Jump to content

grigolosi

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    478

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by grigolosi

  1. grigolosi
    focker VF 1 helmet1

    From the album: Untitled Album

  2. grigolosi
    Well you could use it as a really really powerful leaf blower. That is what Jeremy Clarkson told his town council when they asked why he had an old BAE Electric fighter sitting in his front yard in England. he told them it was for blowing leaves out the yard.
  3. grigolosi
    UUUGgggg a Lysander......just give me a sheet and let me jump off the roof ( the yellow bird behind him at the beginning of the video). The tail gunner position was the worst spot for the crewman on the Lancaster. The Luftwaffe pilots would go after it on the their inital pass and since there was no armor the fatality rate was rather high. The Lancaster had very little armor compared to the American bombers also. But it could haul one hell of a load for its time because of that.
  4. grigolosi
    I haven's heard Bubble chaser used in quite a while M'Kyunn. i know what you mean by washing out stains though. Now I am still washing out Moly B and 7808 oil stains but over in the UAE. Thank you for your service also. On another note: Frothy you would be surprised how much lift those wings will generate. Look at the F-104, that bird had one of the smallest wingspans on a supersonic aircraft. Its wings generated enough lift to get it off the ground pretty quick. As long as the Skylon isn't required to make extreme maneuvers the wings will probably work very well.
  5. grigolosi
    The SV-262 is a definite step away from a lot of the Macross VF designs. It is definitely screaming Draken when I see it. The 31 is simplified looking design to me. Honestly I am not making any judgement calls until i see the series. On another note: Gakken give ole' Morgoth a kick in the shin for me since you are down there in Angband......also tell him to stop bogarting the Silmarils....lol
  6. grigolosi
    Logan they are very crampt when it comes to internal space. Even the engine bay is tightly packed. when we remove or install an engine we have maybe 1/4 to 1/2 inch of clearance on either side of the engine for the GE engines. On the P&W engine you can almost stick your head between the sidewall and the engine (which is great when you are hooking up the stage 7 and 13 ECS ducts). The cockpit is so small that when the seat is fully raised you can see the top of the pilot's or brake riders knees with the canopy closed! I noticed the VF-0 is far bigger, mainly since it has to carry a traditional jet fuel load internally. This required the frame and wings to be bigger. Also one more thing jet engines are not "tuned". They are trimmed. In the case of the EGF-129 the engine is trimmed to the highest thrust rating it can give. This is usually done on the engine through the DEC or DEEC (Digital Engine Control/ Digital Electronic Engine Control).
  7. grigolosi
    I myself find the 171 a boring looking design. I see it and say oh a futuristic F-117 which is also a very boring design. I find the 25 far more pleasing to look at. It has very pleasing curves to it and is very graceful looking to me. Aircraft are like women, curves tend to be more appealing than straight lines. But this coming from a guy that looks at F-16's all day (which also have lots of curves).
  8. grigolosi
    Pushing jets back is so much fun.....especially in tight spaces!
  9. grigolosi
    Speaking of the F-35. Here is its first aerial gun firing. The door apparently worked as advertised.....at least in level flight.
  10. grigolosi
    That is a drag chute on the back of the F-16 fairing. Quite a few countries use them. As for the FB-22, Spanner is correct. That was a picture run in Popular mechanics years back about a proposal to turn the 22 into a bomber. They also had pictures of a 2 seat version for training purposes that never made it to production (imagine that). The stealth level on the current 22 is already incredible, I can't imagine what level it would be at without the verticals on it. Got to see 4 of them in the pattern yesterday coming in for a landing.
  11. grigolosi
    The AESA package is an upgrade module. They can swap out the existing APG radar for the AESA now without having to mount a secondary ECS system and PAO coolant system. All the cooling is run from the packages internal sealed system. The damn PAO system on the block 60 has a nasty habit of leaking through the intake. It looks like some one was in the intake drinking mountain dew and decided to pour a trickle of it down the intake. I like the way they painted over the Taiwanese markings in the picture. I forgot they were still building A model frames. The vertical stab has the older style "skinny" fairing on it.
  12. grigolosi
    I just did some comparisons for measurement. These are the Height, length, winspans for other aircraft along with the VF-1. All in all it is a very strange aircraft size wise. F-14- Height 16 ft, length 62.9 ft, winspan (fully extended) 64ft, weight 43,735 lbs unloaded F-16- height 16 ft, length 49.5 ft, winspan 29 ft, weight 18,000 lbs unloaded VF-1- height 12.6 ft, length 46.69 ft, wingspan 48.49 ft (fully extended?), weight 37,000 lbs unloaded here is the kicker! F-5- height 13.4 ft, length 47.4 ft, wingspan 26.8 ft, weight 9,558 lbs unloaded I work on F-16's and to comprehend an aircraft like the VF-1 being actually shorter in both length and height is odd to me. F-16's are tiny compared to both the Tomcat and Eagle, but it is about a foot shorter than the F-5 which is one of the smallest jet fighters built.
  13. grigolosi
    We are having issues right now with them. They are popping engine MFL's due to spiderweb cracking between the aeration cooling holes on the HPT blades due to the higher heat of the engine.
  14. grigolosi
    The only real world penalty I can think of would be the fact you don't want a turret unlocked on your landing approach. The drag induced by normal pylons loaded asymmetrically is very noticeable on a fighter to the pilot. I also know from watching DYRL that the head turret has to actually lower itself to unlock and swivel. It would take a wind tunnel to ascertain what the drag effect would be with the head turret being unlocked and swiveled either left or right on landing.
  15. grigolosi
    That diagram looks more exact to scale than the other ones. The tires look properly scaled compared to the figure at the nose. But the barrel of that laser is still a bit too long to allow clearance when the gear is retracted. It only needs a little bit taken off the front to provide the clearance.
  16. grigolosi
    Also the nose tire looks to be out of proportion also. Typically fighter nose tires tend to be smaller than that. Even when it is a double tire like the F-18 or F-14 would use. Even most nose tires on these aircraft tend to be around a foot and half in diameter or a little wider than the human head. That angle box section of the nose well could be reduced in size when the tire is proportioned correctly and more than likely the only area raised to allow for the torque links to fit would be directly over them. You would be shocked at the amount of space that can be utilized in a well engineered wheel well. I also just noticed something amiss in the lower 2 diagrams, mainly the left one. The barrel for the laser on the A model VF-1 would be in the way of the nose gear as it extends. I would also suspect that the strut would work better for landings if it was mounted the other way. With the trunnion pin being mounted to the rear of the well and the nose tire being in the front of the well when it is retracted. Just give an idea of what a modern fighter wheel well looks like here is a link with walk around photos of an F-16. http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/awa01/001-100/awa002-F-16C/00c.shtm
  17. grigolosi
    The problem I have with the lower 2 diagrams is the position of the pilots head to the canopy. That canopy is damn low. Typically there has to be room for the pilots head so he can swivel and move, even on an aircraft like the F-16, which has an angled seat the pilots will use their fist as aa measurement to make sure they have proper clearance between the canopy and their helmet . The lower two diagrams pilot looks like they are out of proportion.
  18. grigolosi

