 
     |
| Coolest planes (Page 4/5) |
|
maryjane
|
DEC 28, 11:28 PM
|
|
Bird dogs and Broncos are among my favorite fixed wing aircraft.
Not glorious or superfast or the choice of hotshot seat jocks but they saved a LOT of lives and put a lot of ordinance on target.
| quote | | there was actually talk of using 737-size aircraft with large crews at control consoles and a rotary missile launcher- which would shoot down all of the enemy aircraft. |
|
Unfortunately, this idea hasn't completely disappeared but using KC-130Js with Harvest Hawk instead. USMC has been using it on a limited basis for a number of years with some success.
|
|
|
|
Valkrie9
|
DEC 28, 11:49 PM
|
|
!
I'll watch it after I check my aerodynamics primer.
.....3,2,1
Yep!
A wing off is bad!
F-15E Barrel Roll
Now, at full thrust burning, a steady low g barrel roll is controllable, keeping the nose above the horizon.
An exciting rtb!
' There we were, pulled up to recce the target we had just totaled, when I heard a loud bang! '
|
|
|
|
Valkrie9
|
DEC 29, 12:10 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
Bird dogs and Broncos are among my favorite fixed wing aircraft.
Not glorious or superfast or the choice of hotshot seat jocks but they saved a LOT of lives and put a lot of ordinance on target.
Unfortunately, this idea hasn't completely disappeared but using KC-130Js with Harvest Hawk instead. USMC has been using it on a limited basis for a number of years with some success. |
|
Bronco...hmmn mmmn, yep.
Worked a lot on a version, piston power, floats, wood, steel, grp.
To this day I still think it would work well, no more than a design exercise, a 'pie in the sky' scribble on a few sheets of paper.
TwinJAG, beautiful.
The wonderful culmination of a dream.
\_____________ __(-- --)________________/
|
|
|
|
Valkrie9
|
DEC 31, 05:35 AM
|
|
Schiphol Amsterdam Airport 18R
 [This message has been edited by Valkrie9 (edited 12-31-2021).]
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
JAN 03, 04:12 PM
|
|
Not so much a notably "cool plane" as a crazy story, and some interesting technical facts, stalling out a commercial jet. Warning: this one crashes.
Crazy plane stories are interesting too if you find any.
a much nicer story about the pilots overcoming the odds:
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 01-05-2022).]
|
|
|
|
Valkrie9
|
APR 02, 07:24 AM
|
|
!
XB-70...some details.
|
|
|
|
cvxjet
|
APR 04, 10:32 PM
|
|
I read about that XB-70 crash.....they never were able to fully explain why the F-104 pilot collided with the '70's vert.
The next step was going to be nuclear powered bombers- but the invention of SLBMs and the critical question; "What happens when a nuclear powered bomber crashes?" killed the program. I was in the middle of Nowhere in Idaho and spotted a sign "EBR-1"..."What the heck is an EBR-1?" Experimental breeder reactor number 1......The first reactor to generate electricity, in the world. I went on the free tour- and stood on top of that reactor (No, I do not glow in the dark)
Out in the parking lot they have the two Nuclear Jet Engine test cells.....
|
|
|
|
Valkrie9
|
APR 04, 11:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Zeb
|
APR 06, 02:06 PM
|
|
Here's an interesting question:
The B-70 was Mach 3+ capable.
The SR-71 was Mach 3+ capable.
IF the B-70 was fully developed, would it have been faster than the SR-71?
And we haven't even discussed the A-12.
|
|
|
|
cvxjet
|
APR 06, 05:30 PM
|
|
The XB-70 was mach 3 capable but was not designed to CRUISE at mach 3 for extended periods. The SR-71 was specifically designed to maintain mach 3 during most of it's flight. The engines were a major leap forward in technology. The real innovation was the intake which created 70-90% of the thrust above mach 3.
Not sure about the XB-70 but most aircraft that are "mach 3" capable are only able to >>Sprint<< at mach 3 for short periods of time. A lot of fighters can get close to mach 3 but A) would run out of fuel rapidly at '3 and B) suffer structural damage due to heat>>melting...
To give you an idea how dangerous mach 3 flight is, the SR-71's shock cones at the front of the intake move forward and back to align the shockwave (Depending on actual speed) inside the lip of the engine intake. If the cone moves improperly, the actual shockwave can come out of the intake and impact the wing. This actually happened- the impact of the shockwave forced the '71 to twist sideways- the pilot was thrown through the side of the cockpit!
Also, the SR-71 became so hot during flight that the skin would expand; The plane would take off, leaking fuel, then do a high-speed dash to heat the skin, which expanded to the point of sealing the fuel tanks, then the '71 would refuel and could then do it's mission.
The A-12 is (Basically) the predecessor to the SR-71 and extremely similar....The SR-71 was a 2-seat version with updated technology and materials.
|
|
|
|
