Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


General Aviation Thread

This is a discussion on General Aviation Thread within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old April 17th, 2017   #31
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: NSW
Posts: 175
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
I just don't know what to say....

New Photos And Video of Iran’s Homemade F-313 “Qaher” Stealth Jet Have Just Emerged. And Here’s A First Analysis

https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/1...irst-analysis/

there is so much wrong with this .....
The wings look a bit like the ones on the Russian fighter Clint Eastwood stole in Firefox Down. Maybe this is where the Chinese got their inspiration.
Oberon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17th, 2017   #32
Banned Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 46
Threads:
.........

Last edited by Atasas; April 19th, 2017 at 08:42 AM.
Atasas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2017   #33
New Member
Private
Blue Jay's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 48
Threads:
Hello everyone,

I'd like to reach out to the pilots in these forums and ask about flatspin recovery procedures, as I recently had a discussion involving this and there was conflicting information coming from different people, and wanted to get a third input. I personally have no real-world flight experience save for flight simulators, for what that is worth.

First of all, I am referring specifically to flat spins. Frisbees. Not generic spins.

Now before I entered into the discussion I mentioned above, I thought that general procedure would be to set throttle to idle, not to touch the ailerons, to set rudders to full opposite of the spin and keep them there, then push down on the stick to try and pitch your nose down. The idea would be to counteract your spin and eventually get your aircraft into a dive, from which you could recover from the stall. This is in line with PARE developed by NASA.

One of my interlocutors, however, told me that PARE was for generic spins. He asserted that in a flat spin, you'd want to apply full power in order to increase airspeed. Elevator down to decrease AoA and further increase airspeed with gravity's help. Then you'd want to apply rudder into the spin to further enable increasing airspeed (opposite rudder would increase drag). This made sense to me, but went contrary to my previous knowledge. The only thing we agreed on was that we'd need to burn a lot of altitude either way.

Any input from you guys?
Blue Jay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2017   #34
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
2007yellow430's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: California
Posts: 162
Threads:
Some of the earlier training in Beechcraft Barons resulted in flat spins which were not recoverable. I have not, nor will I engage in any flat spin training in a Baron, since I don't think they are recoverable.

I don't know of any civilian schools which teach flat spin recovery, as most of them are not recoverable.


Art
2007yellow430 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 23rd, 2017   #35
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
Interesting piece on a new supersonic civilian demonstration jet. The article does not mention any new anti-sonic boom development. One has to wonder if flying at twice the speed of sound can justify the higher cost. Will it be higher or lower than Concorde? The project seems well funded and apparently there are people willing to buy 76 of them.

http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com...omponents.html
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19th, 2017   #36
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
2007yellow430's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: California
Posts: 162
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
Interesting piece on a new supersonic civilian demonstration jet. The article does not mention any new anti-sonic boom development. One has to wonder if flying at twice the speed of sound can justify the higher cost. Will it be higher or lower than Concorde? The project seems well funded and apparently there are people willing to buy 76 of them.

http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com...omponents.html
It's going to hold 55 passengers. Expect costs 2, 3, 4, maybe even 5 times Concorde's costs, probably more than a private jet. This won't work. People who can afford that cost will get their own fast jet. Several on the drawing boards with deposits.

Art
2007yellow430 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31st, 2017   #37
Moderator
General
ngatimozart's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 4,203
Threads:
A new 3D printing system offers great capability and significantly reduced costs. This system is a horizontal print system rather than the current vertical print systems, meaning that theoretically there is no restriction upon the length of printed items.

3D Printing Could Provide Mass-Production Flexibility For MROs, OEMs
________________
"There is one immutable truth we cannot prevent; war is coming, we just don’t know when or where." Brigadier Andrew Harrison DSO MBE
ngatimozart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 16th, 2017   #38
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
Airbus will buy a controlling stake in Bombardier's C-Series. Jets for the US market will be built in Alabama. The Canadian government will have to approve this. It appears Boeing has screwed themselves and taxpayers in Quebec and to a lesser extent Canadians in other provinces won't have to be funding Bombardier.

Europe's Airbus to buy majority stake in Bombardier CSeries program - Business - CBC News
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2017   #39
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,735
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
Airbus will buy a controlling stake in Bombardier's C-Series. Jets for the US market will be built in Alabama. The Canadian government will have to approve this. It appears Boeing has screwed themselves and taxpayers in Quebec and to a lesser extent Canadians in other provinces won't have to be funding Bombardier.

Europe's Airbus to buy majority stake in Bombardier CSeries program - Business - CBC News

Well that's a win for Trump, he can now show that his policy are working manufacturing is returning to the US. And the plane will have to compete without government subsidies.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2017   #40
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
It might be a win for Trump but it is a loss for Boeing.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2017   #41
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,735
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
It might be a win for Trump but it is a loss for Boeing.
I somehow don't think that Boeing would be too worried about those 18 aircraft, but it's still revenue they didn't get.

I tho k its getting to the stage where the Canadian goverment has got to go with F35, as he's just going to look stupid going with a less capabile but more expensive machine from Europe
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2017   #42
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
The loss of 18 SHs is not significant at all for Boeing at the moment. LM winning the fighter replacement program will be as will a likely order for MRTTs from Airbus instead of K-46s. These outcomes were likely anyways IMO. Worse still, Boeing forced Bombardier into a marriage with Airbus that will provide Airbus with a solid product range for narrow body single aisle jets with minimal cash outlay. The only outcome that could have been worse was if Comac bought the C-Series, something that Airbus likely considered.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2017   #43
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
This link pretty much sums up the win for Airbus regarding the C-Series deal.

https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/art...ump-and-boeing
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #44
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Ranger25's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Si Vis Pacem. Para Bellum
Posts: 558
Threads:
More Rumors the IAF wants out of SU-57

Interesting article quoting IAF sources they want our of the SU-57. Comments on lack of stealth, higher RCS and reliability seem to be at the crux of their concerns.


Could be interesting to see how this one unfolds and it’s impact on future of program


https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017...m-with-russia/
________________
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

Last edited by Ranger25; 4 Weeks Ago at 10:50 AM.
Ranger25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #45
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,342
Threads:
I saw this article as well. Hard to determine what the effects for Russia might be or whether Indian objections are realistic given their bail out moves on other defence projects. They do have legitimate concerns regarding service and support on existing Russian aviation kit. As for stealth, I believe Russia has always maintained it wouldn't compromise kinematic performance for the PAK 50 FA in order to achieve maximum stealth.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM.