- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 11,621
- Reaction score
- 6,262
Really enjoyed that video. Looked up the bio of the speaker: mother of two grown sons, fighter pilot, former wing commander, sounds like an airman who has already lived a great life!
The most beautiful jet fighter ever made
- Thread starter Winston
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
Nytrunner
Pop lugs, not drugs
Not really an F16 guy, but this is a cool picture
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
Nellis AFB, NV Aggressor painted to look like a commie.
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
This Is The Most Stunning Photo Of A B-1B Bomber Night Launch We've Ever Seen
The image masterly captures the elegant and ferocious qualities of the B-1B, especially when its four turbofans at roaring away in full afterburner.
AUGUST 7, 2020
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-of-a-b-1b-bomber-night-launch-weve-ever-seen
The image masterly captures the elegant and ferocious qualities of the B-1B, especially when its four turbofans at roaring away in full afterburner.
AUGUST 7, 2020
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-of-a-b-1b-bomber-night-launch-weve-ever-seen
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
Tandem seating cockpit ala F-111. Nice lines and I like the paint scheme.
Sukhoi Su-34
Air show demo:
Sukhoi Su-34
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-34
First flight: 13 April 1990
Introduction: 20 March 2014
Produced: 2006–present
Number built: 135
Incredibly detailed examination:
Sukhoi Su-34 Fullback
Russia's New Heavy Strike Fighter
Technical Report APA-TR-2007-0108
by Dr Carlo Kopp, AFAIAA, SMIEEE, PEng
January, 2007
Updated October, 2008
Updated January, 2011
Updated April, 2012
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Fullback.html
Sukhoi Su-34
Air show demo:
Sukhoi Su-34
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-34
First flight: 13 April 1990
Introduction: 20 March 2014
Produced: 2006–present
Number built: 135
Incredibly detailed examination:
Sukhoi Su-34 Fullback
Russia's New Heavy Strike Fighter
Technical Report APA-TR-2007-0108
by Dr Carlo Kopp, AFAIAA, SMIEEE, PEng
January, 2007
Updated October, 2008
Updated January, 2011
Updated April, 2012
https://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Fullback.html
Pretty mean ass looking fighter jet.
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
Russia's stealth fighter - Su-57/T-50S
Check Out These Images Of Russia's Second (production run) Su-57 Felon Fighter Under Construction
The latest Felon was shown off on Air Force Day in Russia, months after the first production aircraft crashed.
AUGUST 12, 2020
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...second-su-57-felon-fighter-under-construction
Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, in the green uniform, takes a closer look at the cockpit of T-50S-2:
Sergey is always such a cheerful guy. Dated 2014.:
Sukhoi Su-57
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-57
First flight: 29 January 2010
Introduction: 2020 (planned)
Number built: 11 (10 test and 1 serial) as of 2019
The fighter is designed to have supercruise, supermaneuverability, stealth, and advanced avionics to overcome the prior generation fighter aircraft as well as ground and naval defences. The Su-57 is intended to succeed the MiG-29 and Su-27 in the Russian Air Force.
The prototypes and initial production batch are to be delivered with a highly upgraded Lyulka AL-31 variant, the AL-41F1, as an interim powerplant while an advanced clean-sheet design engine, currently designated the izdeliye 30, is in final stages of development and expected to be available after mid-2020s. The aircraft is expected to have a service life of up to 35 years.
Check Out These Images Of Russia's Second (production run) Su-57 Felon Fighter Under Construction
The latest Felon was shown off on Air Force Day in Russia, months after the first production aircraft crashed.
AUGUST 12, 2020
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...second-su-57-felon-fighter-under-construction
Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, in the green uniform, takes a closer look at the cockpit of T-50S-2:
Sergey is always such a cheerful guy. Dated 2014.:
Sukhoi Su-57
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-57
First flight: 29 January 2010
Introduction: 2020 (planned)
Number built: 11 (10 test and 1 serial) as of 2019
The fighter is designed to have supercruise, supermaneuverability, stealth, and advanced avionics to overcome the prior generation fighter aircraft as well as ground and naval defences. The Su-57 is intended to succeed the MiG-29 and Su-27 in the Russian Air Force.
The prototypes and initial production batch are to be delivered with a highly upgraded Lyulka AL-31 variant, the AL-41F1, as an interim powerplant while an advanced clean-sheet design engine, currently designated the izdeliye 30, is in final stages of development and expected to be available after mid-2020s. The aircraft is expected to have a service life of up to 35 years.
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
The US Air Force’s radical plan for a future fighter could field a jet in 5 years
16 Sep 2019
https://www.defensenews.com/digital...-future-fighter-could-field-a-jet-in-5-years/
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force is preparing to radically alter the acquisition strategy for its next generation of fighter jets, with a new plan that could require industry to design, develop and produce a new fighter in five years or less.
On Oct. 1, the service will officially reshape its next-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD, Will Roper, the Air Force’s acquisition executive, said during an exclusive interview with Defense News.
Under a new office headed by a yet-unnamed program manager, the NGAD program will adopt a rapid approach to developing small batches of fighters with multiple companies, much like the Century Series of aircraft built in the 1950s, Roper said.
Instead of maturing technologies over time to create an exquisite fighter, the Air Force’s goal would be to quickly build the best fighter that industry can muster over a couple years, integrating whatever emerging technology exists. The service would downselect, put a small number of aircraft under contract and then restart another round of competition among fighter manufacturers, which would revise their fighter designs and explore newer leaps in technology.
The result would be a networked family of fighters — some more interrelated than others — developed to meet specific requirements and including best-in-breed technologies aboard a single airframe. One jet might be optimized around a revolutionary capability, like an airborne laser. Another fighter might prioritize state-of-the-art sensors and include artificial intelligence. One might be an unmanned weapons truck.
But the point, Roper said, is that instead of trying to hone requirements to meet an unknown threat 25 years into the future, the Air Force would rapidly churn out aircraft with new technologies — a tactic that could impose uncertainty on near-peer competitors like Russia and China and force them to deal with the U.S. military on its own terms.
Imagine “every four or five years there was the F-200, F-201, F-202 and it was vague and mysterious [on what the planes] have, but it’s clear it’s a real program and there are real airplanes flying. Well now you have to figure out: What are we bringing to the fight? What improved? How certain are you that you’ve got the best airplane to win?” Roper wondered.
“How do you deal with a threat if you don’t know what the future technology is? Be the threat — always have a new airplane coming out.”
Three industrial technologies enable a Century Series approach for NGAD and will set requirements for participants, Roper said. The first is agile software development — a practice where programmers quickly write, test and release code, soliciting feedback along the way from users.
The second, open architecture, has long been a buzzword in the defense community, but Roper said industry often uses it to describe a system with plug-and-play hardware. NGAD, ideally, would be fully open, with interchangeable hardware and the ability for a third party to develop software for the system.
The final technology, digital engineering, is the most nascent and possibly the most revolutionary, Roper said. While aerospace engineers have used computers for decades to aid in the creation of aircraft, only recently have defense companies developed 3D-modeling tools that can model an entire life cycle — design, production and sustainment — with a high level of accuracy and fidelity. The process would allow companies to not only map out an aircraft in extreme detail, but also model how a production line would work using different levels of manning or how maintainers would carry out repairs at a depot.
“You could start learning so much before you ever bent the first piece of metal and turned the first wrench, so that when you did do it for the first time, you already have learned. You’re already up to a level of proficiency that in the past you would have to be in the 100th aircraft to have,” he said. “And then if you kept going and you modeled the maintenance, then you could go after the part of the life cycle that constitutes the 70 percent of what we pay."
Few defense programs have used digital engineering so far, Roper said. The Air Force is requiring Northrop Grumman and Boeing to use the technique to develop their respective versions of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.
Lockheed Martin:
Boeing:
Air Force Research Laboratory:
16 Sep 2019
https://www.defensenews.com/digital...-future-fighter-could-field-a-jet-in-5-years/
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force is preparing to radically alter the acquisition strategy for its next generation of fighter jets, with a new plan that could require industry to design, develop and produce a new fighter in five years or less.
On Oct. 1, the service will officially reshape its next-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD, Will Roper, the Air Force’s acquisition executive, said during an exclusive interview with Defense News.
Under a new office headed by a yet-unnamed program manager, the NGAD program will adopt a rapid approach to developing small batches of fighters with multiple companies, much like the Century Series of aircraft built in the 1950s, Roper said.
