Aviation Geeks unite?! Anybody else care about planes here?
- Thread starter { Emilia }
- Start date
Your image fails to load for some reason.
as a kid in the 80's, I loved the X-29
I wish they would let civilians buy / build a X-29 for fun.
=D
How much would it cost and would you need a computer system like that plane had to keep it stable?
The computer part is easy, they had 1984 era's computers for avionics.
Our Modern Raspberry Pi is more powerful than the entire computer setup on the X-29.
I wouldn't worry about finding powerful enough computer hardware in the long term.
What I want is access to the proprietary software and what they used for the control laws since it's "Fly by Wire".
If you don't have access to that, you'd have to start from scratch which would be dangerous.
As far as the air-frame, it has bits from the F-5 & F-16 cobbled together.
That's the hard part to attain.
What I want to do with the X-29 platform is to pair it with the F-16 MATV (Multi-Axis Thrust Vector) Exhaust Nozzle
Turn the X-29 into the ultimate "Acrobatic Air Show/Stunt Jet" for performance & fun
That is neat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_X-29
X-29 number two was maneuverable up to an angle of attack of about 25 degrees with a maximum angle of 67°
The X-29 was already one of the most manueverable platforms of it's day.
Imagine what you can do when you slap the MATV Exhaust Nozzle system for even more insanity.
This would be a rich pilot's ultimate wet dream =D.
Or perfect "Adversary at Red Flag" War Game simulations.
as a kid in the 80's, I loved the X-29
Liked it a lot too (and though fictional, I liked the X-30 Conquest from G I Joe too which also had the FSW layout)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell-MBB_X-31
You want fancy smancy moves?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbst_maneuver
^^ example of what it can do, and yeah, it's slightly less nice looking than the X-29 but can fly without a tail if needed.
An there's of course these two.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_HiMAT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_X-36
And another forward swept birdie, rather big sucker this one..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47
You want fancy smancy moves?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbst_maneuver
^^ example of what it can do, and yeah, it's slightly less nice looking than the X-29 but can fly without a tail if needed.
An there's of course these two.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_HiMAT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_X-36
And another forward swept birdie, rather big sucker this one..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47
He doesn't even like motorcycles. Fell off a dirtbike, as a kid, i hear. I don't think he'd want to pilot a widowmaker like that x-plane.
first it was the issues with the 737-Max, now Boeing has another new aircraft giving it headaches - but not because of the design issues.
The 777X has been in the works for sometime now with the first airframe flight last year. The X is a stretched version of the 777 capable of carrying up to 400 passengers with a 13,500km range (or under 400 with a 16,000km range).
Along comes covid and kicks the production schedule and demand in the teeth.
Then you've got the international regulalators who each want to do their own certification in the wake of the Max debacle.
https://www.thestar.com/wsj/busines....html?li_source=LI&li_medium=thestar_business
It doesn't quite have the capacity of the 747-8 but will carry lots of SLC but with the lower costs associated with a twinjet.
unfortunately for Boeing their problem is compounded as it's direct competitor, the A350 is already in service.
The 777X has been in the works for sometime now with the first airframe flight last year. The X is a stretched version of the 777 capable of carrying up to 400 passengers with a 13,500km range (or under 400 with a 16,000km range).
Along comes covid and kicks the production schedule and demand in the teeth.
Then you've got the international regulalators who each want to do their own certification in the wake of the Max debacle.
https://www.thestar.com/wsj/busines....html?li_source=LI&li_medium=thestar_business
It doesn't quite have the capacity of the 747-8 but will carry lots of SLC but with the lower costs associated with a twinjet.
unfortunately for Boeing their problem is compounded as it's direct competitor, the A350 is already in service.
What will happen to large planes like the A380? With not much travel going on and reduced demand will airlines have to put them away in storage or mothball them?
please for once just use google.
Finally what's long been said but never admitted.
the F-35 is a turkey.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/bu...d/news-story/b42ace8b90b5a7437e8ff083788dd993
the trudeau govt in Canada has taken a lot of heat over it's decision not to get the F-35 (and a stop gap bought some of the Australia's surplus F/A-18s) but they have probably made the right move.
the F-35 is a turkey.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/bu...d/news-story/b42ace8b90b5a7437e8ff083788dd993
the trudeau govt in Canada has taken a lot of heat over it's decision not to get the F-35 (and a stop gap bought some of the Australia's surplus F/A-18s) but they have probably made the right move.
A reading room
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45586 and some interesting concepts
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45570
Largest concept plane
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45541
ISINGLASS
http://codeonemagazine.net/c5_article.html?item_id=92
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45586 and some interesting concepts
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45570
Largest concept plane
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=45541
ISINGLASS
http://codeonemagazine.net/c5_article.html?item_id=92
Last edited:
Interesting idea but yeah so never going to happen.
an vtol take off?
that would be a sight to behold.
Last edited:
The only jet VTOL transport aircraft.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_31
Read up on that one after it was depicted in The Man In the High Castle.
