X-59 Resembles Actual Aircraft

NASA ^ | Aug 3, 2021 | Sasha Ellis

[fella]

The “Spirit of St. Lois” and some other aircraft from before War 2 had no forward view. Periscopes.

[al baby]

Oh please ever drive a vett or a old z car a 12 cyl jag

[plsvn]

Do you understand the concept of “experimental”? That’s what the “X” stands for.

Since when did ALL concept aircraft begin with mini versions?

[Chainmail]

Apparently, you’ve never seen the X-1 through X-5.

[newfreep]

Kinda looks lile a Porsche "Targa" roof...

[1Old Pro]

I wonder how many Chinese engineers Lockheed Martin has assigned to the project.

Chicoms probably have Hi Def video feed, unlike our election ballot watchers.

[plsvn]

Apparently, you’ve never seen the X-1 through X-5.

Where they ever scaled up to "production useful" sizes? Experimentation is one thing, practical application is another. We're talking about two different things.

Regarding the X-59, do you think the sonic boom profile of the X-59 will be the same as the scaled up "production useful" aircraft size?

Again, we're talking about two different things. The experimental researchers can go play all they want, but what they play with won't apply well to full scaled production useful sized aircraft.

[Sirius Lee]

The pilot would just have view screens that look like he's looking outside. Or take it even one more step and the pilot just wears a pair of VR goggles.

Or one better, wear VR goggles from inside the safety of some remote mountain bunker.

[bert]

——Mongoose is a tool with the ability to weave together composite wing skins using ultraviolet light to bind the composite material. ——

That would be an ultra violet cured epoxy similar that my dentist uses to glue in a crown or cure a filling

[mad_as_he$$]

Looks like an Avro Arrow.

[mad_as_he$$]

F-35 has “god’s eye”. It will revolutionize the process of flying.

https://www.businessinsider.com/f35-helmet-2017-1?op=1

[Flick Lives]

Interesting tech. Thanks for the link.

[BenLurkin]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow

[mad_as_he$$]

You are welcome!

[Chainmail]

I will differ with you: I am a Mechanical Engineer and I have worked on aircraft testing: the L-1011 Airliner and the S-3A Viking. With both aircaft, 1/10 scale precision models were used for detailed aerodynamic testing in the wind tunnels. Since then, computer modeling gives better defined parameters but there is no substitute for flying to get accurate test results.

The Canadians used a reduced scale model of their CF-105 Arrow and fired it into the upper atmosphere on a rocket to get their supersonic flight data (and they're still searching for it at the bottom of the lake it fell into, since it is one of the only remaining bits of their beloved Arrow program).

The Grumman X-29 was built to test the concept of using a forward-swept wing for high maneuverability and relied on three redundant computers to keep it within its flight envelope (i.e., not crash) it was reasonably successful, but only the Russian Sukhoi Su-47 seem to have used that design.

A reduced scale model will refine and develop the initial concept and allow them to go to the next steps before building a full-scale version. Any idiot that wants to go to a full-scale passenger-carrying prototype without several testing steps in between is asking for disaster.

[plsvn]

Any idiot that wants to go to a full-scale passenger-carrying prototype without several testing steps in between is asking for disaster.

No doubt about that.

[slouper]

I want one of those.