    Klan

    grigolosi posted a gallery image in Macross Fan Art

    Klan

    From the album: Untitled Album

  19. grigolosi

    20151017 151325 1

    grigolosi posted a gallery image in Macross Fan Art

    20151017 151325 1

    From the album: Untitled Album

  20. grigolosi
    The Castle AFB Museum in Atwater CA has one on display with the original off-set bubble dome canopy. It definitely throws you off when you look at it form the front.
  21. grigolosi
    When I was stationed at Edwards back in 98-2000, NASA had a WB-57 still flying. Someone ther was told by another NCO that it was a modified U-2. I had to quickly explain to the airman that it wasn't a U-2.
  22. grigolosi
    Don't forget flight control computers either, without that FLCC, the F-117 was damn near uncontrollable. The X-29 was also that same way due to its forward swept wing. I read once it took 3 flight control computers to keep it within a controllable envelope. The control surfaces on the VF-1 wing have to behave also like a flaperon also. Not only does it have to provide pitch control like the elevon but it also has to provide some form of flap control for landing. Somewhere along the way they were able to combine 3 surfaces into one. The flight controls on it must be some what a nightmare. It includes a leading edge flap, aileron/flaperon/elevon, and speed brake. LEF's are a PITA with rigging and mounting. You then have to have a power drive unit (PDU) to move them. The flight control surfaces, more than likely will use ISA's (integrated servo actuator) since it is a fly by wire system. The engineering of this aircraft would be a masterpiece of aeronautical creation.
  23. grigolosi
    Well the panel work on most Russian birds tend to be "rougher" than our aircraft. The PACAF Demo team flew at the Malaysian arms show in 95'. I was stationed at Misawa where the team is based out of. A friend of mine on the team was telling me the Russian engineers were completely flabergasted at how smooth the surface of the F-16's were and how precisely machined the aircraft panels were. They were even more impressed with how much we were able to fit in the wheel wells of the F-16's. He said they spent damn near an hour examining the wells and taking pictures. He also said they looked at the SU-27's that were there and were shocked at how roughly the panels fit together.
  24. grigolosi
    Its funny but all these Sukhoi lovers out there would be horrified to see how rough they look up close in real life. Ever notice how almost all the pics you see of them are always at a distance.............
  25. grigolosi
    well the Brits aren't the only ones doing throwback paint schemes
×
×
  • Create New...