Jump to content

Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII


Recommended Posts

If you want the latest news on the Pak-Fa, unclassified, go onto the keypublishing forums.

As for the visible actuator pumps on most of the fifth gen fighters, that's thin wing syndrome. The electric actuators for supersonic fighters are massive compared to old hydraulics and cables. The YF-23 had a thicker wing and store more fuel there then most of the other 5th gens. As a result you don't see the actuator bumps, which did help make it stealthier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there any articles that are newer? If you can find some that'd be good. If not, why are you complaining if that's all we have?

Russia Today is a Russian news service They have a number of Videos on T-50/SU-27 on their web sight and You tube channel

Some are in English and some are in Russian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another place to see stuff is F-16.net. They've been pretty good about banning pro-russian trolling, so you see pretty good exchange of views on the PAK-FA, F-35, F-22 and, of course, the F-16.

This thread is pretty long, but its got a lot of technical debate. The people to look for is Hornetfinn and Neurotech who have aerospace design backgrounds

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21808

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want the latest news on the Pak-Fa, unclassified, go onto the keypublishing forums.

As for the visible actuator pumps on most of the fifth gen fighters, that's thin wing syndrome. The electric actuators for supersonic fighters are massive compared to old hydraulics and cables. The YF-23 had a thicker wing and store more fuel there then most of the other 5th gens. As a result you don't see the actuator bumps, which did help make it stealthier.

They've been going with thin wings? That seems pointless, considering thicker supercritical profiles for trans-sonic supercruise and fuel capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is it more of a '5th gen thinner wings' thing or that the new fangled electrical actuators are bulkier? I would have thought that vintage interceptors like F-104 and Mig-25 wings are as thin as you would get and those had no bumps.

Was the YF-23 even using electric actuators? Or it had hydraulics? I don't even remember the YF-22 having the 'bumps'. Was it on hydraulics too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing they moved to electric ones to save weight, like the 787 does. Hydraulic lines, pumps, and the gallons of fluid itself, all add up, weight-wise.

Its also to do with maintenence. Hydraulics are large, multi-system assembles that inevitably have issues. Electrohydrostatic components generally are one piece, self contained affairs: they are easy to check, fix, and replace. That saves a lot of time on the flightline.

Edited by Noyhauser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a little off-topic, but theres a new Liam Neeson movie coming out called "Non-Stop", which features an airliner in trouble. In the trailer, its shown being escorted by a pair of Eurofighter Typhoons, which makes a nice change from F-35s with guns in the wrong place... :)

Edited by F-ZeroOne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

image.jpg

That's the current plan for 2015-2018. I was looking at the numbers and thinking "dang, that's a LOT of A-10's"----then I read some more---yup, that's ALL the A-10's gone.

But don't worry, they just delivered the first F-35 to Luke AFB! Surely that will make up for it. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the target is to save money in defense, why not look at reducing the B-1 fleet over the A-10? It's been sort of a problem child since the beginning even with the B-1B. The B-52 is slated to remain in service for another 25 years and the B-2 probably longer.

Is there a larger shot of that chart Dave?

It reminds that I tried to join the AF Reserves at the wrong time. Was going for Navigator for C-130s and had the door shut on me with several bases due to fleet reduction and or bases moving to the C-130Js. :(

Edited by Shadow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of push back to keep the A-10 flying until after the F-35A is actually online to serve as its replacement. Losing the A-10 will not kil Davis Monathon though, with AMARC there the AF has to keep that base open, they will shift resources around and move another aircraft there. Worst case they will turn DM into an Air Reserve Base and probably have the AZ ANG move over there from the airport.

Also, yes the U-2/TR-1 is finally going to go away. The RQ-4 will be its replacement, as it should ahve been years ago, and now that it is being retired it is hastening RQ-4 upgrades and sensor development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of push back to keep the A-10 flying until after the F-35A is actually online to serve as its replacement. Losing the A-10 will not kil Davis Monathon though, with AMARC there the AF has to keep that base open, they will shift resources around and move another aircraft there. Worst case they will turn DM into an Air Reserve Base and probably have the AZ ANG move over there from the airport.

Also, yes the U-2/TR-1 is finally going to go away. The RQ-4 will be its replacement, as it should ahve been years ago, and now that it is being retired it is hastening RQ-4 upgrades and sensor development.

It'll never be the same even if they keep the base.

My whole life was spent under the sound of Hog's flying. It's a beautiful sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I used to live in Tucson, watching A-10s flying over was a great part of my day, everyday.

I still remember when I first moved to Tucson that the A-7s were still flying out of TIA with the AZANG. My Dad would complain because of how low they came in and that runway damn near comes to the street, so he would be at the stoplight and the ungodly noise of an A-7 roaring over would almost split his eardrums. The A-7 was one of the loudest birds ever, now we have the F-35.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad to see the A-10 go and what sounds like for good this time. Besides F-16's & Blackhawks, we get a lot of Warthogs flying over here too, love that engine sound it never gets boring!!

Whats even sadder is that the Airforce/Government has been trying to do away with this aircraft for a long ass time, The Gulf War proved how valuable it is, then they wanted to scrap it again with the promises of the F-35. Back again with Iraq & Afghanistan, All these years later the A-10 in terms of maintenance & upgrades costs shes one of the cheapest birds flying.

So getting rid of this plane for budget cuts is BS, its just bad politics. For every modern technological advance the F-35 offers, the A-10 can withstand massive AA fire and damage and still land, the same will never be said for the Lightning II. Just my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lived under the flight-line of a Reserve station for C-130s for 2/3 of my life. I'll never forget the sound of an Allison turboprop. They never bothered me either. Occasionally you'd have NG choppers come in and I couldn't stand the Chinooks since they'd actually make the windows rattle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah lets get rid of that crummy old A-10, if it can't even go mach 1 what good is it!?

Stupid joking aside, I'll miss the A-10 if they do actually go through with getting rid of it. They use to fly over where I worked almost everyday, always a fun sight to see them flying along the river at 500ft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the whole idea is to sacrifice the working birds, in order to save face of the F-35 project that has been plagued with issues.

It's very political here locally, even getting the D and R's working side by side in order to save the A-10's. The county has even offered to have the A-10's become part of the reserve. Then also countered with they'd be happy with the next flight group lol.

One of our state representatives will be having a meeting with the top brass who made the decision and will be allowed to grill them on why

the A-10, with it's cheap servicing, and close air support, it's always going to be needed.

I don't think an F-35 can fly home on one wing, and a missing engine....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the whole idea is to sacrifice the working birds, in order to save face of the F-35 project that has been plagued with issues.

It's very political here locally, even getting the D and R's working side by side in order to save the A-10's. The county has even offered to have the A-10's become part of the reserve. Then also countered with they'd be happy with the next flight group lol.

One of our state representatives will be having a meeting with the top brass who made the decision and will be allowed to grill them on why

the A-10, with it's cheap servicing, and close air support, it's always going to be needed.

I don't think an F-35 can fly home on one wing, and a missing engine....

"I know an F-35 can't fly home on one wing, and a missing engine...." Fixed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

I had my issues with Gates over the F-22 but Hagel and some of the higher brass backing him are even bigger tools it seems. Feel bad for these Guard and Reserve units getting hit. I hope there is reconsideration on the A-10s retirement date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All performance issues aside, I think the F-35 is one of the ugliest planes ever.....and not ugly but awesome like the A-10. Just don't get why so many people love it.

Chris

Edited by Dobber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...