What would you choose to have a flight in, and why?

[RichB]

Eric Mc said:

There is a flying Catalina in the UK and anyone can buy shares in it. I was on board this aeroplane at Farnborough this year - sadly on the ground.

One of the pilots who displays this one is my next door neighbour.

[Zaxxon]

cookie118 said:

It's interesting how Russia and the US have gone different ways.

It's more interesting how the USSR's designs were incredibly similar to those from the west.

[SVX]

Zaxxon said:

cookie118 said:

It's interesting how Russia and the US have gone different ways.

It's more interesting how the USSR's designs were incredibly similar to those from the west.

Whilst they are very similar designs, the Tupolev is a lot larger than the B1-B, and as mentioned has a lot more capability. It'd be interesting to really know who was spying on who during the cold war.

[Zaxxon]

There have been many similarities between Russian aeroplanes and Western. With the Russian aeroplanes flying several years after the original western design.

Comet - TU-104
Concorde -TU-144
TU-160 - B1
Buran - Shuttle
AN124 - Galaxy
T-50 - F22

Although China seems to be even worse.

[SVX]

Zaxxon said:

There have been many similarities between Russian aeroplanes and Western. With the Russian aeroplanes flying several years after the original western design.

Comet - TU-104
Concorde -TU-144
TU-160 - B1
Buran - Shuttle
AN124 - Galaxy
T-50 - F22

Although China seems to be even worse.

IIRC Tu-144 flew before Concorde (1968 versus 1969).
Buran was a far superior design to the Orbiter (specifically around their thermal protection design), but sadly the Russians ran out of cash.

As I posted earlier, I think that the obvious spying and subsequent use of the stolen designs was very much a two-way street. In any case, I wish that there was more innovation in aircraft development today

[Simpo Two]

Du1point8 said:

think you maybe looking for these pictures:

http://www.retronaut.co/2011/11/a-day-on-a-flying-...

Well found sir!

I thought the photos were taken on the fateful 1960 trip but that says 1950; maybe there were two LIFE features?

[Zaxxon]

SVX said:

IIRC Tu-144 flew before Concorde (1968 versus 1969).
Buran was a far superior design to the Orbiter (specifically around their thermal protection design), but sadly the Russians ran out of cash.

From wiki

'The development of the Tu-144 is closely related to industrial espionage against the French company Aérospatiale, which was developing the Concorde. Sergei Pavlov, officially acting as Aeroflot’s representative in Paris, was arrested in 1965 and was in possession of detailed plans of the braking system, landing gear and the airframe of the Concorde. Another agent named Sergei Fabiew, arrested in 1977, was believed to have obtained the entire plans of the Concorde prototype in the mid-1960s. However, these were just early development versions and would not have permitted the USSR engineers to come up with their own aircraft, but could have served as an indication of the work of the Concorde design team. An espionage theory involved the Anglo/French Concorde team, who knew that the Soviets were planning to steal the plans, put into circulation a set of dummy blueprints with deliberate design flaws.'

Also the Buran may have been better but I was pointing out the fact that there were suspicious similarities.

[LimaDelta]

Ok, I've thought long and hard about this one, and I think I've made up my mind. For the shear spectacle, the noise and the power I would have to be shot from the deck of the Ark Royal in a FAA F4K Phantom.



On a more realistic note, there is a Mk3 Jet Provost group at Newcastle which I would like to join once I finish my PPL and get a few hours under my belt. I know it isn't a real jet fighter, but it is probably the closest I will come.

My little Traumahawk will have to do for now though

[Scotty2]

For me it would be the LZ130 Graff Zeppelin 2. The peak of Zeppelin design at the the time. Imagine floating above the cities in something the size of cruise liner!!

(Everyone remembers the Hindenburg as a failure but often do not know about the 17 double crossings of the Atlantic without incident in her previous season. Trust a bloody journalist to spoil it all by filiming the little mishap...)

[anonymous-user]

Zaxxon said:

cookie118 said:

It's interesting how Russia and the US have gone different ways.

It's more interesting how the USSR's designs were incredibly similar to those from the west.

I wasn't really commenting on the designs (they do seem to share similar architecture) more the different thinking processes that led to the two aeroplanes, the U.S seemed to think that faster and higher for bombers wasn't the way forward, whereas the Russians did.

aeropilot, if you're still watching you mentioned that the B1 is not well like by its crews, how come? Is it particularly tricky to fly?

[Rotary Madness]

cookie118 said:

Zaxxon said:

cookie118 said:

It's interesting how Russia and the US have gone different ways.

It's more interesting how the USSR's designs were incredibly similar to those from the west.

I wasn't really commenting on the designs (they do seem to share similar architecture) more the different thinking processes that led to the two aeroplanes, the U.S seemed to think that faster and higher for bombers wasn't the way forward, whereas the Russians did.

aeropilot, if you're still watching you mentioned that the B1 is not well like by its crews, how come? Is it particularly tricky to fly?

I know they were very complicated, and absolutely ridiculously expensive to run. Also the cockpit ejects as a mini escape pod

[b14]

SVX said:

Buran was a far superior design to the Orbiter (specifically around their thermal protection design), but sadly the Russians ran out of cash.

http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/11/rare-photos-of-russian-buran-space.html

Check out the cockpit shots from Buran - not something I'd like to go to space in!

[kooky guy]

RichB said:

Eric Mc said:

There is a flying Catalina in the UK and anyone can buy shares in it. I was on board this aeroplane at Farnborough this year - sadly on the ground.

One of the pilots who displays this one is my next door neighbour.

I thought that they were no longer allowed to land on water (insurance reasons) after the Southampton crash (incidentally, the chap I bought my house from had a share in that one allegedly), but in the last week I've seen a documentary featuring the Plane Sailing Cat (at least I assume it was the Plane Sailing one) with a Coastal Command veteran as a passenger certainly skimming the water (they didn't actually show it landing fully which was very disappointing) and now a pic showing it in the water!

So does the Plane Sailing Catalina still operate in the water?

[RichB]

kooky guy said:

So does the Plane Sailing Catalina still operate in the water?

I'll ask Rod when I see him next (tomorrow) but I believe so.

p.s. He's flying it down to Goodwood for the aero display at the Revival if anyone's going and interested in it.

[mattviatura]

Short Sunderland - Military

Some sort of Zeppelin (sp) - Commercial

Oh and I love King Airs.

[onyx39]

Zaxxon said:

There have been many similarities between Russian aeroplanes and Western. With the Russian aeroplanes flying several years after the original western design.

Comet - TU-104
Concorde -TU-144
TU-160 - B1
Buran - Shuttle
AN124 - Galaxy
T-50 - F22

Although China seems to be even worse.

You forgot the most obvious one: IL62 = VC10!

[SVX]

b14 said:

SVX said:

Buran was a far superior design to the Orbiter (specifically around their thermal protection design), but sadly the Russians ran out of cash.

http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/11/rare-photos-of-russian-buran-space.html

Check out the cockpit shots from Buran - not something I'd like to go to space in!

Thanks for the interesting link - actually it doesn't look too bad (for a prototype), interesting that they went for CRT monitors and analogue instrumentation, as compared to digital displays of the Shuttle.

[PaulG40]

ALawson said:

Well I suppose it would we a 12Sq Tornadoe in the navigator seat. My cousin ex Flt Lt of 12 Sq could be in the hot seat!

it'll probably go u/s on crew in to be fair...


I'd have a Tonka pax trip too, or an F16 one!

Edited by PaulG40 on Thursday 6th September 18:56

[PaulG40]

Rogue86 said:

I won't lie to you, the word 'awesome' doesn't come close to describing the experience. I managed to get airborne in a Hawk last year photographing the (then newly painted) 41(R)Sqn 95th anniversary Tornado over the South coast too, and that was also absolutely incredible. I'm hoping to get up in one of our Tornados and the Lancaster/Dakota before the end of the year.

I was on the Hit team for that see off! I chatted with you a few months back when I was showing LloydH and Dave Ellins around Conz and your photog section and getting my leaving print sorted out

[Dee Gee]

I'm a lucky chap and I have loads of types in the log book.

Front seat: T21, T31, D62B Condor, PA-28, Cessna 172, Tornado F3.

Back seat: Phantom, Tornado F3, Hawk, Hastings, Varsity, Dominie, Jet Provost.

Passenger: Typhoon, Jaguar, F16, F104, Super Sabre, Magister, Saab Supporter, Beaver, various light aircraft.

It's never enough is it? The ones I would really want to fly?

I regret passing up a trip in an F15D. I was promised a Harrier ride and it never came.

I really want to fly a Spitfire but doesn't everybody?

Edited by Dee Gee on Thursday 6th September 20:51

Edited by Dee Gee on Thursday 6th September 20:57