It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Aircraft picture quiz

page: 65
<< 62  63  64    66  67  68 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 11:38 PM
Time for a Wombat Attack!

1. Beagle M.218X
2. Flettner Fl 184
3. Scaled Composites 202 Boomerang
4. Convair 990 Coronado
5. Williams V-Jet II (also Scaled Composite designed and built)
6. Heinkel He 119
7. Folland Gnat F.1
8. Adam A500

and emile - I think waynos might have got some of the others from that same website as well....

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 01:51 AM
ar----! How stupid I am!
:bnghd: :bnghd:
I just need to click the picture then know this! :bnghd:
Theseday I just study Hawker series, maybe too study to be fool.
Well, let me make some trouble back to Waynos.
I got a book published by Chinese. In which mentioned a British ex-plane called peoject AW-56 belong to Armstrong-Whitworth, is a flying-wing bomber, I wonder are there any other bombers are similar to Avro Vulcan?

[edit on 7-3-2006 by emile]

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:45 AM
If you go back through this thread to the beginning I used to post pictures from that site all the time but people got wise and backtracked for the answers

I just thought I'd give it another go for old times sake plus the fact they were nice new pictures

Emile; do you mean flying wing types exclusively or all Vulcan rivals?

There is a picture of the first AW 56 proposal on this link

The design later evolved a radar nose and blister canopy like the Vulcan and Valiant before it was rejected..

Talking of flying wings, Handley Page also proposed this airliner below which was comparable in many ways with the Boeing and Airbus BWB designs from recent years;

[edit on 7-3-2006 by waynos]

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:22 AM
Waynos, your post is always surprising to me, it looks very very bigger than B-2 sprite bomber. Maybe American are more actualistic than British, but British are more imageful than America, so I suggest British are responsible for design whereas Ameria are responsible for produce, then there were more greater products would be created.

So many pictrues reminds me of you has given me a wonderful cutaway. One of my friend askme for a clear cutaway of He-111. Could you give some help?

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 08:59 AM
H.P. 117 says on the image

one of my favorites


posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 10:18 AM
North American P-82 Twin Mustang

Lippisch P.13

Leduc O-22

A UCAV from Boeing ?

Pass, but it doesn't look authentic to me, maybe a general theoretical design?

[edit on 7-3-2006 by waynos]

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:26 PM
Ooh, ramjets.

So, they work by forward motion forcing air in, right? Which gives the possibility of endless acceleration, if you have the fuel supply, yes or no?

My understanding is that they are like superchargers, their practical applications are few because in order to make power, you have to take a little away (unlike a turbo) and that they are just too thirsty.

But they did give someone the idea for scramjets...

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 06:34 PM
Fine that means I can post more easily identified pictures

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 08:37 PM
Emile, - Check your email.

Howlrunner, I think the main problem with ramjets (and scramjets) is that they don't work at slow speed. No speed, no compression, no engine cycle. Don't kid yourself - turbo-charging is not free power - it is taking power from the exhaust.

[edit on 7/3/06 by The Winged Wombat]

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:30 PM
I have got an email you sent to me with quite clear cutaway, I can flount it to my friends again, last one is that P.108
Thanks again.

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:38 PM
One of your post is taken from here: isn't it ?

Then I saw a attacker design which is next generation after Su-25 Frogfoot but has never flown even never been built.
The last one is an plane of supersonic bomber Sukhoi T-4?

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 10:13 PM
You two are really good at post some picture to make quizz. This time could you post some picture but the viewsight should be behand of the aircraft or just show a tail like this

or just show undercarrier? Don't forget post some hard_difficult ones
By the way Do you think that has already included 99% or 100% aircraft of all the world? How many aircrafts did this web lost? Does any other websites rival this web?

[edit on 8-3-2006 by emile]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:29 AM
Oh, no emile, even 1000aircraftphotos has a long long way to go yet - I think they maybe have about 6000 different aircraft represented - at a guess, I'd say maybe 60,000 might be getting close to good coverage of all marks and models. is good for US built aircraft. is good for helicopters (All the world's rotorcraft)

AXLs Plane Gallery has over 12,000 pictures but represents less that 800 different aircraft types. Pretty good automatic recognition quiz though.

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 07:35 AM

F-18? F-20?

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:05 AM
So many question break out:
Marster, could you two tell me whether the Novi Avion has been completed by design?Or even the design has never been completed?
Please noute your book don't use web, because I ha ve read []this web[/url], but so  many conflict in it.

[edit on 8-3-2006 by emile]

[edit on 8-3-2006 by emile]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:37 AM
Not F-18 or F-20 emile, It is the North American X-10 unmanned aircraft which was tested as part of the SM-64 Navajo strategic missile program. By the tail numbers, it was the first of thirteen examples built.

As far as I know the Novi Avion was not built - I think they got into a bit of a civil war before anything got done about building it.

[edit on 8/3/06 by The Winged Wombat]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 05:32 PM

Originally posted by emile

Polikarpov I16 Chato? That is, if I16 and Chato are the correct designations. The one that went to Spain to fight the Condor Legion for the Republicans.

WW, there's nothing free about a turbo, plant your foot, wait for exhaust gas pressure to build up, the turbine spins under pressure, forced induction begins...wheeeee!

But there's no cost until you spin the turbine, and then you are not taking power from the engine.

Superchargers take their power from the crank, so you add load to the engine before you even go anywhere. And unlike a turbo, you have to manually disengage the thing. And, boy, can they be thirsty...However, pushrods prefer a blower over a turbo, over-head cams like turbos more than blowers...and combat aircraft tend to prefer blowers because you don't want that second or so of lag before you get kicked in the pants.

And then Whittle and Ohayn come along and some Yank invents reheat and pilots are back to lag, but only the time it takes to "push the button, max".

On the subject of ramjets...didn't the vehicle you pictured have RATO to get it to speed?

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 07:44 PM
I'm not sure which picture you're referring to, but if it's the Leduc O.22, then it actually had an Atar turbojet at the centre of the ramjet, which allowed the aircraft to take off under it's own power. As with so many other projects around the world, the funding tap got turned off before they actually got to light up the ramjet, although it did fly on the power of the turbojet a number of times.

I would suppose that the upper limit of ramjet performance would be governed by the ability to contain the pressure in the tube (structural strength) and the volatility of the fuel (you still need to burn it rather than detonate it)

[edit on 8/3/06 by The Winged Wombat]

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 11:57 PM
That plane is Ki-27 just painted star as Soviet AF.

Then here is a difficult one for Wombat and Waynos:

Who has more infor. about that Yugo. mini- Rafale?

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:53 AM
I don't appear to have any information on the Yugoslav 'Novi Avion'

The Photo --- Heinkel He 176

The earlier ones look to be...

Breda Ba 201 & Latecoere 302

[edit on 9/3/06 by The Winged Wombat]

new topics

top topics

<< 62  63  64    66  67  68 >>

log in