old shapeActually, weight has very much to do with it! Engines are very heavy, and having to add them to the rear fuselage presents four mayor weight issues:
- The actual support there will weigh a lot. The rear fuselage is not particularly strong as, with the exception of the tail, there are not that many forces pulling on it. Not nearly as much as on the wing anyway.
- The tailwing will still need to go somewhere. By having the engines at the rear you have to put the tailwing on top (F28, DC9 etc) or somewhere mid of the tail (Caravelle). This requires further reinforcing of the tail, and the rear section it is attached to… thus a double penalty!
- Engines are designed to shear off in case of critical damage. It happens only very rarely, but the engines are designed with that in mind anyway.
The shear is probably the most important issue here, I forgot about that.
However, doing so on a tail engined plane is tricky due to center of gravity issues. If the engine where to fall off you will have a large center of gravity issue longitudually, though a small bonus diagonally (hope I put this right).
Engines that fall off are due to maintenance problems. They shear off if there is a catastrophic failure or a siezure.
The CoG is a good point, harder to correct by putting more thrust on the other side (Harder than if it was out on the wing)A diagonnal CoG failure can be dealed with, to some extent, with steering and power inputs. With a longitudial failure this becomes much harder.
- You would need considerably more fuel lines and stronger fuel pumps.
You mentioned that the additional strenghtening of the tail versus the wing negates the weight issues. As mentioned above the center of gravity is a potential issue, even if only in emergencies. There is another thing though. At the end of the day the wing will need reinforcing anyway to resist the impact from the landing gear.
No, the gear loads are taken up in the Bermuda Triangle, (The Rear of the rear spar to fuselage triangle, where the pintles and gear beams etc. are) that area will always have to be beefed up…..more so if there is a lump of engine outboard of it.
The wingbox, the section where landing gear and fuselage attach, is the strongest part of the plane. (Torsion box actually)
The wingspars go out of that box and the engines are attached to the spars. Beyond the engines the spars will thin out, or go down in number.The Front Spar carries most of the Engine load, but obviously the rear is used, or a mid stubby spar. The Spars, and stringers/stiffeners all taper out right from Rib 1 or Rib 0, without a lump of engine to cope with the whole structure outboard of the Bermuda triangle could be optimised, it would also be less complicated to manufacture
As you mentioned ease of access is vastly superior for wing mounted engines then it is for tail mounted engines. That’s another reason that is very important. A fast turnaround time is not possilbe if you need half an hour just to set up a ramp to touch the engine!
Indeed!This is also the reason why tail mounted engines are only used for regional jets and business jets. The landing gear is not tall enough to make an engine fit under the wing. Another way around that is to mount your engines on top of the wing like the Honda Jet and the VFW-614.
And, I’ve just thought of another….The Leading Edge anti ice system takes bleed air from the lump, and if that lump is handy..more the better!
Electric anti ice is just coming to the fore now, however.
Answers in the text in bold
old shapeAny options/guesses what these could be on the outskirts of an African city? Harare at 17°51’32.34″S 31° 8’0.84″E Bunkers or ammunition storage? They are remote from any installation of note.
I wouldn’t say they were military at all. No fences, people, flags or any sign of military business.
The larger ones are only 18 yards long. They are not a wet chemical store as there is no bund around it.
The Greek-key shaped walls are often used to prevent people seeing in, because it’s private or it’s an eyesore. Not much use an an explosive barrier as the bang would carry stuff over the wall in a nice arc to that township nearby.
There is a factory 1.11 miles South East which could possibly be the owner of these buildings.
old shapeI can only echo the improvement sentiments.
old shapeAcademic think tanks are usually pretty good, the problem is that the UK govt does not listen to them either. They just listen to themselves and their own policy groups. The civil service has a very real lack of expertise, go take a look at the application process and you will see that they do not even look for expertise in any given area.
Hmmm. Yes.
I was asked to apply for the Civil Service by a Senior MoD Officer at Wyton. He told me the salary structure and I had to contain my laughter. Even with the free pension it would require a significant and rapid promotion within 6 months for me to even sniff at it.
And, the bureaucracy would wear me down in weeks I’m sure. Mind you, working with them I suffer the same red tape. Oh, and the two year rule got on my nerves. 6 months settling in, 12 months undoing or repeating what the last incumbant did and 6 months looking for your next post. Great system…not.
old shapeOther way around, the flir cameras are very insensitive compared to the military spec stuff, i have seem both and believe me what flir give to you in industry is nothing compared to what other companies can do for military..
you may also want to check out terahertz imaging!
In that case I sit corrected. 5 years out of date I am :-).
