RUSSIA'S RADICAL NEW FIGHTER

Discover Magazine ^ | FR Post 9-30-2002 | By MALCOLM V. LOWE

[vannrox]

Interesting.

[Poohbah]

Great. It can pull 10+Gs and do the funky chicken.

Missiles are getting to the point where they can pull 100+Gs, and the Air Force version of Lockheed-Martin's F-35 will eventually mount a 100-kilowatt laser with a 10KM range, and it will be stealthy to boot.

The only way to describe this is to compare it to the various cavalry arms of the European armies in July, 1914. Splendid troops, well-trained, well-equipped...and completely frickin' irrelevant in the era of the Maxim Gun.

[Vigilantcitizen]

"The only way to describe this is to compare it to the various cavalry arms of the European armies in July, 1914. Splendid troops, well-trained, well-equipped...and completely frickin' irrelevant in the era of the Maxim Gun."

Bwahaahahaha!!

The revolving missle magazine is pretty neat though.

Just for kicks, should I ping stavka2?

[Magnum44]

For the first of its kind, it sure looks a lot like a rip off of this...

Two X-29 aircraft, featuring one of the most unusual designs in aviation history, were flown at the NASA Ames-Dryden Flight Research Facility (soon to be renamed the Dryden Flight Research Center), Edwards, Calif., as technology demonstrators to investigate advanced concepts and technologies. The multi-phased program was conducted from 1984 to 1992 and provided an engineering data base that is available in the design and development of future aircraft.

[knighthawk]

S-37 at FAS:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/s-37.htm

[PushinTin]

Garbage. This reporter obviously got some major kickback for this article. There is nothing radical about it. As stated in the article NASA tested a similar design almost twenty years ago. Gee, big surprise, the Ruskies stole the design and made it bigger. We all know bigger is better. The F-22 would kick major butt on this puppy. No stealth, Non-steering jets, No heat signature reduction equal major sitting duck.

[FlyVet]

USA has messed around with this forward-swept-wing design, based on the F-5/T-38 airframe. I think the Germans also messed with it during the WW II era. If I remember right, it had triple-redundant computer systems to keep it stable, because it is literally "flying backwards", which makes it extremely maneuverable, due to its inherent instability. The problem is, if the computers were to fail, it's instant death for the pilot. Try throwing a dart backwards some time, then imagine a plane acting like that at 500 knots or better.

[paddles]

Too bad they only have enough money to build two of them. It'll be great for airshows.

[adam stevens]

This worries me. America must have a military that can destroy all enemies. Otherwise the world that hates us because we will free will be tempted to strike and might even win.

[Bobby777]

this is from a Popular Mechanics article from over a year ago ... is somebody else copying it and publishing it?

[Grampa Dave]

Right on.

I currently reading Tom Clancy's Red Rabbit. The over hyped and poor quality control of the Russians under the communists is the same today as back two decades ago. Clancy nailed the old Soviet PR bozos throughout this book. They couldn't even make enough panty hose with good quality to satisfy the Russian women let alone make planes to compete against ours.

This is just another old rip off of our out of date technology.

As someone posted, they will have enough money to build a couple and show them at air shows around the world. Those who still have nightmares of the Russians will have another reason to continue those nightmares.

[steveegg]

There has to be a reason why the X-29 was abandoned.

[Poohbah]

The performance tradeoffs didn't give enough positive results for the price tag.

[templar]

This worries me. America must have a military that can destroy all enemies.

Technology is great, but it will never replace training. To defeat all enemies, we need to worry less about the most advanced technologies and more about the most advanced training. People fight, not machines.

[steveegg]

Sounded familiar. At least the vectored-thrust motor won't be in it (yet).

[archy]

For the first of its kind, it sure looks like a rip off of this....

And of these earlier thoughts from the German firm of Blohm and Voss.

[e_castillo]

There has to be a reason why the X-29 was abandoned.

Built by Rockwell International I believe and now many years and many new developments later it is obsolete!

[archy]

There has to be a reason why the X-22 was abandoned.

And why the ordered fleet of Army Comanche helicopters has been cut in half....
And why the tanks are being replaced with wheeled armoured cars....
And why the Crusader Artillery Support System was cancelled....

But everyone gets new blu- I mean black berets....

[archy]

Just so. Surely it will be replaced in service as soon as the Ekip developmental prototypes are type-classified into functional YAK and MiG designs...or maybe MiL or Ka models....

[PsyOp]

Didn't our experiments with this design have problems with the wings wanting to twist off of the airframe under high-speed manuevering? Thought I read that was another reason we stopped pursuing it. It would then make sense that the Russians, to make it work would have to build such a beefy airframe to handle heavy-duty wing roots. The cutaway diagram seems to suggest this. Any thoughts?