dark light

Nashio966

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,626 through 2,640 (of 3,400 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Vulcans That May Not Survive…? #1183457
    Nashio966
    Participant

    You never mentioned the Vulcan at Duxford. It is an aircraft in a maijor collection and is under cover.
    Do you think (like me) that if XH558 is retired to Duxford as has been mentiond in the past, she will be in danger ?

    thats a damn good question! wasnt the one at DX delivered by martin withers?

    in reply to: Vulcans That May Not Survive…? #1183606
    Nashio966
    Participant

    would have thought that the major decider would be how the vulcans in america hold up having looked briefly around there dont seem to be many that are in imminent danger, only time will tell eh!

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1183612
    Nashio966
    Participant

    shows what i know at the end of the day. cheers for the info 🙂

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1183625
    Nashio966
    Participant

    The difference being, 319 is owned by a charity who view it as a public attraction and an asset to the museum. BAe already own a Vulcan (603) so why would they buy another just to rip it apart?..

    LL, firstly i dont think that 319 is anywhere close to having to be scrapped, she has come on leaps and bounds over the last year or so and congratulations to all involved, I wasnt implying that they should buy another. my point is that they supposedly want to make some sort of observation on airframes that have been left out in the open for a long time, there are not only plenty of aircraft that have been stored outside for many a year, but also the same type of airframe in 603’s case. destructive testing on the spars ??? :S the vulcans have been around 50 odd years havent they?

    not sure how they intend to compare results for fatigue life taken from an aircraft that has been stood outside since 1982, to 558′ which, give or take has been under restoration since 1997 (not quite sure about this) and arrived there in 92’/93′ since 1997 has been under a MASSIVE restoration effort. really cant see the comparison that can be made there.

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1183886
    Nashio966
    Participant

    i honestly cannot see the point in this. its a waste, in all honesty there is no guarantee that 558 will be flying for more than one season (not to be a downer i have every faith, but there really is no guarantee) as for looking at airframe condition whilet outside, there are plenty of airframes that have been stored outside longer, look at 319 at NEAM (again sorry guys, i know she’s on the mend) really this is nothing but an act of vandalism.

    in reply to: Help wanted finding a www address #1184126
    Nashio966
    Participant

    not a bad job lot there, i fancy the F4 😉

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1184439
    Nashio966
    Participant

    on a classic airframe?! its a bit **** really!

    in reply to: Unusual .303 round from Defiant crash #1184582
    Nashio966
    Participant

    christ! they sound evil!

    in reply to: Art Nalls' HarrierS! #1184613
    Nashio966
    Participant

    lucky git, whats the going price on a Sea harrier these days?

    in reply to: Sexiest Warbirds #1184729
    Nashio966
    Participant

    can i add

    Fw-190-D
    ME-109 G-6 “Black 6”

    possibly two of the most beautiful aircraft ever

    in reply to: Spitfire V replica #1184732
    Nashio966
    Participant

    wow that must have really been some undertaking, to build great news that she has a home 🙂

    in reply to: Tom Blairs FW-190s #1184735
    Nashio966
    Participant

    arco website? great news i cant wait to see it fly 🙂

    in reply to: F-22 vs. F-35 #2457565
    Nashio966
    Participant

    cheers 🙂 always good to have an update to the information in my memory banks, my main retort above was to the difference in speed and cruise etc, thanks for relpying 🙂

    in reply to: F-22 vs. F-35 #2457575
    Nashio966
    Participant

    for starters, i know what supercruise is. A little history first. the lightning prototype, the P1, first flown on the 4th of August 1954 by roland beaumont, was the first aircraft ever to exceed the speed of sound in level flight without afterburners, only being able to sustain a speed of about mach 1.02 ill think you will find that the later versions of the lighning IE the F3 and more notably, the F6 could supercruise at almost the same speed. maximum speed of the lightning is mach 2.27 at altitude with the highest height being reached by one somewhere in the region of 87,000 feet, in fact im pretty sure i remember hearing of a lightning that intercepted a U2 and going above it. 380kt cruise speed is rather entertaining, considering that the approach speed is something ridiculously high, i forget now but something like 140kts, im sure someone knows. Dont get me wrong, the F-22 is a very aesthetically pleasing aircraft, and IMHO looks a lot better than the F-35, though i cannot see how you would compare two vastly different aircraft, one is designed Supersonic V/STOL with a single engine, to a twin engined Supercruising Interceptor, just can’t see how one could compare really

    Ben

    in reply to: F-22 vs. F-35 #2457632
    Nashio966
    Participant

    just read on wikipedia that the combat radius of the F22 is 471 miles, compared to that of the early 60’s English Electric Lightning (according to wikipedia again) had a combat radius of ~800 miles, the lightning was widely criticised for having appauling range, what does that say about the F22!

Viewing 15 posts - 2,626 through 2,640 (of 3,400 total)