Posted on 07/26/2004 7:08:07 AM PDT by finnman69
Fergit editing out the plane.....
Heck, it would be more of a stitch if registered could "edit out" the pilot's uniform.....
From what I read, open was for takeoff and regular flying, forward-swept for high-maneuverability dogfights and all the way forward (equalling a sort of radical delta configuration) for high-speed flying with the former trailing edge becoming the leading edge. But as you said, it would have the extra advantage of folding for storage.
They were, however, made of super-strong composites to counteract the extreme lift torsion on the tips. It was also a fly-by-wire bird with 4 computers backing each other up. Without them to help the pilot, it was unflyable.
Computers are old news now. I don't think an F-117 can get off the ground without them. A long time ago I read comments from a test pilot and the pilots of the chase planes. Apparently the maneuverability was unbelievable, with its inherent instability allowing it to do things no other plane could do. I'm surprised we didn't go forward with a design like this, and over 20 years since it first flew I'm sure we could do it much better now (especially the computer and composites).
Could be.
(THAT particular USN "pilot" (and I use the term loosely!) is the real source of the problem people have been talking about: She was "politically-corrupted" flight qualifications, through flight school, through jet training, and through carrier landing quals.
Then, when she really had to land in real situations, she crashed and died..... Just like every evaluating officer predicted she would.)
Ah, but good eye candy. What else is required?
She almost (that's ALMOST) made Starship Troopers enjoyable.
I don't even want to imagine the female form at 20,000 feet without a pressure suit.
Shalom.
The SR-71 performed its first operational sortie from Kadena AFB in Okinawa in 1968. Although "Blackbird" is its popular nickname, the name given it by the pilots who flew it is "Habu". The name comes from a type of snake found in Okinawa.
I seem to remember an article not too long ago about forward sweep swing-wing aircraft and the probability of it being built.
Mach 3 is a bit of a stretch for that thing, a closer guess at a top speed is likely as you mentioned, 1.5 to 1.8Mach.
Maybe stretching it to 2.1, but with the inlet and nose shaping that'd be a heck of a stretch.
(Or so I'm guessing.)
But darn if they didn't make it pretty.
OK - Assume the wings "roll forward" for storage, and "rotate back" for slow speed (launch/land/recover), combat manuevers, and sub-sonic cruise to reduce fuel consumption - but with the "flaps" on the outside of the wing (which become the leading edge), I don't think I'd want to go supersonic with the wing retracted foward!
Neat idea of integrating the canard with the forward (outboard) edge of the wing.
If you could only get rid of the flaps............
Looking more closely, it doesn't appear that the wings really do much fully swept. The entire aircraft looks to be a lift-generating design, with the wings really being pop-out control surfaces, or pretty much acting as flaps themselves for low-speed operation. A lift-generating body isn't new, as they discoverred accidentally when that Israeli F-15 was able to land safely without a wing, with the body producing enough lift to keep the plane up.
But in any case, with the wings fully swept forwards, the flaps just become slats. I would bet they either get locked into place or are used for extra maneuverability at high speeds (but I can't imagine the stress they'd endure in that situation).
Ugly plane, but a truly cool idea.
Those Russians aren't too imaginative these days, are they? Looks like a slightly reworked MiG-25.
Not bad for Hollywood.
Don't get me started on the F4, what a disaster! "Dogfighting, what's that?" One of my college professors flew one in Vietnam, and he didn't have many kind words.
Well, at least its dismal failure resulted in the F-15 getting made.
The Navy does according to a carrier documentary I saw a while ago (a real documentary, not a Michael Moore documentary). They even pixellated out nametags during interviews.
That's because the MiG-31 was a follow-on to the MiG-25. The -31 had a crew of two, and a powerful radar for long-range work. It was slower than the FOXBAT, though, by about half a Mach. IIRC, it also wasn't very maneuverable, but then neither was the FOXBAT (which, if all this weren't confusing enough, is the aircraft that FIREFOX was actually based on.).
Very true, and the exceptions are rare. LTC Carter on Stargate SG-1 is believable, but I can't think of any others right now.
It never really was designed to dogfight, it was intended as an interceptor and ground-attacker. At the time (late '50s-early '60s) dogfighting was thought to be obsolete due to long-range missiles. They didn't even put a gun on the F-4 until the "E" model came out, and the Navy version never even got one. It was, however, great at what it was designed for, and over 5,000 were made. It was used the world over.
I think you're right. All I've read about it is they're excellent for maneuverability, but they're not a good option for Mach 2+. That's why the Grumann design has them folding forward into a delta. The one they build was definitely not a fast plane, but it would be right on your tail in a few seconds in a dogfight.
That's why I never liked them, although they are beautiful planes in an aggressive sort of way. The plane itself was a mistake of the higher command believing that skilled pilots could be replaced by technology. They completely forgot the lessons of the Korean War, and pilots were sitting ducks once the missiles were gone. IIRC, our kill ratio dropped like a rock from Korea to Vietnam.
BTW, my prof liked the F-111, except for one extremely bad design mistake that could have you losing orientation if you fiddled with the radio during certain maneuvers. Apparently some crashed because of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.