The airborne ones I was involved with were pure black and white, these industrial ones seem to grade by colour, which is far more ergonomic for decision making. Also, “Military”….have you seen this top tech. on airborne applications? Land based technology seems to get into the military ahead of the airborne, simply because of the amount of testing and integration issues.
Although lately, the technology in our IFV’s and Battle Tanks is getting tested to a remarkably high level, not far behind the air.
old shapeThat is called democracy and what we do wish to see in all countries.
It was a comment agin Politicians, not democracy. If the Politicians would only just listen to real experts, not academic think-tubs.
old shapethink it works on emissivity of the materials..
check these guys out
Those cameras are the very latest tech. Used in industry for such things as monitoring bearings getting hot.
It will be 10 years before that level of tech. is cleared for Air use and used in a Platform…..one hopes it is presently some way into that 10 years. 🙂
old shapeWhat a shame Politicians decide the fate of our Armed Forces.
Only Brown knows what he’s up to, the children running the other party would be even worse and the “Also rans” make a convenient fence to sit on.
To increase Defence spending, one needs to change the opinions of the voters. Thanks to years of anti war protests, the military now carries an element of evil with it…(Until our special forces are on the news, then everyone jumps for joy at the British skills).
With the London bombings, the evils of 9-11 etc. I was looking forward to a return of massive Defence expenditure, but no….the removal of the Berlin Wall is analogeous with the Beeching plan for the Defence Industry. The infrastructure has gone.
So, while we continue down the pinko route, our forces will become less equipped and less trained, on more and more outdated kit. Or maybe too few items of decent kit but it amounts to a real reduction in spending.
As I stated above somewhere, SLL is correct – we face no real threat from a waring nation. Most of our Defence spending projects at the moment will never see the action that was anticipated when they were created. Do we need a $135M dollar platform to deliver 8 smarts? Just who are we going to use Typhoon, JSF against? However, I am very pleased that these projects are there for the protection of skills and jobs and with the anticipation that maybe one day we can have an armed force that would once again be the envy of the world.
If we were to have a bottoms up SDR based on the present needs, do you share my view that we need a Long Range Bomb Truck with a very large bay for carrying 20 or 30 SMARTS?
old shapeThanks, but the heat coming through a shoe would be different from a bare hand so does the computer enhance the picture and produce a complete human? And if you stood in front of a hot fire, would you be invisible to the camera?
The heat through a shoe would indeed be less than bare skin….however if the kit is set up to search for things around the 37 degrees C then you will just see different shades of white. If you watch the Gun Camera footage of insurgents being offed, you see the heat image of the exploding body but if the bullet(s) hits a vehicle the sparks cause a white-out in the frame.
If the unit is set for 37ish, and you stood in front of a fire, yes, the image would bleach out……until recalibrated for the fire…..you would then be a silhoette.
I was familiar with FLIR manufactured by GEC and a French firm (Who’s name escapes me at this time) and the images from these units was markedly different. On one of them, you could barely make out a shape…Ambulance? Tank? Truck? And we were sat in the office trying to work it out, Lord knows how hard it is in the moving platform. The other kit was far superior but nearly twice the price.
The MoD chose the one best suited.
old shapeI am a lot of things………….;)
This debate is really very simple, I do not think that anybody here is opposed to the idea of increased defence spending, however it needs to be done in context not just the pointless fulfilling of wish lists. Lets be honest, as soon as one list is completed another will immediately emerge. The reality is that the UK faces very few threats national security and none to its national survival yet it has one of the most powerful military forces in the world. The US at least makes the argument that it wants to remain the worlds most powerful state but the UK and European counties in general seem to have grown out of this ego game and transferred it to the EU.
Not arguing. We face no “War” threat.
Points, we still run a few countries in what’s left of the Empire..oops Commonwealth, and some of those places do indeed face a threat to National security and possibly survival. There is no more welcome sight to those nations to see the Union flag/jack flying close to home.
Although we still have a powerful force, it’s on a downward trend…simply because as you say, the threats have gone and the ill-informed pinko’s vote against defence.
As I said, my defence spending increase would be to presently concentrate on anti terrorism. The existing hardware to be maintained/upgraded until a real “War” threat becomes available for funding.
Also, all my pals and myself rely on the budget being spent on hardware, so my wish-list would be a couple of gigabytes on here. My defence budget would increase at the expense of many other things in Government. Certainly not at the expense of the taxpayer…..unfortunately, politicians are bent/twisted/liars/corrupt and will ensure that the proletariat pay more to get less. If you find a good politician, shoot them before they turn bad.
old shapeMr Sealordlawrence…..
Are you really an American?….you seem remarkably well informed on UK and European history, which is not something on the usual USA curriculum.