Instead of maturing technologies over time to create an exquisite fighter, the Air Force’s goal would be to quickly build the best fighter that industry can muster over a couple years, integrating whatever emerging technology exists. The service would downselect, put a small number of aircraft under contract and then restart another round of competition among fighter manufacturers, which would revise their fighter designs and explore newer leaps in technology.
The result would be a networked family of fighters — some more interrelated than others — developed to meet specific requirements and including best-in-breed technologies aboard a single airframe. One jet might be optimized around a revolutionary capability, like an airborne laser. Another fighter might prioritize state-of-the-art sensors and include artificial intelligence. One might be an unmanned weapons truck.
But the point, Roper said, is that instead of trying to hone requirements to meet an unknown threat 25 years into the future, the Air Force would rapidly churn out aircraft with new technologies — a tactic that could impose uncertainty on near-peer competitors like Russia and China and force them to deal with the U.S. military on its own terms.
Imagine “every four or five years there was the F-200, F-201, F-202 and it was vague and mysterious [on what the planes] have, but it’s clear it’s a real program and there are real airplanes flying. Well now you have to figure out: What are we bringing to the fight? What improved? How certain are you that you’ve got the best airplane to win?” Roper wondered.
“How do you deal with a threat if you don’t know what the future technology is? Be the threat — always have a new airplane coming out.”
Three industrial technologies enable a Century Series approach for NGAD and will set requirements for participants, Roper said. The first is agile software development — a practice where programmers quickly write, test and release code, soliciting feedback along the way from users.
The second, open architecture, has long been a buzzword in the defense community, but Roper said industry often uses it to describe a system with plug-and-play hardware. NGAD, ideally, would be fully open, with interchangeable hardware and the ability for a third party to develop software for the system.
The final technology, digital engineering, is the most nascent and possibly the most revolutionary, Roper said. While aerospace engineers have used computers for decades to aid in the creation of aircraft, only recently have defense companies developed 3D-modeling tools that can model an entire life cycle — design, production and sustainment — with a high level of accuracy and fidelity. The process would allow companies to not only map out an aircraft in extreme detail, but also model how a production line would work using different levels of manning or how maintainers would carry out repairs at a depot.
“You could start learning so much before you ever bent the first piece of metal and turned the first wrench, so that when you did do it for the first time, you already have learned. You’re already up to a level of proficiency that in the past you would have to be in the 100th aircraft to have,” he said. “And then if you kept going and you modeled the maintenance, then you could go after the part of the life cycle that constitutes the 70 percent of what we pay."
Few defense programs have used digital engineering so far, Roper said. The Air Force is requiring Northrop Grumman and Boeing to use the technique to develop their respective versions of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.
Lockheed Martin:
Boeing:
Air Force Research Laboratory:
I worked for McDonnell Douglas for 5 years so partial to the FA-18
I thought this was the coolest fighter jet ever back when I was a fresh teenager...
Sooner Boomer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2011
- Messages
- 5,885
- Reaction score
- 4,843
What is the name of this little, strange beauty? A kit?
As I recall it is called a Cri Cri and has been built with many different types power plant, including two-stroke single cylinder piston motors (with tuned pipes, even!), electric motors with props, electric ducted fans and tiny jet engines as above.
Usually billed as "the smallest twin engined (jet, fan, electric, etc.) airplane in the world"
Cute little thing... Kinda looks like the canopy is on backwards.
Usually billed as "the smallest twin engined (jet, fan, electric, etc.) airplane in the world"
Cute little thing... Kinda looks like the canopy is on backwards.
MClark
Well-Known Member
Cri Cri is correct.
My brother had one sharing his hangar, it had so many engine failures the owner told the control tower it was normal procedure to shut down one engine for landing.
My brother had one sharing his hangar, it had so many engine failures the owner told the control tower it was normal procedure to shut down one engine for landing.
Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,749
This Rising B-2 Stealth Bomber's Intricate Belly Is Positively Otherworldly Looking
The image looks like the arrival of an ominous alien spaceship while also showcasing how complex the B-2's smooth underside really is.
FEBRUARY 7, 2021
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...cate-belly-is-positively-otherworldly-looking
--------------
Oh c'mon! How can you beat the F16 in Thunderbirds paint?
Edited to add: Glory, Winston, those are very, very nice!
Edited to add: Glory, Winston, those are very, very nice!
