Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 3)

Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 3)

Author
Discussion

NDT

1,672 posts

227 months

Monday 22nd February
quotequote all
db said:
The tail is still there when inverted. The wing produces lift, even inverted. The wing would be forced up, and onto, the inverted aircraft.
Except when the aircraft is inverted the lift is pointing down, so both the lift and gravity will move the wing away.

RizzoTheRat

20,478 posts

156 months

Monday 22nd February
quotequote all
Only if it's in a positive g dive, if it's flying straight and level the lift will be upwards the same as if it wasn't inverted.

If you were to assume the wing would fly straight, you'd probably be best off separating when flying straight and level as the aircraft would lose lift and dive, while the wing would lose weight and climb. However I'd assume the separated wing would immediately stall and start to flip around all over the place.

CanAm

6,832 posts

236 months

Monday 22nd February
quotequote all
Apparently they only tried it once; on the “proof of concept” Hillson prototype, not the Hurricane. The aircraft “lost a few hundred feet of height” (because as per a previous poster the top speed with 2 wings in place was lower than the stalling speed as a monoplane) but it seems to have worked ok.

NDT

1,672 posts

227 months

Monday 22nd February
quotequote all
RizzoTheRat said:
Only if it's in a positive g dive, if it's flying straight and level the lift will be upwards the same as if it wasn't inverted.

If you were to assume the wing would fly straight, you'd probably be best off separating when flying straight and level as the aircraft would lose lift and dive, while the wing would lose weight and climb. However I'd assume the separated wing would immediately stall and start to flip around all over the place.
Yes, that's what I meant.

db

660 posts

133 months

Monday 22nd February
quotequote all
NDT said:
db said:
The tail is still there when inverted. The wing produces lift, even inverted. The wing would be forced up, and onto, the inverted aircraft.
Except when the aircraft is inverted the lift is pointing down, so both the lift and gravity will move the wing away.
Doh!
It made sense to me at the time, but the time was half past gin o'clock.

Ash_

5,015 posts

154 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all


A rather cool picture that a work group sent out yesterday.

FourWheelDrift

81,914 posts

248 months

Saturday 6th March
quotequote all
Messerschmitt Me 262 Mistel. When you run out of pilots throw aircraft at your enemy.



Ps. Just found out this is a model of the planned pairing which never flew. They planned many different aircraft combinations in 1945 but the only ones to be used operationally were the JU-88s with FW-190 or Me-109 aircraft carried.

Edited by FourWheelDrift on Saturday 6th March 16:24

JeremyH5

728 posts

99 months

Saturday 6th March
quotequote all
FourWheelDrift said:
Messerschmitt Me 262 Mistel. When you run out of pilots throw aircraft at your enemy.

Crumbs. What didn’t they try?

Eric Mc

114,593 posts

229 months

Sunday 7th March
quotequote all
That's what comes of a descent into panic, desperation and madness.

MartG

17,572 posts

168 months

Monday 8th March
quotequote all
Not the clickbaity thing you might expect from the title, and there's pics of some interesting helicopters in the article

https://hushkit.net/2021/02/22/10-worst-helicopter...

bungz

1,446 posts

84 months

Tuesday 9th March
quotequote all
Linky of the Bristol Belvedere said:
This left troops trying to board through a door four feet off the ground as the fuselage was still high enough to allow torpedoes to be loaded on the underside. Which turned out not to be a major requirement in the jungles of Borneo due to the paucity of submarines.
biggrin

Voldemort

4,513 posts

242 months

Monday 15th March
quotequote all

giveitfish

3,516 posts

178 months

Monday 15th March
quotequote all
There's about as many frontline combat aircraft on that deck as the RAF has in total frown (obviously I'm joking, but it's starting to be a close-run thing - I count 55 on that desk vs. what, 150 Typhoons we have now?)

Edited by giveitfish on Monday 15th March 18:50

irocfan

26,510 posts

154 months

Tuesday 16th March
quotequote all

JeremyH5

728 posts

99 months

Tuesday 16th March
quotequote all
irocfan said:
You must follow the same people on Twitter as me wink

irocfan

26,510 posts

154 months

Tuesday 16th March
quotequote all
JeremyH5 said:
irocfan said:
You must follow the same people on Twitter as me wink
FB, but all the same

Teddy Lop

4,651 posts

31 months

Tuesday 16th March
quotequote all
giveitfish said:
There's about as many frontline combat aircraft on that deck as the RAF has in total frown (obviously I'm joking, but it's starting to be a close-run thing - I count 55 on that desk vs. what, 150 Typhoons we have now?)

Edited by giveitfish on Monday 15th March 18:50
why are those numbers relevant? Many, i suspect most "front line" countries used to have greater numbers of less capable aircraft.

MB140

2,818 posts

67 months

Wednesday 17th March
quotequote all
Teddy Lop said:
giveitfish said:
There's about as many frontline combat aircraft on that deck as the RAF has in total frown (obviously I'm joking, but it's starting to be a close-run thing - I count 55 on that desk vs. what, 150 Typhoons we have now?)

Edited by giveitfish on Monday 15th March 18:50
why are those numbers relevant? Many, i suspect most "front line" countries used to have greater numbers of less capable aircraft.
More importantly because of the following

The complexity of these aircraft and the maintenance required to keep them flying.

The reduced quality of the training engineers in the RAF receive now.

The ever dwindling numbers they can retain (even techie pay and a retention bonus failed to retain people). Those left in are then expected to do more with less and that just keeps happening. (I’m old school RAF having done 24 years so far, the RAF has long acknowledged that it would cease to operate at this level and safety were it not for the goodwill of those in the service. The new bread joining recently won’t hang around for long. In get trained and some experience and get out (which is how the armed forces want it as it’s cheaper)

Yet another pay freeze (I realise these are exceptional times though). I bet I haven’t had 5% in the last 10 years and real world with inflation that’s a nice pay cut.

Then how many of those 150 are available or could be made ready fairly quickly.

I would at a bet say not even 60%, I don’t work typhoon so I don’t know there serviceability rates so it’s a bit of a guess but it’s an educated guess from years of experience of being on frontline squadrons.

mko9

1,192 posts

176 months

Wednesday 17th March
quotequote all
irocfan said:
How old is that picture? We haven't had any hogs painted like that since at least the early '90s, if not older.

Ayahuasca

26,409 posts

243 months

Friday 19th March
quotequote all


Department of Homeland Security P3 Orion AEW far from its homeland, way south of the border, down Panama way.