Page 169 – Key Publishing

topspeed

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,521 through 2,535 (of 2,657 total)

← 1 2 3 … 168 169 170 … 176 177 178 →

Author

Posts
April 29, 2009 at 9:54 am in reply to: World's Oldest Independent Air Force #1190293

topspeed
Participant

There have always been two types of boomerangs, returning and non-returning, obviously the non-returning are the first examples of cruise missile type aerial weapon delivery, designed for one way attacks as used by modern air forces, where as the returning boomerang is the traditional re-useable vehicle more commonly used in early Air Forces.

The Boomerang, the oldest flying device, for its age, in the world!

smiles

Mark Pilkington

40 km north from Oulu ( where I live ) is a museum with 5000 years old boomerangs ( Kierikki-Keskus in Yli-Ii ). Will that make our AF the oldest in entire galaxy ?

with a mild grin

Jukka T

April 29, 2009 at 8:36 am in reply to: World's Oldest Independent Air Force #1190433

topspeed
Participant

Didn’t the Finnish Air Force have a majority of Swedish pilots during the Civil War, and weren’t they also being led by a Swede and then a German? About 50% of their aircraft in December 1918 were captured from the reds, the rest being gifted or bought from Sweden and Germany or flown by allies in Russia. Total a/c at that time was about 40.

I think this was earlier than this and those were “white” russians fleeing the “reds” in their own country into Finland with their planes. Some planes were possibly captured too.

The backbone of the trainers did form these russians who actually also changed their names into finnish ones.

I bet a book or a film could be made of these Niuport pilots.

Count von Rosen of Sweden donated a single copy of a Bleriot with blue swastikas already painted on the aircrafts ( family emblem ).

Not a massive start for the AF but an early start anyway.

April 27, 2009 at 2:44 pm in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430068

topspeed
Participant

Yeah Doug,

It is interesting. What CAD program did you construct that 3D model ?

rgds,

Juke

April 27, 2009 at 8:31 am in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430120

topspeed
Participant

It requires lenghty log-in and the site seems to be very very slow…unfortunately.

April 26, 2009 at 1:40 pm in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430147

topspeed
Participant

Its engine stopped on 40 th flight and was demolished. Pilot recovered.

It doesn’t seem to wanna leave the ground effect. See the body is also a lifting type ( fuselage ).

Here is the BB I ( in a museum nowadays ); http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F00nxuodsHs&feature=related

It is funny though…80 hp needed to get that airborne. Wrights needed only 12 hp.

April 25, 2009 at 9:02 am in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430156

topspeed
Participant

world smallest AC

Here is a link to a flight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKdR68KswSQ

April 25, 2009 at 8:46 am in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1194439

topspeed
Participant

It is the Fairchild XNQ-1

John

Is the weight correct here;

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

April 24, 2009 at 2:01 pm in reply to: Weight of the paint job ? #1195447

topspeed
Participant

Gentlemen !

Thanks for the input. I’ll figure out what the 35 sq meter winged Fouga Magister IV paint should weight using the Buccaneer paints.

1 sq yard is 0.836127360 m2

The wing should have been only 3.5 kilos and fuse possibly just 2 kilos. Whoever offered the paint job apparently had no glue about it on aeroplanes. That Fouga was in civilian register.

Here is data that says 40-50 lbs to an aeroplane. http://www.airbum.com/articles/ArticlePaint.html

rgds,

Juke

April 24, 2009 at 10:48 am in reply to: Weight of the paint job ? #1195620

topspeed
Participant

Hello Fouga 23,

It was long a go when a friend of mine a test pilot refused the paint job of his flown old FAF Fouga Magister CM 170. He said he was told it will weight more or less 100 kg altogether.

Some people have found this estimate grossly exaggerated. He is a lightweigh person and flew it alone in air shows…does this matter ( will there be excess weight in the tail ) ?

April 21, 2009 at 7:33 am in reply to: Drug Runner UAV #430204

topspeed
Participant

A helicopter is pretty dumb for the job. Guess something like a Remos GX would be more interesting. Anyway.

It’s amazing what hobby components are available out there! Autopilots with integrated GPS for example, all kind of radial, Wankel and Boxer r/c and UAV engines with 30hp and more for only a few thousand bucks, &c. I reccon building a private UAV is just a few steps away. A simple shape out of GRP, launched by a bungee cord, flown via GPS waypoints, cuts fuel supply at target and activates WLAN-based localizer. Send surviving engine and electronics back via UPS.

Well like I said dunno. Maybe they are doing it already if it is that easy as you refer. I just think it may not be that easy as it sounds like. If the druglords get that sophisticated the police will have to get AA-guns on their vehicles and radars etc.

April 20, 2009 at 2:59 pm in reply to: Drug Runner UAV #430207

topspeed
Participant

Subs could easily go undetected..I dunno know about UAV:s.

April 20, 2009 at 6:38 am in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430232

topspeed
Participant

wing loading

There are also other factors than engine in ac.

Twin engine passenger planes of the old days were pretty reliable for they flew well with one engine alone..as do the new ones too…not all though.

Gipsy Queen also uses a lot of oil…I read. Plane is 70 years old and more.

April 19, 2009 at 5:50 pm in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430252

topspeed
Participant

I was talking about modern a/c TS,almost all older a/c were expensive to run 😀
You really can’t beat a small jet a/c for reliability,and maybe at some stage they will get cheap enough for more private use.

cheers baz

Baz,

I don’t wanna argue with you.

FAA did not allow Learavia to manufacture LF 2100s albeit 260 orders. For what ever reason, but none of the 3 planes suffered no malfunction of the systems AFAIK.

Only simililar size passerger plane with equal mileage I know about is the DH-89 Dragon Rapide..and that is old ( and slow ). Only 747 size jets come close in mileage per passenger ( and perhaps new Airbus and Dreamliners etc when fully booked ).

Juke

April 19, 2009 at 5:02 pm in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430258

topspeed
Participant

Hi
I was thinking more about safety…. ie less moving parts = less mechanical trouble.
The jets I work on are generally so reliable that when we do get an engine/system problem we really have to scratch our heads because it may have been 4/5 years since the last snag we had to deal with.

regards baz

Yeah sure, but that is a result of a reeeally long developement…Supermarine Scimitar had the worst duty/maintenance ratio ever recorded in aviation history…and that was a jet.

If piston engine industry had mega billions to use for coating, nickel parts or whatever necessary to make it safe..they could come up with engines that could beat jets…not in top speed but in economy…reliably.

April 19, 2009 at 7:47 am in reply to: Something new perhaps ? #430264

topspeed
Participant

Seems a little strange to go to a lot of trouble developing a supersonic prop driven a/c when it is so much easier to use a jet engine,I have worked on both types and I can tell you that a well designed jet a/c is much more reliable/easier to look after than (say) a high performance turboprop

cheers baz

Dart ( project ) was a piston ac with Batten Norwood trimmed engine ( 13 hp / cu in ).

I agree that turbo prop like Lear Fan 2100 is not the answer to go supersonic.

My intention is just to go 1/4 fuel consumption of a regular ultralite.

Engine like AVEC ( axial vector engine ) could deliver supersonic reaching performance ( if they get it reliable enuf ).

I don’t think anyone actually tried to go supersonic ( except John Fitzpatrick )…but a pusher with 580 mph top speed in level flight might reach it in a 30 degree dive.

Anyway the supersonic region would need a very loud prop and no one wants that in the first place.

Here is more about the advantages of an axial thrust pusher:

http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/1984/PV1984_561.pdf
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 2,521 through 2,535 (of 2,657 total)

← 1 2 3 … 168 169 170 … 176 177 178 →