Aviation Geeks unite?! Anybody else care about planes here?

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by { Emilia }, Mar 4, 2020.

?

What's your level of interest in aviation?!

  1. Setting squawk 7500 when a flight simmer gets anywhere near the cockpit.

    10.3%
  2. Telling an Airbus from a Boeing? Easy. Shape of cockpit side windows!

    35.9%
  3. I AM GOING TO DIE ON THIS PLANE OMG!!!

    20.5%
  4. 737 Max? I'd like fries with it.

    5.1%
  5. Sure, I like animals: mad dogs, warthogs, racoons, otters,...

    5.1%
  6. "Hi, is this the A340 crew? I've got a delivery for you. Four hair dryers?"

    7.7%
  7. I'm just here because I like voting in polls.

    35.9%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Love the Macross Photoshop =D
     
    publiusr likes this.
  2. KennyB

    KennyB I have spoken............ Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2001
    Location:
    Tokyo Japan
    I’m not far……..I’ll pop down and check it out—-lol
     
  3. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    It's a fake.

    This is clearly a 'shop to look like a Bandai "Valkyrie" toy.

     
    publiusr likes this.
  4. KennyB

    KennyB I have spoken............ Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2001
    Location:
    Tokyo Japan
    You know he was needed here.......

    Screen Shot 2022-09-07 at 17.57.45.png
     
    CorporalCaptain likes this.
  5. Marc

    Marc Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Shinning Waters
    Boom have hit a snag with Rolls-Royce pulling out of the project.

    I don't know if anything from the Olympus engines could have been used design wise but R-R are the only company I can think of that have experience in building engines for supersonic passenger aircraft.

    https://www.flightglobal.com/airfra...ms-supersonic-airliner-project/150111.article

    Roll-Royce (and others) developed the design from the Bristol engine used in the Vulcan bombers which were subsonic but wing and engine location similar to what would eventually be seen on the Concorde.

    General Electric had the GE4 based on an earlier design in development for the Boeing SST but it was canned when the aircraft was cancelled.

    Boom says it will announce a new engine partner at later date so time will tell if it's a new engine company (I think unlikely) and then whether it will be complete new design or an upscale of an existing design.

    I expect it would be scale up to same time and money and also to met Boom's timeframe of entry into service by the turn of the decade.

    Because an airliner will operate in a different manner to a fighter (4 or more engines, higher altitude, more frequent flights) and the physics involved it's probably the biggest challenger after mitigating sonic boom issues.

    And as we've seen in here many a great airframe has been let down by a lousy engine.
     
    J.T.B. likes this.
  6. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    That means GE or Pratt & Whitney are the likely Engine Partners to step in, considering there are only the Big 3 engine makers in the world that can provide reliable engines on the scale that they want.
     
  7. publiusr

    publiusr Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  8. J.T.B.

    J.T.B. Rear Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Nice color shot of an Albacore supporting the North Africa landings, late 1942.

    albacore_1942.png
     
  9. Marc

    Marc Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Shinning Waters
    The U.S.A.F is pushing to retire it's oldest F-22 Raptors to allow funding to be funnelled towards their replacement which is planned to to enter service in 2030.

    There are 185 Raptors of which 122 are mission capable (subject to maintenance availability) the rest are for training, development and backup because they're not combat capable.

    Scrapping the block 20s would save about $50 mil per aircraft (operating costs, upgrade etc) but in the wake of the issues with the F-35s there are concerns on whether the NGAD (Next Generation Air Defence) fighters would enter service on time but they're gonna be expensive fuckers @US100mil+.

    Unit cost for the Raptor is $122mil (double when you factor in R&D, operating costs etc) where as the F-35s come in at ~$US70mil.

    They could have an easier time with the NGAD if they don't add vtol and don't try and make it a one size fits all fighter.

    There are two major issues with the F-22 a) they were designed in the 1990s with a different style of combat in mind and they lack ability for long range operations. In the mean time both russia and china have developed competing 5th gen fighters with long capabilities though the former might suffer in development and deployment due to vlad the invader trying to conquor Ukraine.

    The Air Force Wants to Dump the F-22 Raptor to Make Way for a New Fighter Jet (msn.com)
     
  10. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    You could thank "Congress" for that requirement.

    They wanted one Platform / Family to do it all, thats what they got.

    The main issue is that their long range capability SUCKS.

    The YF-23 was literally the perfect platform for what we need now.

    It had the "Endurance" that the Pacific Theater needs and was optimized Aerodynamically.

    Yes, it's "Dog Fighting" capability was slightly weaker than the F-22, but still better than anything else we currently have and met the ATF requirements in "Dog Fighting".

    The idiots at the time picked the wrong horse to back.

    No, the YF-23 and it's Overly Maintenance heavy Tiles should've been chucked out and they should've gone with the same style of LOAN Exahust Cowling that the F-35 has.

    At some point, Maintenance Costs has to super seed Aftwards Stealth detection and that should've been the compromise made.

    The F-22's way of Vector Thrust Nozzle is good, but not the best. WAY too much moving mass and maintenance expense.

    We need to go with "Fluidic Thrust Vector" that uses re-directed air to have 15° off axis thrust, which is good enough without having to add in the heavy mass for the traditional Thrust Vector mechanisms.

    This allows 15° off axis radially, but can't pivot as much as the F-22's Vertical Axis of 20°.

    Other Thrust Vector systems may allow more degrees off axis, but they are mechanically complex and add ALOT of weight & mechanical complexity along with maintenance logistics.

    "Fluidic Thrust Vector" adds minimal weight but gives you reasonable off-axis pitch control.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2022
  11. publiusr

    publiusr Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  12. Gingerbread Demon

    Gingerbread Demon Stealer of all the cookies in time and space Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2015
    Location:
    Gingerbread Demon
    Not a real F14 but a sweet replica

     
    StarCruiser and publiusr like this.
  13. Marc

    Marc Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Shinning Waters
    Further to my to my earlier post, other engine manufacturers include GE and P&W have also turn down Boom in their search for an engine maker.

    GE went so far as to say that supersonic capable engines for the civilan market wasn't an area they are interested in.

    So Boom may look to building it's own engines which would require more money but also need to tread carefully to make sure they don't infringe on anyone else's patents and designs.

    Think avoiding the legal issues might be the hardest party. Engineers with the requisite experience won't be easy to find and if Boom were to try and entice them away from GE et al and I can see NDAs being demanded on the way out the door.
     
    J.T.B. likes this.
  14. J.T.B.

    J.T.B. Rear Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Yeah... I think this spells doom for Boom.
     
    publiusr likes this.
  15. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    If the US Government wants a Boom Overture, I'm sure somebody can convince either GE or P&W to help
     
  16. J.T.B.

    J.T.B. Rear Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    It's not a matter of convincing, it's a matter of money. If the manufacturers themselves don't see a market for the engines, the US government is not going to subsidize their development.
     
  17. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Maybe they should reach out to SNECMA / Safran. The French might be able to help.
     
  18. Marc

    Marc Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Shinning Waters
  19. publiusr

    publiusr Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
  20. Non Sync

    Non Sync Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Hiding from the NARA, I've said too much...
    [​IMG]
    Eviation's Alice, an all-electric aircraft, completed its maiden flight this morning from Moses Lake, Washington. Alice, a nine-seater commuter plane has a range of 250nm, is fly-by-wire with fully electronic flight control system. The 900kWh battery is expected to charged 1 hour of flight time in 30 minutes with anticipation of reducing charging time as technology improves. Replacement batteries are estimated to cost $250,000, which is still less than replacing or overhauling piston engines in similar aircraft.