Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 2)
Discussion
The restoration of the Condor wreck lifted from Norwegian waters in 1999 is still going strong - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uHA83Jsz9E
They are going to call it "Trigger's Besen"
They are going to call it "Trigger's Besen"
PRTVR said:
Did all Nimrods have vertical fins on their tail ? I can't remember seeing them, anybody know the purpose of them.
All Nimrods with an AAR probe were fitted with finlets on the tailplanes.Nimrod, as I am sure you are aware, was developed from the DH Comet. Sadly DeHavilland had a habit of not designing big enough fins for its aircraft.
As a result, scabbing the bombay pack onto the basic Comet airframe produced problems with both Directional Stability (Yaw), and with Dutch Roll (Yaw/Roll coupling). The problems were particularly apparent when the bomb doors were open because you now had a huge keel area forward of the CofG and CofLift. To try to counter this Nimrod was fitted with a fin leading edge fillet in order to increase the aft keel area. However this really wasn't enough so the aircraft was additionally fitted with a rudder limiter linked to the bomb door selector (such that the aircraft's critical Sideslip Angle could not be overcome with the bomb doors open). Eventually this limiter was removed as spares became unavailable and the advice was to maintain a minimum of 250kts if manoeuvring whenever the bomb doors were open (a bit of a problem if dropping ASRA gear - Air Sea Rescue Apparatus ie dinghies).
When the AAR probe was fitted as a UOR (Urgent Operational Requirement) for Op CORPORATE the marginal nature of Nimrod's aft keel area was highlighted again - hence the fitment of the tailplane finlets.
Even then this was still a barely sufficient. Indeed after the removal of the ARAR/ARAX ESM (Electronic Support Measures) kit from the 'banana' fairing atop the fin, and its replacement with the Loral YELLOWGATE ESM pods at each wingtip, the banana fairing was retained so as not to reduce fin area. On MR2 from Op GRANBY onwards this fairing was used to house a towed array missile decoy.
On Nimrod MRA4 there must have been a fairly major Directional Stability problem as evidenced by the much larger fin leading edge fillet and larger finlets when compared to Nimrod MR2.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Wednesday 18th January 00:04
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
PRTVR said:
Did all Nimrods have vertical fins on their tail ? I can't remember seeing them, anybody know the purpose of them.
All Nimrods with an AAR probe were fitted with finlets on the tailplanes.Nimrod, as I am sure you are aware, was developed from the DH Comet. Sadly DeHavilland had a habit of not designing big enough fins for its aircraft.
As a result, scabbing the bombay pack onto the basic Comet airframe produced problems with both Directional Stability (Yaw), and with Dutch Roll (Yaw/Roll coupling). The problems were particularly apparent when the bomb doors were open because you now had a huge keel area forward of the CofG and CofLift. To try to counter this Nimrod was fitted with a fin leading edge fillet in order to increase the aft keel area. However this really wasn't enough so the aircraft was additionally fitted with a rudder limiter linked to the bomb door selector (such that the aircraft's critical Sideslip Angle could not be overcome with the bomb doors open). Eventually this limiter was removed as spares became unavailable and the advice was to maintain a minimum of 250kts if manoeuvring whenever the bomb doors were open (a bit of a problem if dropping ASRA gear - Air Sea Rescue Apparatus ie dinghies).
When the AAR probe was fitted as a UOR (Urgent Operational Requirement) for Op CORPORATE the marginal nature of Nimrod's aft keel area was highlighted again - hence the fitment of the tailplane finlets.
Even then this was still a barely sufficient. Indeed after the removal of the ARAR/ARAX ESM (Electronic Support Measures) kit from the 'banana' fairing atop the fin, and its replacement with the Loral YELLOWGATE ESM pods at each wingtip, the banana fairing was retained so as not to reduce fin area. On MR2 from Op GRANBY onwards this fairing was used to house a towed array missile decoy.
On Nimrod MRA4 there must have been a fairly major Directional Stability problem as evidenced by the much larger fin leading edge fillet and larger finlets when compared to Nimrod MR2.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Wednesday 18th January 00:04
F-89 Scorpion with rotating nose guns. Apparently it could also rotate 360 degrees on the longitudinal axis to hit targets alongside
I suspect it caused a lot of drag and buffeting
There was a similar trial on an F9F too
I suspect it caused a lot of drag and buffeting
There was a similar trial on an F9F too
Edited by MartG on Wednesday 18th January 12:02
Edited by MartG on Wednesday 18th January 12:03
Eric Mc said:
In De Havilland's original concepts for what became the Comet, one version the aircraft had no tailplane. It was because of this proposed design that they built the three DH108 Swallows - all of which crashed.
There was a later proposal, not by DH, for a Vampire based business jet that looked a lot like the first of those sketches. I don't think it even reached the prototype stage though.Eric Mc said:
It made it to mock up stage
Then they realised that its centre of gravity would be insanely sensitive to changes in luggage weight?Or that passengers / CAA / FAA would not be keen on a single-engined civilian jet design? (apparently there have been NO single-engined civilian bizjets).
Or they realised that the original version came with an ejector seat, but the civilian version would not come with multiple ejector seats?
Surprised it got as far as a mock-up.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff