Why the lend-lease fighters were so welcome for the Russian pilots. The American ones like the Aircobra came with excellent radios f.e. 😉

Without a doubt the 39 mm Olbsmobile cannon also prohibited movement. Such a projectile tear arms and limbs in the cockpit and spills all the guts into windscreen ! Hard to fly when you cannot see forward…I bet.

The kill ratio with 109s was “only” 27/1 because russkies had better weapons and better tactics and 20/1 outnumbered in the skies.

But I want to remind that also in Continuation war USSR was aggressor toward Finland as in Winter War.

Not true. Levkov has started L-1 hovercraft tests just in 1934.

And first idea was by Emanuel Swedenborg in 1718..

Toivo Kaario he invented his in 1932; http://tutkielmat.uta.fi/pdf/gradu01659.pdf

Anyway called it surface glider..since no WIG was known by then.

Any info on that Swedenborg invention ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Swedenborg

Give specifics to a cartoon dream that ignores the laws of physics?
Yeah right.

This entire site is pretty much paper plans fighting dream wars with paper airplane ignoring the reality of politics and how paper designs will function when exposed to the parameters of real war climate that ignore what all the political paper warriors sitting behind their desks spew forth.

Yours wishful thinking just takes it to the extreme.

So are ya saying also D-21 ignored all physics ? Is politics same as ignoring that also small countries might need to defend themselves ?

I am glad you don’t keep repeating the flying coffin phrase again.

I might be inventing an universal stealth fighter which even the future radars cannot detect. This migh need the MLU like every 20 years till about 2100..and still burns only 600-800 liters / hr ( on economy drive ) and goes supersonic on supercruise. Not diamond nor gold plated but still ( and stings like a bee ).

:rolleyes:

I like the concept but why are the wings so oddly shaped? Wouldnt you get more lift and equal drag if they where flat? + lower RCS from the sides…

Care to elaborate further ?

Draw on this how you want them.

D-21 was launched from the SR-71 in flight, needed to reach MAch3 to be able to fly on its engine (ramjet) that provided its thrust at high speeds only (or it wouldn’t even ignite). With 6.65t of thrust it provided it had to just maintain flight. Your aircraft will have to make do with an engine that will have to accelerate it past the sound barrier, maintain supersonic flight, and yet all that while loosing somewhere about 80% of its thrust once up there at altitude (not much air for a turbofan that high up)

oh, and by the way, it was a single use, reconnaissance drone filled with fuel and one single camera. It would fly in a straight line and self destruct once back

your engine will have to breathe (not easy in your concept, as there’s not much space for air to enter inside, increasing difficulty with thin air at altitude), you’ll have to have a cockpit with plenty of nice stuff (heavy) in order for your pilot to sit there and stay alive (for the beginning at least), you’ll need to have landing structure (gear and solid structure to stand landings at least during trials… as once in service it may not land all that often ^^ ), you’ll need to have space for weapons with supporting structure (heavy again), etc..

ah, as for rockets you want to use, the D-21 when launched from a B-52 needed a booster bigger than the ship itself to reach sufficient speed (highly supersonic) to start its own engine… what do you think your two small rockets (where will you place them?) will be able to do?

again, there’s no free lunch… it just doesn’t happen

Yes ramjet is pretty inefficient for this.

I think the 7.2 kN engine that lifts this up to 40 – 50 000 ft ( at supercruise on mach 1.4 ) where the rockets are ignited is the best change to get to meet anyone flying really high…even an SR-71 ( if one is resurrected from moth balls and for some reason not identified beforehand ).

This flys at half wing loading ( compared to SR-71 ) so it ought to go to 100 000 ft at least.

Rockets fits nicely…and a really small biz-jet turbofan. There has to be doors for inlets to be closed with.

I just practically redesigned this with 21 m2 wing and fully faceted fuselage and canopy.

Here is good example what good STEALTH design means… a SR-71 is much faster than a PAKFA or J-20 yet it is double sized..and it has even less engine power.

Young fella, your velocicraptor is balsa wood model airplane that simply physics shows may work in a cartoon world but no where else.

Give me an example or something spesified !

Work on low observable aircraft started a decade before Ufimstev’s work was published.

Ufimstev’s work allowed the creation of computer models to predict the RCS of complex shapes. This occurred at the same time when finite element modeling for structures and computational fluid dynamics for aerodynamic modeling was also in its infancy. The Soviet Union had not yet started using computers to crunch through the calculations for mesh models, so Ufimstev’s work was not seen to be important.

Lockheed used IBM360s to crunch the calculations for Have Blue and F-117. Northrop used a Cray supercomputer for B-2 and YF-23 calculations. And Lockheed also used a Cray for F-22 calculations.

Computers cannot do thing for you unless someone knows what to do with them ( I would not switch to hand drawing after computers ).

US has been doing research early on; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacit_Blue and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Have_Blue