drifand Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Just wanted to share what I thought was the funniest photo of any jet I've ever seen. Photo credits: "Phantom" by Simone Micheli, published in CREATIVE REVIEW Oct 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 World's best super-cruiser is still the Concorde, so a big goes out to all the F-22 fans... Better then the SR-71? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Leader Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 I agree with the cornhusker... I understand a few of you are real afficionados when it comes to Boeing 7-whatevers, Airbus, etc... can we get back to fast-movers though? And Richard, it's "When in Rome, do as many Romans as possible" Hey where's some of your Tomcat Sunset pictures? I posted some pictures of the jet powered Shockwave truck over in the Transformers movie thread and actually convinced a person or two that that was the new design for Optimus Prime! I took over 1,100 digital pictures at the Guardians of Freedom airshow a few weeks ago... a quarter of those pictures where of the Blue Angels! Before I post them, I have to go back through and pick a few select pictures and either reduce or crop them so they are just 100-200k or so instead of being 2-4MB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akilae Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Better then the SR-71? I actually asked this on the old thread... I think the SR-71 doesn't count because it actually A/Bs everywhere it goes. Supercruise = no A/Bs, from what I gather. Might be wrong though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Richard, lemme make some of the photos a little more "browser friendly" and host them and I'll post 'em up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Interesting tidbit for DH and the other liner fans, they are testing the 737-900ER here at Edward right now, kept taxiing past us during our ground test today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted October 11, 2006 Author Share Posted October 11, 2006 Eh, 739ER is nothing more than a higher-weight 739. Physically identical to a base 739, but different door arrangement. Anyways--yup, the SR-71 is a special case in that it is actually most efficient in afterburner, and does so for hours on end. So it's not supercruise. It's burnercruise. Basically, when over Mach 3, almost all the fuel goes to the afterburner, almost none to the turbojet. The turbojet basically ceases to function, most of the air is bypassed around it and goes straight to the burner. (in a totally different way than a turbofan) SR-71 design speed is Mach 3.2---any lower speed is less efficient. If it goes Mach 3.1, it won't have the range to complete its missions. Interestingly, it actually becomes even more efficient when it goes faster--but the airframe can't take it. The SR-71's "high cruise" speed is 3.3, with an emergency dash speed of 3.35. On the few times these were authorized---they landed with extra fuel. (The SR-71's absolute limit is Mach 3.4---that will destroy the aircraft--don't give even a moment's thought to all the Mach 4+ rumors---a simple calculation of the Mach angle will show that the bow wave will intersect the wing leading edge around Mach 3.4, so that's the limit---and Blackbirds have been destroyed proving it) Concorde normal cruise is officially 2.04, but typically holds right around 2.00. Highest in-service cruise was 2.23. The Tu-144 is all-around faster, but its supercruise limit is 1.6 It can only do 2+ in burner. Well, the basic Tu-144D was. The LL is almost certainly faster, but nobody knows how fast. Estimated the thing could hit 2.5. (Certainly 2.4) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 (edited) Hmm, how hard would it be to have turned the Concorde into a bomber (internal load)? OK it won't carry that much payload but you'll have a long range supercruisin bomber right back in the 70/80s right? The SR-71 is practically a ramjet at 3.2 right? Its not quite the traditional afterburner on virtually all other planes. Its 'supercruise' in the 'spirit of the term'. Edited October 12, 2006 by Retracting Head Ter Ter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phyrox Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Hmm, how hard would it be to have turned the Concorde into a bomber (internal load)? Hard. And by hard I mean impossible. There is a lot more to aircraft and aircraft design than basic airframe and engines. Besides, by that time no one in the West was building high and fast bombers because they didn't want them, not because they couldn't make them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted October 12, 2006 Author Share Posted October 12, 2006 Ironically, the opposite was seriously proposed for the XB-70----ultra-high speed airliner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalvasflam Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 Ironically, the opposite was seriously proposed for the XB-70----ultra-high speed airliner. Wasn't that the sonic cruiser concept redux from Boeing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted October 12, 2006 Author Share Posted October 12, 2006 No. Mach .95 and Mach 3 are quite different. And the XB-70's a lot bigger. The XB-70 pax version was proposed when it was still flying. It was little more than a few windows and seats in the forward fuselage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 It has been requested that I post some photos from my trip to the Tomcat Sunset ceremony... I've selected a very tiny sample of photos (all of them pertaining to the jets, I didn't re-size any from any of the parties I attended) I hope you enjoy! Here's "Bandwagon 103", the high-visability ceremonial jet. I thought the scheme looked better on the low-vis bird, but everyone seemed to be after this one: "Bandwagon 102", the ceremonical "taxi jet". This is the jet everyone believed would be flying the final flight.: The ground crew lines up for the send-off: Taxiing down to the arming area (pretty much out of sight of the public). The jet shut down there and another jet (already spooled up) took it's place: "Bandwagon 107" made the ceremonial flight. VF-31 was bound and determined to have "Felix" on the ceremonial "last flight" jet (any astute observer without a camera would've noticed that this jet had drop-tanks and pylons on it...): We then got a single weak-ass flyby at low speed and at high altitude... the crowd was very upset at this: The reason behind this was later made clear. The day before (friday) the two "last cat" schemed jets nearly traded paint on a section take off (read: taking off together). Once the admiral of NAVAIR got wind of this, the order came down: "You get ONE JET, ONE PASS, with as little margin for error or mishap as possible!" Any "high-balling fighter spirit antics" would earn the respective pilot a one-way trip to the "dishonorable discharge" line and that would be the end of it. Hard to argue with the "safety" philosophy, but you can tell everyone was dissapointed. However, we weren't rushed immediately off the flight line. In fact, things got pretty interesting! A number of hornets from the VFA-83 Rampagers began coming in (notice the assymetrical loadouts): There were about 4 or 5 of those guys (probably spent half a memory card on those guys alone), then a pair of VFA-11 Super Hornets came in. My camera's focus was fighting me about that time, so I got NO good shots of the 'Rippers jets. This one came out "ok" I guess: (to be continued) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 (edited) After the ceremony, a few jets began departing. First up was 4 or 5 Super Hornets from VFA-41. I guess most of them were ex-tomcat drivers that were on hand for the final flight and were heading back to NAS Lemoore: After VFA-41 (and a solitary VFA-15 "Valions" Legacy hornet) "left the building", about 5 VFA-106 "Gladiators" Legacy hornets were departing for some training sorties. Some were single-seaters, but there was also a pair of family-models: After everyone departed, I took the opportunity to shoot photos of all the Super Hornets that were on static-display for the ceremony (all of the super hornets present were past-tomcat squadrons that sent one of their show-jets for the ceremony) "Bullet 100" (VFA-2 Bounty Hunters) "Gypsy 275" (VFA-32 Gypsy Swordsmen) (I *HATE* the new "my little pony" design...) "Ripper 111" (VFA-11 Red Rippers) (both show-jets were out on training missions, so a line jet had to do) "Fast Eagle 100" (VFA-41 Black Aces) (you can see the tail of "Camelot 200" of the VFA-14 Tophatters behind it): "Vampire 100" (VX-9 Vampires) "Lion 200" (VFA-213 Black Lions) (this jet is hot off the assembly line) and last but certainly not least: "Victory 200" (VFA-103 Jolly Rogers) (I've seen this jet probably 4 times now... I never tire of looking at it) and now, if your bandwidth has been raped enough, back to your regularly scheduled programming Edited October 12, 2006 by Skull Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Leader Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 (edited) Time to rape some bandwidth of my of my own! (Nice pictures, Jeremy!) Here's a few of the 1100+ pics I took at the Guardians of Freedom air show a few weeks back. I started another thread for this subject though I'm not sure if I'll have time to post more pictures. The pictures that are like 1024 x 683 pixels were directly reduced from their original 3456 x 2304 pixel size. Pictures that are any other size are crop jobs. Edited October 12, 2006 by Apollo Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Great photos, Richard... Did the VFA-122 F/A-18E do the demo? Usually they use an F model for the actual flying! Would've figured SOMEONE would've had something to say about the stuff we posted... I guess no one is interested. Edited October 24, 2006 by Skull Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Leader Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Great photos, Richard... Did the VFA-122 F/A-18E do the demo? Usually they use an F model for the actual flying! Would've figured SOMEONE would've had something to say about the stuff we posted... I guess no one is interested. That was the only Super Hornet at the show. Of course there was the Blue Angels, but of course those were regular Hornets. The pilot of the F/A-18E has flown EVERY single version of the F/A-18 - A, B, C, D, E, and F. I'm probably not going to have time to get my dedicated thread up and going again, but I'll try to post some more pictures in this thread. Some of the pictures I have include the super rare RC-135 variant that has a regular C-135/707 nose instead of the regular long black nose of the Rivet Joint RC-135's. Many of its sensors and antennae are differnet from the regular RC-135's, though it does have the side looking radar on both sides. There are only two in existence. One is in storage and the one I saw at the show is usually overseas on deployment. For whatever reason, it was back here in Nebraska. Edited October 24, 2006 by Apollo Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat S Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 In case someone who might be interested missed my post the other day... Boeing Museum of Flight pics (Seattle) I took these a few weeks back when my cousin came to visit. In the same directory are pics from the Sci-Fi museum (where you are not supposed to take pics, so they are blurry). Also some pics from the Space Needle. http://www.mrtwo.net/mr2modproject/temp/10-11-2006/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKWIND Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 The pics in the link are all sweet . . . . The SR-71 is one of my favorite birds (aside from the F-14). . . Forgive me for sounding like a noob, But the thing I always wondered was if the unit on the top of the SR-71 was a drone or another engine? I know it might not be the smartest thing to mount up there, but I've never been really sure. . . Usually you see it without the component on top. And I saw on the History Channel there were more models but they really don't go to far in to them. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted October 25, 2006 Author Share Posted October 25, 2006 Somehow I missed all the "Leader" pics until now. I rarely get to see any front-line squadron, much less a "colorful" one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat S Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 The pics in the link are all sweet . . . . The SR-71 is one of my favorite birds (aside from the F-14). . . Forgive me for sounding like a noob, But the thing I always wondered was if the unit on the top of the SR-71 was a drone or another engine? I know it might not be the smartest thing to mount up there, but I've never been really sure. . . Usually you see it without the component on top. And I saw on the History Channel there were more models but they really don't go to far in to them. . . Good info on the drone. http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/d-21.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Edwarsds Airshow this weekend who else is going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Won't be at Edwards, but I WILL be at Nellis in a few weeks.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 I still think it seems so wrong seeing an F/A-18 with Jolly Rogers markings. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Shawn and a few others usually show at Edwards, it almost becomes a mini-MWCon some years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Leader Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 (edited) Good info on the drone. http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/d-21.php As pointed out on this link, the Blackbirds modified to carry the D-21 were two A-12's which were redesignated M-21's... for many years it was thought they were simply redesignated M-12, but about 10 years ago it came out that they were infact redesignated M-21 to match the number of the D-21 drone it was carrying. The Boeing Museum of flight is very lucky to have the sole surving M-21 and a D-21 to mount to it to boot. As for this link saying the D-21 was not used "operationally" is partially incorrect. Some were used for recon over China and I believe elsewhere. Ben Rich (the second man to haed Lockheed's Skunk Works) talked about how at least one D-21 flying over China malfunctioned and crashed somewhere deep in China. Edited October 26, 2006 by Apollo Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garou Kuroryuu Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 I still think it seems so wrong seeing an F/A-18 with Jolly Rogers markings. Graham So do I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingNor Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 So do I. I'm feelin that too. pretty much the only thing i like seeing f-18s dressed up as are the Blue Angels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skull Leader Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 (edited) I really disliked it at first, but since I helped put together a decal sheet with the squadrons new jets (through Hobbydecal), they've really started to grow on me. The Super Hornet as a whole is starting to grow on me. It's certainly no Tomcat, and the argument is very much up in the air to if it's "Mr. Right", but it is without question "Mr. Right Now", so we might as well make the best of it! It's been hard (as a fan) to come to grips with the fact that there are no longer any flying Tomcats in the US (I stop at the word "flyable", because the plane I care for in the museum is very much complete and could be flown with about a weeks worth of hardcore maintenance). Wanna see flying Tomcats now, you'll need to move to Tehran... and to be fair, Iran's F-14As wear a pretty kick-ass blue cammo scheme that isn't too far removed from something you'd see on a flanker. Edited October 27, 2006 by Skull Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drifand Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 A380 finally rolls out on massive discount after repeated fubars! (Sort of...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynx7725 Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 A380 finally rolls out on massive discount after repeated fubars! (Sort of...) Vivo City Toys 'R Us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drifand Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Vivo City Toys 'R Us? Jurong Pt, heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynx7725 Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Jurong Pt, heh. Heh. Think I saw something similar over at Vivo City too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted October 30, 2006 Author Share Posted October 30, 2006 Continuing the "overweight planes" thread: Apparently the 787 is overweight. Haven't heard any specifics though. Leafed through Air&Space's F-35 article at the magazine stand. One of the ways they reduced weight was very interesting: More complex gear doors. The original design was a simple one-piece style and hung open when the gear was down. The new design is more airliner-esque with multiple doors that close up as much as possible after the gear is done moving. How does this save weight? (since more complex gear doors add weight)--- With the gear doors up, there's no interaction between the big gear doors and local airflow/exhaust when hovering---so the v.stabs can be made smaller. It's all a stability/control issue when hovering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drifand Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Has fuel consumption for VTOL been drastically improved since the days of the Harrier? Always had the impression that VTOL compromised the max payload... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts