Aircraft Identification

[Worldtraveller]

So from a link Tubby provided in the countdown thread, I looked a bit in the Cobalt Aircraft. It's ambitious, to be sure.

Realistically, based on what little I've seen in press releases, I'm guessing their certification efforts by 2018 are unrealistically optimistic. I've been in the aircraft certification business for 20 years, and it simply does not happen that 'fast'. Fast in this context is typically 7 - 10 years, depending on how much new, untested technology is being used in the airframe, materials, and /or manufacturing process.

Interesting factoid: When developing a new aircraft, the R&D, including building the first 2-3 prototypes is typically only about 1/3rd the cost of development. The majority of development (in this sense, development means 'getting it to market') costs are FAA certification. The same goes for the time it takes for development.

I have an old xmas tree ornament from my days at Raytheon Aircraft company that the company gave out in 2005 that says "Hawker Horizon Certification - 2005". The 2005 is crossed out, and 2006 written below that. ...all the way to 2009 or 2010 (I forget now) when it finally certified.

I think I may know where the inspiration for this plane design came from:

Cobalt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_Co ... MG_CO5.jpg

Robotech: https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/ro ... 0906072435

[Roo St. Gallus]

A nice little article on Republic Seabees from the Smithsonian's Air & Space rag.

[Roo St. Gallus]

[quote=""Worldtraveller""]
Realistically, based on what little I've seen in press releases, ... certification efforts..... I've been in the aircraft certification business for 20 years, and it simply does not happen that 'fast'. Fast in this context is typically 7 - 10 years, depending on how much new, untested technology is being used in the airframe, materials, and /or manufacturing process.

[/quote]

That is my general impression. The first prototype is often the way back to the drawing board, and the tinkering even goes on well after formal introduction. I tend to think that the North American P-51 Mustang is an interesting exemplar of the development process.

[Tharmas]

Roo, my wife and I usually visit our state fair each year, and this year I saw this model Catalina in the arts and crafts exhibits, and thought of you. It appeared to be made of wood, with plastic props, engines, and wheels. Whether it was from a balsa kit or scratch built, I can't say. In any case it was very impressive model building.



Could have been this kit:

http://www.guillow.com/pby-5acatalina.aspx

[Worldtraveller]

[quote=""Tharmas""]Roo, my wife and I usually visit our state fair each year, and this year I saw this model Catalina in the arts and crafts exhibits, and thought of you. It appeared to be made of wood, with plastic props, engines, and wheels. Whether it was from a balsa kit or scratch built, I can't say. In any case it was very impressive model building.



Could have been this kit:

http://www.guillow.com/pby-5acatalina.aspx[/quote]
Very nice. The Catalina is one of my favorite WW2 era aircraft. If I could afford one, it's one of the few I would actually be inclined to have and keep flying. Alas, I am not nearly that well off.

[Roo St. Gallus]

Yes.

Alas.

Were I flush enough, I'd love to keep a Dakota in the sky.

And a Seastar at the pier.

I am nowhere near any of that.

ETA: I saw this Cat sitting on the tarmac at Duxford when I was there on the solstice.

[Worldtraveller]

[quote=""Roo St. Gallus""]Yes.

Alas.

Were I flush enough, I'd love to keep a Dakota in the sky.

And a Seastar at the pier.

I am nowhere near any of that.

ETA: I saw this Cat sitting on the tarmac at Duxford when I was there on the solstice.[/quote]
That is a very nicely restored model. I like that paint scheme, too.

I saw one...when I was in Seattle I think, that was painted with the Black Cats color scheme. Looked cool, but not my favorite.

The PBY proved to be a pretty formidable, if under rated and under utilized, torpedo bomber during the Pacific campaign.

[Roo St. Gallus]

[quote=""Worldtraveller""]

Yes.

Alas.

Were I flush enough, I'd love to keep a Dakota in the sky.

And a Seastar at the pier.

I am nowhere near any of that.

ETA: I saw this Cat sitting on the tarmac at Duxford when I was there on the solstice.

That is a very nicely restored model. I like that paint scheme, too.

I saw one...when I was in Seattle I think, that was painted with the Black Cats color scheme. Looked cool, but not my favorite.

The PBY proved to be a pretty formidable, if under rated and under utilized, torpedo bomber during the Pacific campaign.[/QUOTE]

Oak Harbor, on Whitby Island, is a NAS for seaplanes. They had a static example but it wasn't a Black Cat. I would not be surprised if there were more in and around the Puget Sound area....It's kind of a natural. Nothing would make me happier than seeing regular flights through the San Juans. Jericho Beach, in Vancouver, B.C., also had a prior life as a seaplane air station.

I like the subhunter whites, myself. Coastal Command is one of my fave topics and the Brits gave the Catalina its name. It logged distinguished service in the ever so tedious work of hunting and killing submarines with entirely inadequate tools. It was one of the best bargains the Brits got from Lend Lease (along with, of all things, B-24 Liberators that Bomber Command didn't want...the VLR Liberator III that broke the curse of the Atlantic Gap). Great ponderous albatrosses. I wish they'd fired it up and flown it the day I was there, but it might have just been my luck to even get to see it. My understanding why so many pilots love the Cat is that so many of them have been fished out of the drink by a Cat and its crew.

[Worldtraveller]

[quote=""Roo St. Gallus""]

Yes.

Alas.

Were I flush enough, I'd love to keep a Dakota in the sky.

And a Seastar at the pier.

I am nowhere near any of that.

ETA: I saw this Cat sitting on the tarmac at Duxford when I was there on the solstice.

That is a very nicely restored model. I like that paint scheme, too.

I saw one...when I was in Seattle I think, that was painted with the Black Cats color scheme. Looked cool, but not my favorite.

The PBY proved to be a pretty formidable, if under rated and under utilized, torpedo bomber during the Pacific campaign.

Oak Harbor, on Whitby Island, is a NAS for seaplanes. They had a static example but it wasn't a Black Cat. I would not be surprised if there were more in and around the Puget Sound area....It's kind of a natural. Nothing would make me happier than seeing regular flights through the San Juans. Jericho Beach, in Vancouver, B.C., also had a prior life as a seaplane air station.

I like the subhunter whites, myself. Coastal Command is one of my fave topics and the Brits gave the Catalina its name. It logged distinguished service in the ever so tedious work of hunting and killing submarines with entirely inadequate tools. It was one of the best bargains the Brits got from Lend Lease (along with, of all things, B-24 Liberators that Bomber Command didn't want...the VLR Liberator III that broke the curse of the Atlantic Gap). Great ponderous albatrosses. I wish they'd fired it up and flown it the day I was there, but it might have just been my luck to even get to see it. My understanding why so many pilots love the Cat is that so many of them have been fished out of the drink by a Cat and its crew.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. The SAR catalinas were probably the most 'popular'. It's a fantastic aircraft all around. It's also one of the few (of the ones I like) that I've never seen fly in person.

[Worldtraveller]

When I was living in Germany, working for Lufthansa airlines, I got a daily close up of this Ju-52 every day.

It was literally parked in the hangar, right under my office. Over the winter, Lufthansa (LHT) did a complete overhaul, and I got to climb around the airframe, and go inside pretty much whenever I wanted.

I was on the list to get a ride, but we shipped back to the states before my turn came up.

I did love the sound of those radials firing up though. Like a symphony to me.

[Tubby]

I am reading a biography of Deke Slayton. He tells of something that happened in his test pilot days that I can't picture.

I had been doing braking tests in the F-105. This meant coming in for a landing, then slamming on the brakes to see how they would hold up. Well, they started burning. So I shut down the engine, which was a dumb thing to do, because all that did was dump fuel on the flames.

Does shutting down a turbine not also snap a fuel valve shut? And if it doesn't shut it, would fuel coming out the front or back of the engine land on any of the wheels?

[Worldtraveller]

[quote=""Tubby""]I am reading a biography of Deke Slayton. He tells of something that happened in his test pilot days that I can't picture.

I had been doing braking tests in the F-105. This meant coming in for a landing, then slamming on the brakes to see how they would hold up. Well, they started burning. So I shut down the engine, which was a dumb thing to do, because all that did was dump fuel on the flames.

Does shutting down a turbine not also snap a fuel valve shut? And if it doesn't shut it, would fuel coming out the front or back of the engine land on any of the wheels? [/quote]
In a modern turbine (especially a turbofan), it wouldn't be an issue at all.

I suspect what happens is that there is extra fuel in the burners (some that doesn't get burned prior to exiting the nozzle, much like flames will shoot from a car exhaust at high RPMs) and any vapor may condense on the exhaust nozzle, since it cools rapidly as it expands through the nozzle throat. if some of this were to run forward along the underside, the vapor would be enough to cause a

The only other thing that comes to mind is that the original F-105 didn't have self sealing tanks, and maybe it just plain leaked.

Hard to say, really, but the systems they had back in the 60s weren't nearly as well developed as they are now.

Modern aircraft brake systems often get hot enough to catch fire when used at the extreme end of their design envelope, but I'm really not sure how fuel could get dumped on it.

Gratuitous cool video (I was working at Boeing when this test was done).
747-8 rejected takeoff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g6UswiRCF0

[Rie]

After many Aircraft crashes 'they' are modelling design of aircraft on the flight of birds..i.e their wing anatomy etc.

arrot:.. yep even the parrot

we used to rehabilitate Raptors.. from Kestrels to Eagles and it was clear that their ability to climb higher, catch thermals and a lot more could help change Aircraft design

[Hermit]

[quote=""Rie""]After many Aircraft crashes 'they' are modelling design of aircraft on the flight of birds..i.e their wing anatomy etc.[/quote]The design of aircraft began based on the flight of birds. Here's one from over 500 years ago:



Late in the 19th and early in the 20th century a number of intrepid inventors still tried to basically copy birds, some with flapping wings.


(View video on YouTube)

Aeroplanes have become safer all the time even though nobody has modelled the design of aircraft on the flight of birds..i.e their wing anatomy etc. for decades. Just about the only feature left from birds is the cross-section of the airfoil, wherein the upper surface of the wing is of greater area than the lower, thus creating a lot more lift than if both areas were the same.

[Worldtraveller]

There are some cool small (not large enough to carry a payload) flapping models that fly ok, usually indoors only, but yeah, we've progressed way beyond modelling aircraft after birds' anatomy.

Or did you have something specific in mind, Rie?

I saw an old delta wing (F-102 maybe) take off from the Savannah airport this morning about 10 minutes after a pair of F-18s. Usually those old planes are remotely piloted and used for live fire missile training/testing exercises.

[Shake]

[quote=""Worldtraveller""]There are some cool small (not large enough to carry a payload) flapping models that fly ok, usually indoors only, but yeah, we've progressed way beyond modelling aircraft after birds' anatomy.

Or did you have something specific in mind, Rie?

I saw an old delta wing (F-102 maybe) take off from the Savannah airport this morning about 10 minutes after a pair of F-18s. Usually those old planes are remotely piloted and used for live fire missile training/testing exercises.[/quote]

I know they had been using old Phantoms (as QF-4s) for such missile testing, and I thought maybe they'd started running out of those and moved onto something else, but I'm not sure.

To the point about taking tips from nature, I'm pretty sure the 'winglets' which appeared on some airliners and are also prominently featured on the USAF's C-17 were put on to reduce turbulence from wingtip vortices:

I had to get one from my final base.

[Worldtraveller]

[quote=""Shake""]

There are some cool small (not large enough to carry a payload) flapping models that fly ok, usually indoors only, but yeah, we've progressed way beyond modelling aircraft after birds' anatomy.

Or did you have something specific in mind, Rie?

I saw an old delta wing (F-102 maybe) take off from the Savannah airport this morning about 10 minutes after a pair of F-18s. Usually those old planes are remotely piloted and used for live fire missile training/testing exercises.

I know they had been using old Phantoms (as QF-4s) for such missile testing, and I thought maybe they'd started running out of those and moved onto something else, but I'm not sure.

To the point about taking tips from nature, I'm pretty sure the 'winglets' which appeared on some airliners and are also prominently featured on the USAF's C-17 were put on to reduce turbulence from wingtip vortices:

I had to get one from my final base.[/QUOTE]
Interestingly, the 'blended wingtips' for example, on the 747-8, are 5-8% more efficient than winglets, and they are much closer to what bird wing tips look like. Boeing and Airbus (as well as other aircraft manufacturers) have stuck with winglets (and Boeing went with the 'scimitar' winglet for its next-gen 737) because they look cooler. (seriously, I was working there when the decision was made, and I know a couple of the engineers that pushed for the blended wingtips....)

[Tubby]

Put me in the pilot's seat with my current state of aviation knowledge, and my answer to, "How do you plan on navigating to John Wayne" at 7:33 would be, "Uh... I've got a sectional map in my hands and I'm going to look around at the ground." What are some real-world responses that the pilot might give over the radio?

[Worldtraveller]

I got a better look at the delta wing aircraft that I briefly saw yesterday.

Turns out to be a French-built Dassault Mirage. Proably a Mirage 3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage

[Roo St. Gallus]

[quote=""Worldtraveller""]I got a better look at the delta wing aircraft that I briefly saw yesterday.

Turns out to be a French-built Dassault Mirage. Proably a Mirage 3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage[/quote]

Hmmm....It seems unlikely they'd use a Mirage as a target drone, so maybe they were involved in some kind of Red Flag exercise?

It seems that Pakistan is the only current user of the Mirage III, but there are several operators of the Mirage 2000.

Or, airshow?

And aside....To me, the whole Mirage family from the III, to the 5, The Nesher/Kfir and the Atlas Cheetah, the honker IV, the updated 2000, and the F1, are all 'hot' fighter configurations. All are very visually pleasing aircraft.

The same with the SAAB family of fighters.

[Worldtraveller]

Could have been a 2k. I wish I had binoculars at work, my eyes ain't what they used to be.

My guess would be training. I know the Germans have several squadrons stationed in the states more or less permanently, and they rotate their pilots in for training they can't really do in the EU. One of the advantages of such a large country is that we have lots of open space to fly military exercises that would be hazardous, or just too loud, around a civilian population center.

[Roo St. Gallus]

I know the feeling.

If it were the Germans, they wouldn't be flying Mirage 2K. Could it have been a Eurofighter Typhoon?...It's a delta, but with canard. I understand about the 'wide open spaces', but there are places like Mach Loop in Wales, too. Given the number of military alliances the US has any more, we're starting to see sophisticated Sukhoi and MiG aircraft doing exercises in the US. It must make the Red Flag exercises real eye-openers.

[Roo St. Gallus]

I had to check to see whether Draken International fields a delta. They don't. I don't know if there are other privates that deal with fighter exercises.

[Worldtraveller]

I got a good enough look to tell it was a Mirage. Looking at some profiles online, it looked more like the 2k than the III. Definitely not a Typhoon (I love that plane), but it was too far away to see nationality markings.

The Luftwaffe flies the Typhoon, and I think they still use one of my favorites, the Panavia Tornado.

[Shake]

[quote=""Roo St. Gallus""]I know the feeling.

If it were the Germans, they wouldn't be flying Mirage 2K. Could it have been a Eurofighter Typhoon?...It's a delta, but with canard. I understand about the 'wide open spaces', but there are places like Mach Loop in Wales, too. Given the number of military alliances the US has any more, we're starting to see sophisticated Sukhoi and MiG aircraft doing exercises in the US. It must make the Red Flag exercises real eye-openers.[/quote]

Speaking of MiGs, I once got to see a MiG-15 at an airshow here in upstate NY. They were touting it as the only Western-owned MiG-15. Was nice to see it fly.