I would not require laminated compreg wood to be better than carbon nanotube, but it has to be stronger, lighter, and cheaper (two out of three will do) than aluminum if there’s to be a reason for using it. There are plenty of small air forces who would like to get small (presumably economical!) jet fighters for air policing and reconnaissance.
My point exactly…it would be moderatly cheap and lite.
do you have a comparison table like this for laminate wood?
No I don’t have such table for laminate wood. I just got my first piece of 1.5 dense laminate done 4 days ago. I might look for it from the known sources in a bit. We know it is 10 times tougher than plywood and 20 times tougher than wood is some aspect….and 4 times harder in tensile strenght than similar weighing wood if staypak processed.
Does AIRFIX and REWELL+ MONOGRAM already have J-20 modelled ?
For a moment, I thought it was the Eastern Ukrainian separatists’ “Novo Rossiya” latest edition to their air force – fresh from a museum….
Could it be an ground attack AC that actually has been used in the duty…with patches and some weathering.
…. steel is 33 times stronger than woods
You keep forgetting that this laminate is tougher than KEVLAR ( at least more dense )…which you say is 5 times stronger than steel.
Already the Duramold ( invented by Virginus Clark ) Howard Hughes used in HK-1 was 80% stronger than aluminum.
They make railway cars from Duramold kinda stuff in India even today.
My point is that the stealth mock up is not stealth made for the document but the real one weathered 60 years in rain ( by the looks of it ) may have been.
What the document is displaying is a Homedepot quality stealth ac looking like Ho-229.
This is homedepot 7/32 in plywood…nothing like aviation grade plywood and far from dense compressed compreg or staypak.
The document is not denying that the mock up is not stealth……it is just forgetting that the original plane was absorbing the waves in first 5 minutes of the document.
it wouldn’t be stealth at all, because there are a few thing in side a fighter you cant make from wood
1-radar
2- wire
3- processor, central computer
4- explosive in missile, bullet, bombs
5- pilot
… etc
while wood, glass can be transparent to radar wave, they cant absorbing radio energy thus radar wave can still reflected of these things i mentioned above, as a result the aircraft will have huge RCS
The impregnated laminates that are compressed do absorb radio waves or reflect them I am sure ( they don’t get electrified…work as insulation ). Pilot can wear a vest made of the same material as the plane is…all wire and radars are inside thus protected by the surface material that is 20 times harder than wood.
This is why I ask…if it was made of aviation grade high density COMPREG or STAYPAK type compressed laminates ( that have nothing in common with wood as material ) would it be stealth ( more than 20% better as witnessed by the Boeing team ).
I refer to these figures mentioned here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqgfjXaJxV8 ( ….they actually confirm it THE REAL THING does absorb radar waves …in first 5 minutes….the cheap mock up doesn’t at the end….so this is actually a really crappy document )
This looks like an aeroplane made from cheap plywood, but it isn’t….but this here is; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EaZdeTERjY
Here is another non stealthy Home Depot aircraft; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1V8quR2P7lw
….and an other one; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q-8TilAluQ
How stealth could it be ( when built from real aviation grade “lumber” ) ?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]235415[/ATTACH]
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/06/the-aircraft-that-could-have-m/
Flying once and crashing once is not a good record for any prospective pilots!
I wonder was it a malfunction or bad design ?
A modern Jet aeroplane yes, a modern jet fighter, no.
Yes FalconDude..not alone from wood based STAYPAK laminates ( stronger than COMPREG ) but possibly clever bondage with carbon and glassfibres ( metal possibly too here and there ).
I actually managed to make a little piece of 1500 kg/m3 density wood laminate…and having seen and felt it I have a strange feeling 1200-1400 kg/m3 would do just as well ( that I managed to press week earlier ).
If we are talking European theatre, WW2
25 September 1939 – Warsaw
14 May 1940 – Rotterdam
Moggy
Early days of December 1939 Soviets bombed Helsinki. Sorry 30th of November 1939.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]235397[/ATTACH]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Helsinki_in_World_War_II
Fineness was resumed after the bombing.
Few points there.
Wood laminate can be 20 times harder than wood. So if 50 cm needed to stop a bullet an inch is enough of the compreg laminate.
Another is the tensile strenght….if you have 600 in normal wood of 0.4 specific gravity then 1.4 specific gravity yields 3.5 times more ( ~2000 ) !
Heat resistance was greatly increased ( as there is no air inside the laminate ).
Also no fungi or moisture can damage it.
Here is a comparison with kevlar, carbon fibre and glass fibre.
http://www.christinedemerchant.com/carbon-kevlar-glass-comparison.html
For comparison with the laminated woods.
I think there is no doubt that the nazi party arranged the death for several ethnic entities…and most part in secrecy. It is a very sad phenomena. As a finn I hate it extra heavily since our AF carried swastika from 1918-1944. Nazis totally ruined the symbol as well.
I am not sure how the mass bombing of civil targets started. I read the Adolf Galland memoirs and I was surprised that he said the Guernica bombing was much lesser event as what has been described. Anyway the Jules Verne named Farman apparently bombed Berlin first….or was it the other way round like in BoB the movie reveals ?
Dresden was devastated that is for sure..RIP all those dead there.
Maybe we can learn something from this terrifying tragedy.
Very interesting to see how behaves propeller at supersonic speeds?
Just like Baumgartner; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBagmMtw6ik
Spinning in infinity ! :rolleyes:
Is that kinda vehicle able to give a warning if someting is really happening before land based radars ?