim Radio/Radar detection, IR detection, or both?
Designation Systems / Re: Handley Page aircraft
« Last post by Apophenia on Yesterday at 02:43:33 pm »
Chris: Kites, Birds and Stuff - Handley Page Aircraft, P. D. Stemp, Lulu Press, July 2011

Page 99: "Handley Page H.P.122 - A project for a V.T.O.L. type, during 1961. Powered by four Rolls-Royce Tyne engines."

Stéphane: Great stuff ... corrections/additions made. Thanks for confirm the Type X designation :) And I too would like to know what H.P.48 and H.P.49 were reserved for!

A few other responses ...

Finding dates for HP designs was crazy-making  :o I too have seen Bluebird listed as a 1909 type. The Type A first flew on 26 May 1910, so I went with that. But now I'm doubting my choice on the Type B (with its convoluted history). Finished in 1909 but abandoned by HP before flying, the 'B was flown in 1910 as the Plane Limited Biplane. But, this is an HP list, so 1909 seems to be the important date.

I've seen both "Antiseptic" and "Yellow Peril" applied to the Type D/H.P.4 and the Type E/H.P.5.

Type S: Doh! I had the HPS as Type S in the 'H.P.' listings but forgot to add it to the second Letter Types  :-[

Type T: Still confused about this one. Are you saying that (in the second series), the Type T was the H.P.19 Hanley while the Type Ta was its development, the H.P.25 Hendon? That would certainly make sense.
Military / Re: Nuclear Weapons NEWS ONLY
« Last post by sferrin on Yesterday at 02:10:30 pm »
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Various Blohm und Voss projects
« Last post by newsdeskdan on Yesterday at 01:55:04 pm »
Is the CIOS report a paper copy or a softcopy? I would really like to see it!
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-20 news, pictures, analysis Part III
« Last post by Blitzo on Yesterday at 01:53:19 pm »
Well, Chengdu does appear to take many cues from Western VLO designs through both publicly available information and (very likely) espionage.

Considering most international stealth fighter projects that are emerging take quite a fewcues from designs first pioneered by US stealth fighters, yeah.
Tbh this is something that I've never contested since we first saw the photos of J-20 back in late 2010. It would have been concerning if J-20 did not feature similar stealth shaping principles to other stealth fighters.

Even VLO shaping itself consists of tradeoffs and compromises. While the stealth of the J-20 is no doubt more complex and nuanced than what most of us can eyeball, it's likely that engineer from a company with extensive VLO experience like Lockheed would be able to identify design features that he wouldn't agree with, at least from a VLO perspective.

Assuming that the article is not talking out of its backside and they actually managed to get a LockMart scientist or engineer to make a serious and informed comment about the J-20 based off various photos -- the statement itself is still so damn vague that one could ascribe whatever meaning to it that we wanted.

Even we are able to easily ID a few points of J-20's design and configuration which are obviously not as stealthy as it could be. The current Al-31 engines for example have round nozzles without serrations. The actuators under the wing are F-22 style rather than flat like the F-35. So is that what the guy means?

Or, is it more extreme like what some people here suggested, like CAC literally copy and pasted bits and pieces from F-22 and F-35 without actually thinking about what they were doing and applying their own R&D?

But again, the J-20 doesn't need to compete with the F-22 in every characteristics to be able to perform its intended mission.

Agree, but also not really what this discussion over the last few pages seems to have been about. Rather, the discussion is more about interpreting what on earth the Lockmart guy meant.
Space Projects / Re: Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope
« Last post by Flyaway on Yesterday at 01:43:33 pm »
WFIRST’s second chance

There’s a saying often used in the space community that you’re not a real NASA mission until you’ve been threatened with cancellation. There is some truth to that: many NASA missions that ultimately were successful faced the threat of termination, either by the agency or Congress. For example, the new book Chasing New Horizons is filled with near-death experiences for the New Horizons mission to Pluto (see “Review: Chasing New Horizons”, The Space Review, April 30, 2018)
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Various Blohm und Voss projects
« Last post by steelpillow on Yesterday at 01:11:53 pm »
Is the CIOS report a paper copy or a softcopy? I would really like to see it!
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Shorts S.B. 8 Helicopter Design
« Last post by CJGibson on Yesterday at 12:45:16 pm »
Interesting theory, it did have a rigid(?) rotor.

Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Shorts S.B. 8 Helicopter Design
« Last post by retrofit1 on Yesterday at 12:27:57 pm »
Additional question - from engineering point of view - what is the advantage of such configuration?
Perhaps to balance the increasing lift of the advancing blade vs the decreasing lift of the retreating blade in cruising speed, with moderate blade pitch changes?
Space Projects / Re: Early european rocketry projects
« Last post by Michel Van on Yesterday at 12:22:17 pm »
oh yes, early Space Shuttle studies had RCS with LOX/LH2 propellant, they even consider the RL-10 for final orbital injection of Orbiter

french HM20 is German "HDTW" by MBB,
what stand acronym BORD for ?
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10