Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 2)
Discussion
Life really can be funny sometimes.....
February 2, 1970, a Convair F-106 Delta Dart, operated by the 71st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron inadvertently departed controlled flight, and entered a flat spin. The pilot, Gary Foust, attempted to recover, unsuccessfully, including the desperation move of deploying the aircraft's drag chute; however recovery proved to be impossible, and Foust fired his ejection seat and escaped the stricken aircraft at an altitude of 15,000 feet.
The reduction in weight and change in center of gravity caused by the removal of Foust and the ejection seat, however, caused the aircraft, trimmed for takeoff and with the throttle at idle, to successfully recover itself from the spin. One of the other pilots on the mission is reported to have radioed Foust during his descent under his parachute that "you'd better get back in it!".
Foust watched incredulously while descending on his parachute, as the now-pilotless aircraft descended and skidded to a halt in a farmer's field near Big Sandy, Montana. Foust drifted into the nearby mountains; he was later rescued by local residents using snowmobiles.
Shortly thereafter, the local sheriff arrived at the scene of the crash, and was surprised when he observed the aircraft – the heat of the crash landing, combined with the exhaust from the still-idling jet engine, melted the snow which allowed the aircraft to start to move. Having contacted the air base, he was informed that he should simply allow the jet to run out of fuel, which occurred an hour and forty-five minutes later without further incident.
A recovery crew from McClellan Air Force Base arrived on the scene and began to dismantle the aircraft, removing its wings for transport aboard a railroad flat car. The damage to the aircraft was minimal; indeed, one officer on the recovery crew is reported to have stated that were there any less damage he would have simply flown the aircraft out of the field.
Following its misadventure, the "Cornfield Bomber" was repaired and returned to service, operating with the 49th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron, the final USAF unit to operate the F-106. Upon its retirement, it was presented to the National Museum of the United States Air Force, where it remains on display.
Very, very different aircraft which flew in very different flight regimes. So any physical similarity is purely coincidental.
The original Tu 144 did not have foreplanes. However, shortcomings with the low speed handling of the prototype 144 showed that a complete redesign of the wing might be needed. In the end, a compromise was decided on by fitting retractable foreplanes to the forward fuselage. These helped but they did add extra weight to the design.
The B-70 was designed for Mach 3 flight with droopable outer wing sections which trapped the supersonic shockwave under the fuselage allowing the aircraft to "surf" the sonic wave - thereby extending its range.
It was a highly advanced aeroplane - which was rendered obsolete even before the first example had flown - which is why the project was cancelled.
The original Tu 144 did not have foreplanes. However, shortcomings with the low speed handling of the prototype 144 showed that a complete redesign of the wing might be needed. In the end, a compromise was decided on by fitting retractable foreplanes to the forward fuselage. These helped but they did add extra weight to the design.
The B-70 was designed for Mach 3 flight with droopable outer wing sections which trapped the supersonic shockwave under the fuselage allowing the aircraft to "surf" the sonic wave - thereby extending its range.
It was a highly advanced aeroplane - which was rendered obsolete even before the first example had flown - which is why the project was cancelled.
Here's a picture of the very first Tu144 being rolled out in 1967. You can see that it doesn't have foreplanes and the engines are mounted quite closely together under the centre fuselage -
The later development aircraft were very different. In fact, they were almost a complete redesign. The foreplanes were added to give better control at low speeds and the engines were moved further outboard. This also needed a complete redesign of the undercarriage.
The later development aircraft were very different. In fact, they were almost a complete redesign. The foreplanes were added to give better control at low speeds and the engines were moved further outboard. This also needed a complete redesign of the undercarriage.
2013BRM said:
I'd forgotten just how stunning the TU144 was, I think I even prefer it to the Concorde, flawed though it was
Was thinking the same. Particularly head on. Feel almost blasphemous saying it though.Also, I am sure I read somewhere it was made from stolen "unrefined" Concorde blueprints.
Could be total tosh though.
onyx39 said:
2013BRM said:
I'd forgotten just how stunning the TU144 was, I think I even prefer it to the Concorde, flawed though it was
Was thinking the same. Particularly head on. Feel almost blasphemous saying it though.Also, I am sure I read somewhere it was made from stolen "unrefined" Concorde blueprints.
Could be total tosh though.
Concorde had that beautiful "S" shaped ogival wing with very sophisticated camber changes all along the wing. It was this complex wing shape that was Concorde's real secret - it allowed it to cruise at Mach 2 without reheat and also allowed it to slow down and land at reasonable speeds, without the need for any high lift devices such as flaps or leading edge slats or droops.
The 144 wing is much simpler - just a double delta. This allowed it to fly at Mach 2 (slightly faster than Concorde - in fact) but it needed reheat to maintain that and it did not allow good slow speed handling. The Tu144 was fitted with quite massive trailing edge flaps and was redesigned, as mentioned above, with foreplanes to further rectify its slow speed problems.
It was a bit of a mess really.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff