I looked more into this. The CEO of the company changed and the proposed plane will now have a jet engine. The more you dig, more questions and this one looks like smoke and mirrors
Aviation Geeks unite?! Anybody else care about planes here?
- Thread starter { Emilia }
- Start date
I looked more into this. The CEO of the company changed and the proposed plane will now have a jet engine. The more you dig, more questions and this one looks like smoke and mirrors
It's in development, so projects in aviation will take time, you just have to be patient.
It's not like we're short of other aircraft to fly in at the moment.
Another video about the Otto aircraft
more information has come to light with the investigation in the MD-11 crash last November.
And well it's not a good look for both fedex and boeing and the faa ain't looking too great either.
www.thestar.com
the courier company said it did't carry out the inspections because boeing said the part failure wouldn't lead to a crash.
for boeing it was under estimating the risk and b) lobbying (and ultimately being succesful) in have an increased amount of time between certain inspections and maintenance claiming it would be more efficient for the operators.
The number of cyclles went from 19,900 to 29260 (a massive increase)
And well it's not a good look for both fedex and boeing and the faa ain't looking too great either.
UPS never required detailed inspection of part that failed before engine flew off plane that crashed
UPS never required the detailed inspections needed to spot the problem that led to an engine to fly off one of its planes before it crashed even after Boeing recommended
www.thestar.com
the courier company said it did't carry out the inspections because boeing said the part failure wouldn't lead to a crash.
for boeing it was under estimating the risk and b) lobbying (and ultimately being succesful) in have an increased amount of time between certain inspections and maintenance claiming it would be more efficient for the operators.
The number of cyclles went from 19,900 to 29260 (a massive increase)
There has to be people who would want a Flying Motor Home as their plane.
That is a lovely craft
Postcards on aviation
projectswordtoys.blogspot.com
I miss quad-engine jets.
J-20
Ecojet
EV
techxplore.com
Not sure that I like the “V” tail design here:
Last time a civil aviation aircraft sported one of those—it got called the “doctor killer.”
Postcards on aviation
Rob's Dad's Airliner Postcards
the blog about vintage and modern space toys, Project SWORD, SpaceX and Golden Astronaut, Monsters, sci-fi and vintage toys
projectswordtoys.blogspot.com
J-20
Ecojet
EV
Hybrid-electric aircraft clears 30,000 feet for first time in test flights
An aircraft powered by a megawatt-class hybrid-electric engine developed in collaboration with NASA and built by GE Aerospace, demonstrated flight of an innovation that can inform new generations of fuel-saving aircraft power systems.
Not sure that I like the “V” tail design here:
Last time a civil aviation aircraft sported one of those—it got called the “doctor killer.”
Last edited:
That's pretty wild I love it. But high cost to keep it maintained no wonder it wasn't more popular
This one's interesting the D21 drone that was carried by the Blackbird
On aircraft design
techxplore.com
Sad development
Tailored surface vibrations to improve aerodynamic performance in passenger jets
A passenger jet soars across the sky at 640 mph (1,030 kilometers per hour), its wings pummeled with wind and boundary-layer turbulence, challenging the plane's operation and efficiency. Advancing research from Mahmoud I. Hussein aims to prevent that turbulence with engineered microscopic...
Sad development
Last edited:
AN-225 was considered for moving not just Buran, but Energia core blocks
For drones
techxplore.com
Fluid dynamics are improving
techxplore.com
More 737 trouble?
techxplore.com
For drones
Streamlined path-finding model helps unmanned vehicles search 15 times as fast as conventional model
A hiker is lost in the forest, and winter weather is setting in. The search needs to be speedy, thorough and efficient. Searchers send out an autonomous robotic drone. But how does it know where it should go? New research from Rohan Ghuge, assistant professor of information, risk and operations...
Fluid dynamics are improving
Simulated proving ground trains and assesses AI for actively controlling fluid dynamics
A platform for training and comparing machine learning models to actively reduce drag, improve lift, cut noise and manage heat has been launched by an international team that includes researchers at the University of Washington, University of Michigan Engineering, RWTH Aachen University and the...
More 737 trouble?
Brief physical access may let attackers alter Boeing 737 flight instructions
Physical access to an aircraft has not typically been considered a cybersecurity risk—but it should be, according to a team of computer scientists at the University of California San Diego. In a paper presented Aug. 13 at the USENIX Security Symposium in Baltimore, Maryland, former UC San Diego...
Well for what it's worth I posted the video about the D21 drone because for years I have found the Blackbird a fascinating aircraft. It has broken altitude and speed records, done many incredible things.
Over the years I have built various models of the Blackbird. In various scales, and one or two with the drone. So anyway that's why I posted the video but I meant to keep a brief comment in the description
Over the years I have built various models of the Blackbird. In various scales, and one or two with the drone. So anyway that's why I posted the video but I meant to keep a brief comment in the description
Last edited:
That would have been much more engaging, because you make models, might be that someone else builds aircraft models.
Would indeed be nice to include something like that, if you just post a link to a youtube vid about the SR-71 and just go "here you have a link to a vid of the SR-71" then that doesn't do anything.
But If you then tell that you like this aircraft, and its technology and then (tadaa) ask if someone else likes it, or dislikes it or has seen it up close or rather likes the Mig 25 more because it's almost as fast and so on.
And maybe that discussion then goes beyond that like including the English Electric Lightning because that aircraft has a phenominal climb rate, and then include the F-104 which for the time was really fast.