IMO this debate is yours. I cannot add further facts so I’ll sit back and watch the show.
old shapeIts these mind less acts that pee me off so much…
Not only is it mindless, it is dishonourable to the memory of those who served on behalf of these mindless oafs who damage the monuments.
Should I have ever done anything such as this as a youth in the 1970’s (not that such an idea would ever have occurred to me), my father would soon have taught me the error of my ways.
on another tack, I have engaged for many years in investigating the paranormal occurrences at RAF airfields, and it is problems with this vandal behaviour that has caused many landowners to stop the public accessing their buildings.Personally I say shoot these sods on sight and raise the gene pool.
Here here!
In the 60’s, my mates would have leathered me, never mind my dad…….he would have merely killed me!
old shapeAgain, explain why 3% is needed? We are certainly not in the worst funding state since the 1930s that is just an absurd statement, Sandys? CVA-01? Knott defence review?
The fact is that the UK armed forces are in a strong position, Trident renewal has been confirmed, the CVF’s ordered, the largest SSN force in Europe etc etc etc etc.
You do not need to itemize a list you need to explain a threat scenario, you seem to be obsessed with defence spending for the sake of it and that is just pointless. Unless you are actually defending against something it is a waste of time.
I do not care if you find the phrase ranting offensive, becouse without actually providing a reason why defence spending should increase that is all you are actually doing.
‘We want eight and we wont wait’ is important becouse it shows relativity. At the time the debate was genuinely seen as one of national survival, without eight dreadnoughts it was percieved that the Germans might tip the balance and be able to overwhelm the RN and cripple the UK. This is important becouse it is spending directed specifically to a recognised threat scenario. The point being that you can not create a usable itemized list without a specific set of threat scenarios. So far nobody here has given a threat scenario that constitutes a genuine threat to UK national security. Thus your itemized list is irrelevant.
An example: Some people here have falsely argued that Russia represents a clear and present threat. However to prepare for that the UK would need to develop the most advanced strategic defence system the world has yet seen. A combined air defence, anti-ballistic missile and anti satellite system protecting a true nuclear triad. Firstly this would cost far more than your meaningless 3% figure and secondly it would be utterly useless in Falklands style conflict. This has happened before, such a strategic defence system was found to be well beyond the monetary capacity of the UK in the 1950s/60s, thus it was never built. And the Falklands, had it have come a few years later, would have shown the near uselessness of a dedicated strategic defence system
So in conclusion, unless you can enlighten us as to what the UK actually has to defend against, do not even bother posting your list as without a genuine threat scenario it will be just as meaningless as the 3% figure.
Correct.
Trident, Typhoon, CVF’s, F-35 even……fabulous against the losers with the wrong imaginary friend planting IED’s in a subway or on a train etc. I’m just glad these projects provide UK jobs for folks like me. Who is the enemy for which we are likely to need such splendid technology?
We need more intelligence, not hardware. In fact the main hardware we actually need is a large Bomb Truck, laden with SMARTS. That’s modern warfare. As seen on night 1 of “Shock and Awe” which was only 10% of what it should have been.
old shapeThanks for the feedback one and all – it’s a pleasure to share the images.
The Guinot shot is over Rendcombe REF, it was taken on a very cold day back in February. I felt very sorry for Lucy, as she was very cold on the wing!
As for this next year, there are a few projects already pencilled in, so I hope to bring you more images as the year progresses.
As to my ultimate air to air – well after the Spitfire, which was always top of my list I guess the DH88 would be quite high, but the BBMF fleet would be one that I would love to shoot, as also the Red Arrows. I can but hope!!
Prints of these images are available from the Grace Spitfire website (Spitfire images obviously) and the Shuttleworth shop sell prints of thier three airframes. We hope to offer a selection throughout the season.
You put us to shame!
(So you should, your pictures pay your mortgage 🙂 )
old shapeChina is not the problem. It is North Korea picking a fight with China, and the USA is duty bound to defend China. Pop go the North Korean Nukes.
The North Korean problem is there because a certain nation couldn’t finish the job properly last time.
The middle east problem will escalate in 2008, Israel shall be picked on again, and there is no way she will allow herself to be humiliated (As per 2007) so that should see off some more bad guys in “Back to Normal” Israeli glorious style.
Russian money is essentially in private hands, but the aerospace / defence industry is now in recovery (Slow but sure). That is most likely to be used against each other within the Soviet States.
We need US defence spending in order to get lots of military equipment around the world, but leave the War Management to the Brits and things will end up in better shape.
In summary to the posts above, you can always tell an American, but you can’t tell him much.
Sign In
