• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Old Vision to the Future of Aviation

Status
Not open for further replies.

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,797
Reaction score
4,962
Hi,


after we closed the topic; imagination of the future from the past;
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2504.msg20810.html#msg20810


We can talk here about old new idea for future of the aviation,which never saw
the light.


Here is a two concepts,a flying aircraft carrier and extra folding wings airplane,the
later design looks like Russian Nikitin-Schevchenco concept.


http://books.google.com.eg/books?id=RycDAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=popular+science+1943&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DNkEVIGDB6ya1AXXx4D4DQ&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Edit : The latter one can now be found here http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,22720.msg230225.html#new
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    679.8 KB · Views: 173
  • 1-2.png
    1-2.png
    966.8 KB · Views: 160

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
664
hesham said:
after we closed the topic; imagination of the future from the past;
We can talk here about old new idea for future of the aviation,which never saw the light.

I believe the old topic was closed for a reason... because it was full of everything and nothing, a collection of real projects, fake projects by magazine illustrators, real projects interpreted by propaganda and artists, etc.

I'm not a moderator, but I'm pretty certain that recreating the same topic is bound to lead to the same result: it will get locked!

Why not stick to the simple and coherent procedure that was exposed previously?
  • If no company or inventor is identified, and it's far-fetched, fanciful, unrealistic --> leave it here
  • If the inventor is identified but not an engineer/aviator linked to a known company/project, and it's fanciful --> leave it here
  • If the inventor is identified but not an engineer/aviator linked to a known company/project, but it looks serious --> post it in the "Theoretical..." section
  • If no company or inventor is identified, but it's plausible, realistic --> post it in the "Theoretical..." section
  • If an aviation company is clearly identified as the source of the concept (however crazy or fanciful)--> post it in the "Early projects..." or "Postwar..." sections
Of course, that's only my understanding of this forum's logic. If any mod thinks it should be done otherwise, feel free to edit or delete my post.
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,296
Reaction score
1,257
I agree with Skyblazer, please hold yourself in from creating such run-of-the-mill-topics, as
they become uncontrollable very fast and interesting information probably is lost then, because
it's more or less impossible to find it again.
And it's not even necessary, I think. If you read those articles, the inventor of that hybrid
airship is mentioned (Horace chapman young and Eric Langlands), as well as that of the convertible
mono/biplane (Byron T.Wall). And of the latter one, you can even find the patent (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2288501.pdf )!
So, I would ask for more quality, instead of quantity, please.

Nevertheless, thank you for pointing me to those old mags, again, besides many interesting
articles with regards to aviation, or naval and army themes, there are a lot of clues for DIY'ers,
that are still worthwhile today ! ;)
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,797
Reaction score
4,962
And also I agree with you my dears Skyblazer and Jemiba,


and I will be specific and brief,also not all drawings or paint will send,and I will do
as Skyblazer explanaions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top