Anything is better than just posting a link and then just say "here's a link to a flying bunny"
Would indeed be nice to include something like that, if you just post a link to a youtube vid about the SR-71 and just go "here you have a link to a vid of the SR-71" then that doesn't do anything.
But If you then tell that you like this aircraft, and its technology and then (tadaa) ask if someone else likes it, or dislikes it or has seen it up close or rather likes the Mig 25 more because it's almost as fast and so on.
And maybe that discussion then goes beyond that like including the English Electric Lightning because that aircraft has a phenominal climb rate, and then include the F-104 which for the time was really fast.
Anything is better than just posting a link and then just say "here's a link to a flying bunny"
And fortunately the Lightning didn't kill as many pilots as the F-104 but didn't get any foriegn sales but then English Electric didn't engage in bribery and other corrupt practices.
At the times I'm not aware of any accidental flights in the F-104 unlike the Lighting. Can't remember the details as whether it was taxi test or engine run up but no it end up in wheels off the ground but the airfraft landed safetly.
And maybe that discussion then goes beyond that like including the English Electric Lightning because that aircraft has a phenominal climb rate, and then include the F-104 which for the time was really fast
Also if people want some videos that might stimulate some discussion, Rex's Hangar has a whole pile at this point coveraing aircraft upto the 60s.
Again it backups up a point I made quite some time back in the thread - the number of airframes that had the potential to be good aircraft but left down engines that turned out to be utterly shit.
Though some like B-29 manage to be great aircraft inspite of the engines (their Wright units were powerful but more issues that Time Magazine).
Yeah, next time I post a video I won't skimp on the description
@Marc
In The Netherlands the F-104 was actually one of the safest fighter jets we had, it was mostly the Germans who couldn't handle the aircraft, their pilots weren't used to anything that fast and fickle...
The Italians had a very good run with the F-104 S it was retired in 2004.
I have been up close with one, the wing's leading edge is REALLY sharp, as in there are protection covers on the leading edge so you can't cut yourself.
An engineer, Walter Holden indeed managed to get the Lightning into the air which was not entirely wanted... he managed to get it back on the ground but dinged up the tail a bit.
en.wikipedia.org
The aircraft he flew is now in the Imperial War Museum Duxford
In the past there were quite a lot of aircraft designs which were indeed not reaching their design goals because of their engines, X3 Stiletto was one of them, it was supposed to reach Mach 2 but never came close to it because of its weak engine.
en.wikipedia.org
It did help to develop the F-104 though.
As for the Mig 25 it is highly interesting that it is the anti SR-71 where streamline and careful design was replaced by a nickel steel brick with the most powerful engines they could find in the Soviet Union and that it actually worked (mostly)
In The Netherlands the F-104 was actually one of the safest fighter jets we had, it was mostly the Germans who couldn't handle the aircraft, their pilots weren't used to anything that fast and fickle...
The Italians had a very good run with the F-104 S it was retired in 2004.
I have been up close with one, the wing's leading edge is REALLY sharp, as in there are protection covers on the leading edge so you can't cut yourself.
An engineer, Walter Holden indeed managed to get the Lightning into the air which was not entirely wanted... he managed to get it back on the ground but dinged up the tail a bit.
Holden's Lightning flight - Wikipedia
In the past there were quite a lot of aircraft designs which were indeed not reaching their design goals because of their engines, X3 Stiletto was one of them, it was supposed to reach Mach 2 but never came close to it because of its weak engine.
Douglas X-3 Stiletto - Wikipedia
As for the Mig 25 it is highly interesting that it is the anti SR-71 where streamline and careful design was replaced by a nickel steel brick with the most powerful engines they could find in the Soviet Union and that it actually worked (mostly)
yep that's the incident.
Can't recall if I was reading up on the Lightning and then when to a youtube video where Holden was interviewed.
horses for courses.
The Foxbat was intended to intercept the B-70 Valkryies which designed to fly at mach-3 and they need materials that could withstand the temperatures.
the SR-71 and before that the A-12 were intended as reconnaissance aircraft to fly high and fast and not have a repeat of the U-2/Gary Powers incident
The russians had titanium but they didn't have the skunkworks or the material skills.
and lets face it - brute force was their general approach
Yep, they had titanium but not the skills to use it reliably although their naval shipyards could but I guess the navy and airforce didn't like each other much..
Nickel steel is much cheaper to use and anyone with basic welding skills can weld it and a lot of the Foxbat was welded, of course the thing was very heavy, guzzled fuel and had a shitty range at speed which they had to drop to Mach 2.83, go faster and the engines would overrev destroy themselves, they did some show off flights at Mach 3+ but that resulted fitting new engines after that flight.
And yeah.. subtle was usually not how they did things..
Nickel steel is much cheaper to use and anyone with basic welding skills can weld it and a lot of the Foxbat was welded, of course the thing was very heavy, guzzled fuel and had a shitty range at speed which they had to drop to Mach 2.83, go faster and the engines would overrev destroy themselves, they did some show off flights at Mach 3+ but that resulted fitting new engines after that flight.
And yeah.. subtle was usually not how they did things..
Actually sat in an F104 just over 40 years ago, (Bae Hawk that year too), both on the ground. Nice aircraft
It was also that year for a short flight on a Dakota, all at the same airshow
It was also that year for a short flight on a Dakota, all at the same airshow