I'm partial to the F-111. They're something to see with fully sweep wings and with full afterburner. We were stationed at Mtn. Home AFB in Idaho with them and At RAF Lakenheath in England. I got to see the wing leave for Saudi before the first Gulf War. 3:30am at the end of the runway. Each plane has 4 2000lb bombs, most were laser guided and some were TV guided glide bombs and they also carried sidewinders. Heavily laden and in full afterburner. Gave me goosebumps.
I have a soft spot for the F-111, prolly due to seeing 'dump and burn' at so many flyovers.
I have been watching F-111 since I was about four years old. Was my second-favourite aircraft (Concorde topped the list). Favourite military aircraft currently is the B1-B. Was a sad day when they retired the F-111. A lot of them were cut up and buried due to safety concerns. There is a museum here that was lucky enough to get a cockpit. If you are ever in Melbourne (Oz, not FL) drop in to this museum as you can sit in almost all of the aircraft. https://www.aarg.com.au/
There is a F-111 on a pylon in Freedom Park at Nellis AFB in Las Vegas. That was our last duty station.
There is a museum here at Evan's Head which has a complete F-111 you can sit in. For reals.
https://www.visitnsw.com/destinatio...tractions/evans-head-heritage-aviation-museum
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2014
- Messages
- 2,114
- Reaction score
- 715
When I went to work for General Dynamics in Fort Worth in 1986, they had an area at the far north end of the assembly line where they rebuilt fairly badly damaged F-111s. Was interesting to watch them be reborn. They stopped doing it a few years after I started working there.
A fantastic and beautiful aircraft, despite a difficult birth with significant problems along the way.
A fantastic and beautiful aircraft, despite a difficult birth with significant problems along the way.
I grew up in Mtn Home, as an Air Force Brat, I was also on the base quite a bit. When the 111’s first arrived there was still the bad reputation attached. Over the years the aircraft was there, I did grow to enjoy it and was rather sad to see them transferred to Lakenheath.
I also had the misfortune to see one disintegrate out at Sailor Creek Bombing Range when the TFR failed.
The city park (Carl Miller Park - no relation) has one on display, and AFAIK the Base still has one a pedestal as you enter the main gate.
As a teen I was heavily involved in CAP, one of our frequent enjoyments was spending time in the F-111 simulator.
I can’t vouch for what it is like to fly the real aircraft, but the simulator was a blast when I was 15/16.
I also had the misfortune to see one disintegrate out at Sailor Creek Bombing Range when the TFR failed.
The city park (Carl Miller Park - no relation) has one on display, and AFAIK the Base still has one a pedestal as you enter the main gate.
As a teen I was heavily involved in CAP, one of our frequent enjoyments was spending time in the F-111 simulator.
I can’t vouch for what it is like to fly the real aircraft, but the simulator was a blast when I was 15/16.
Last edited:
I got to crash he F-111 simulator a few times. We were at Mtn. Home from 81 to 87. Lakenheath from 87 to 91. Nellis in Las Vegas from91 to 99. When my wife retired she went to work as a contractor then to the Nevada Test Site until 2018 when she retired for good.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2018
- Messages
- 436
- Reaction score
- 562
I remember back in the 70's when the BD-5J made a big splash at Oshkosh, a one-seat kit plane built with a French micro turbojet. Held the Guiness record for the World's Smallest Jet for more than 25 years. They were notoriously hard to fly, but that never bothered James Bond.
If I recall correctly they never could get the plane certified for manufacturing. The stall speed was too high at least initially.
They did sell kits though. Google it and there is a lot of information on it. Kurt
lakeroadster
When in doubt... build hell-for-stout!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2018
- Messages
- 436
- Reaction score
- 562
Yep, at Oshkosh it was all about experimental aircraft and kit-building. I never realized they were certifying it for regular manufacture, though.
I remember the analysis of some BD-5J crashes, usually after a flame-out, having to do with the high stall speed. The nose would pitch up, and if the pilot was too busy trying to get the engine started (instead of just flying the plane), it would stall easily, and drop as a rock.
I remember the analysis of some BD-5J crashes, usually after a flame-out, having to do with the high stall speed. The nose would pitch up, and if the pilot was too busy trying to get the engine started (instead of just flying the plane), it would stall easily, and drop as a rock.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2015
- Messages
- 3,958
- Reaction score
- 2,719
F-14 Tomcats would sometimes do this on carrier approach. STRICTLY against NATOPS, but done at least once a cruise! Always a sight to behold!
Similar threads
