Page 10 – Key Publishing

Coach

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 176 total)

← 1 2 3 … 9 10 11 12 →

Author

Posts
September 29, 2004 at 9:50 pm in reply to: The F-19 Stealth – fake or reality? #2639069

Coach
Participant

hello Erez

could not contact you by email, you must have turned this off in your profile

please change it

September 27, 2004 at 6:17 pm in reply to: The F-19 Stealth – fake or reality? #2639819

Coach
Participant

To MPJay

I don’t think Testor was able to do any serious research in lo properties of there F-19 plastic model as this is really not a child’s play but scientific work which needs a hole lot of knowledge and instrumentation.

BTW: even Janes, world wide known as usually good informed put the attached pic in the 1986/1987 edition of the Janes all the world aircraft. A typical example of disinformation!

September 4, 2004 at 11:49 pm in reply to: Patrol of the Patrols #2655665

Coach
Participant

sorry … here comes the pic

August 31, 2004 at 12:24 pm in reply to: How can Mig 1.42 be Stealth ? #2659275

Coach
Participant

Mig 1.42

to SOC

“The 1.42 design featured a different intake, a different nose section, and a different wing layout.”

Could you give us a source from where you got this information? And of course, a pic would would even be more appreciated!

August 27, 2004 at 1:19 pm in reply to: Mikoyan MFI = MiG-37 ???!!??? #2662627

Coach
Participant

The Mig-37 Ferret plastic model kit was another try from Italeri to repeat the commercial succes of the F-19 model. Fantasy sells!

August 27, 2004 at 12:25 pm in reply to: FALCON – true hypersonic! #2662650

Coach
Participant

Well, surely not on short term! But on the long – let’s say in the next 2 decades, it could be possible. A hell of a lot of R&D has to be done first, basics, proof of concepts, cfd, scaled down models and all that stuff.

Don’t know if the USAF really needs that, but project FALCON shows, that they want more or less exactly some-thing like that (global reach from conus, hypersonic…). The question is if the government is willing and able to fi-nance it!

August 26, 2004 at 8:47 am in reply to: FALCON – true hypersonic! #2664081

Coach
Participant

I meant it doesn’t make sense to use a rocket engine because you would have to carry the oxygen for the whole flight right from the start. That’s why I would prefer an airbreathing engine.
But one the other hand: a HCV must not stay inside the atmosphere for all its flight. To minimise drag and heat it could apply a skipping paten as proposed for HyperSoar (see http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/hypersoar.htm)

August 25, 2004 at 7:52 am in reply to: FALCON – true hypersonic! #2664560

Coach
Participant

You mean the X-33 Venturestar?

The engine they intended to use there was a Linear Aerospike engine, pic below, for further info read

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/design/aerospike/main.shtml

As this is a rocket-engine and not airbreathing at all, it would not make sense to use it in a hypersonic cruise vehicle intended to fly in or on top of the atmosphere

August 24, 2004 at 8:30 pm in reply to: FALCON – true hypersonic! #2664945

Coach
Participant

I think hypersonic aerodynamics are not boring at all, particularly if you consider the thermal problem of skin friction.

But the second point you are right – propulsion is a true challenge! The X-43 shows that the development of SCRAM-engines has just begun. The only air breathing alternative I can think of is a Rocket Based Combined Cycle Engine RBCCE – whose development is not much further, as far as I know. Perhaps somebody else?

August 17, 2004 at 12:29 pm in reply to: F-111 replacement? #2644549

Coach
Participant

I think we recently have discussed all this in other threads before – so why shall we repeat it ?!

For the FB-22 option read:
http://forum.airforces.info/showthread.php?t=29782

The never-ending story about YF-23 and what could be done (or what already might have been done) based on this design, you find in:
http://forum.airforces.info/showthread.php?t=28409&page=1&pp=30

August 12, 2004 at 2:34 pm in reply to: FB 22 #2647879

Coach
Participant

It all startet with an article in PopSci by Bill Sweetman, which you can still find here:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,12543,262063-2,00.html

August 12, 2004 at 9:12 am in reply to: Cancelled projects #2648158

Coach
Participant

To Billy Bishop

The MBB Lampyriade stealth figther is a good example of first generation stealth, which is fully based on faceting the external surface of an aircraft.

August 11, 2004 at 3:22 pm in reply to: Cancelled projects #2648776

Coach
Participant

To give a quick impression of the XF-108 here a pic. It’s from the higly recommended website (in french)

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/prototypes.com/f108/f108.html

July 9, 2004 at 8:24 am in reply to: One fin vs two #2672602

Coach
Participant

Twin fins – for stealth reason

As far as I remember, the twin fins came up (at least in the west…) when stealth came into play. The twin fins gave the opportunity to cant them out- or inwards at any angle.

Perhaps someone knows why Migs & Sukhois do not use this possibility?

June 25, 2004 at 10:39 am in reply to: Private spaceship almost in space #2682269

Coach
Participant

What I still don,t know

A recommended read about SpaceShip1’s flight you find here:
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/spa06224.xml

The remaining questions are (and I’m looking forward to
answers from some better informed members of this fo-rum) :

max. speed during descent in feathered config ?

speed to swap from feathered- to no- feathered config ?

max. speed during descent in non-feathered (landing-) config ?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 176 total)

← 1 2 3 … 9 10 11 12 →