dark light

Bug Lover

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 124 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: That F-22 Crash #2628452
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    More info has leaked out but since it is from the media it is probably flawed.The last thread I started on the Crash was closed before I got to make a second entry but seeing some of the entries I was glad it was. 😀

    I will let the chips fall were they may on this one but it DOES’NT appear to be the same problem of the YF-22 (software).

    in reply to: Boeing X-32, "Monica" #2628457
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    I really liked the looks of the proposed F-32. I had the pleasure of seeing the full scale mock-up (I didn’t take this photo).

    in reply to: Boeing X-32, "Monica" #2628515
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    Tiger Meet by Mark Costello

    in reply to: Boeing X-32, "Monica" #2628543
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    This is a model that was built to the a theme by an average Joe. The theme was called “What if?”. Various plastic kits are modified to appear to have entered service or its mission profile is different. Like an F-16 modeled as if it was carrier ready, C-130 has the props replaced with jets, that kind of stuff. It was a contest and they even had a website, but it is down.

    Good disscusion though 😀

    in reply to: JSF, stud or dud? #2630547
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    It’s hard to tell but I think we agree FrancisDeAssisi. 😀

    in reply to: JSF, stud or dud? #2630604
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    F-14 Hotdog-you forgot to add potential FOD ingestion issues, potential head-on RCS issues, problems with the exhaust in VTOL mode, and a bunch of others. And what room for growth? The airframe was damn near packed as it was.

    F-23 and F-35 more like. The F-32 might have been an acceptable F-18 and AV-8 replacement, but it would have had issues taking on some of the F-16s roles, such as air defense. More on this later.

    SPACE/Room
    The X-32 actually had a weapons bay the X-35 didn’t and clearly had no room.

    The F-35 moved its main gear to a location like the X-32 and now it has room but I think the F-32 would have had much greater fuel capacity.

    A2A
    F-32 would have probably been lighter, after a fuel dump and it was to have thrust vectoring. The F-35 TV is an option that probably will never happen.

    in reply to: F/A-18 Hornet (Classic) #2631186
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    Cool

    in reply to: JSF, stud or dud? #2631193
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    It was eliminated because McD didn’t follow the guide lines. It required the aircraft to use a single engine and McD added another for its lift fan.

    Looks had NOTHING to do with it….until the X-32 🙂

    in reply to: JSF, stud or dud? #2631572
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    Yak 141 used 2 small lift jets (small turbojets mounted vertically in the fuselage), not a single large lift fan like the X-35. It’s a concept that dates back to Dassault experiments in the 1960s.

    LM paid a German company for use of the 3BSN design.

    The clutch is essentially an adaptation of carbon-carbon wheel brake technology that couples the drive shaft and lift fan gearbox. The control laws to accomplish the shift from low bypass to high bypass would not be easy without a FADEC.

    True.

    The McD entry was actually more like the Yak-141. It was to use a single small lift jet which is why it was eliminated.

    in reply to: JSF, stud or dud? #2631699
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    The Bird of Prey was actually a McDonnell Douglas project (IIRC). The X-32 was a Boeing project and when McD was eliminated it became part of Boeing and as such picked up part of the X-32 project.

    Anyone remember the McD entry? Very sexy little V-tail. Need a pic?

    in reply to: F-18 E/f #2631703
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    I interrupt this bashing session to insert a public service message.

    The Super Hornet is here to stay and all of your whinning isn’t going to change it.

    Oh the F-14 is DEAD gone by 2007….get over it.
    😀

    in reply to: EA-18G #2642444
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    Well at least I got my EA-18G hat/cap 🙂

    in reply to: F-15,16 limitations in comp. with MiG's #2640379
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    That can be done on any modern jet.

    Cool thanks,
    I figured as much. The information I was given was for the Hornet so I didn’t want to say it was true for all. It does make sense though.

    in reply to: F-15,16 limitations in comp. with MiG's #2640441
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    I heard that the F/A-18s flight computer can be overriden if the pilot feels he really needs too.

    in reply to: if MiG-25 was to be constructed with todays technology #2651164
    Bug Lover
    Participant

    Am I missing something?
    Are you guys saying that the MiG-25 is an agile fighter? Well, heck screw the lightweight composites stuff….Joe grab the arc welder we gonna build us a 5th generation fighter! 😀

    This is actually good reading, I must start from the beginning.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 124 total)