It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

3 planes that SHOULD have changed the world

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Slightly different spin to the other thread, I was wondering which three planes ought to have, or were expected to change the world but didn't. After considerable thought I came up with the following.

1 Harrier Back in the 1950's VTOL was the holy grail of aircraft design, by 1970 with the first Harriers in service you only have to look at the number of VTOL projects around, for instance the Hawker Siddeley HS 141 was a VTOL airliner in the A320 class! to come to the conclusion that by the end of the century EVERYTHING in the sky would be a VTOL aircraft. For various reasons like noise and cost it never happened.

2Concorde; Similarly back in the '60's everyone thought that SST's were the future, at one point in ithe early '70's there were 400 options on Concordes from airlines all over the world and Russia and the USA desperately tried to match it. In the end Boeing turned their losing design from the USAF's C-X competition into the airliner of the future and incredibly today SST's are a thing of the past not the future

3Rockwell Orbiter, or the 'Space Shuttle' Remember when the Space Shuttle was going to revolutionise space travel by introducing re-usable space planes into regular service? Well the reality has been very different and I saw the Space Shuttle once (flippantly) called "America's answer to Concorde" and the similarities are clearly there as despite years of sterling service in its own right we are no nearer to regular space flights than we were with the Saturn V series.

[edit on 10-1-2005 by waynos]




posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I couldn't agree more with your selections.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Still would have been nice to see the TSR2 in service



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I don't usually get to contribute here other than to cool the waters, so I'm glad I get to participate.

How about this one. The Arrow.





posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Waynos, I'd agree with two of your selections, but my suggestion for the first airplane that should've changed the world was the Saunders-Roe Princess (or its spiritual godmother, the Hughes 'Spruce Goose' flying boat).

Again, another airplane for which the time had come -- and gone.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:26 PM
link   

we are no nearer to regular space flights than we were with the Saturn V series.


Umm really... have you been under a rock the past 6 months no offence intended but Burt Rutans SpaceShipOne won the X-Prize.


Bigelow is almost ready to test thier inflatable space hab, first test is supposed to happen in 2006-07.


Virgin Galactic says they will be ready to take passengers in 2.5 - 3 years time for a couple hundred thousand vs. the 20 million the Russians want, granted they take you up alot higher then SS1, SpaceShipTwo is already in the works(which will go alot higher then SS1). Get my point





[edit on 10-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Spaceship One DID change the world...

The other three simply SHOULD have, and I agree wholeheartedly with the selections....



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Spaceship One DID change the world...

The other three simply SHOULD have, and I agree wholeheartedly with the selections....


Heh I was replying to his comment in the third caption. I guess I should go now, that I'm done disagreeing with the thread author
I guess my vote would have to go to.....
on the Avro Arrow I love that plane, too bad it got cancelled.. Oh well.. Coulda woulda shoulda..... That is when Canada truely dropped the ball in Aircraft design... Now all our armed forces have to brag about is our Snipers heh

[edit on 10-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Space flight is a totally different bucket of frogs from the usual aviation industry but I gotta agree, Burt Rutan sure does know how to make planes.
I've been a fan for many years and although the SpaceShipOne ia a cool piece of kit, the carrier / launch aircraft is even more beautiful (White Knight if I remember correctly)

I'm sure I have an air-to-air photo of it carrying it's baby somewhere on my HD, I'll have to take a look.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Cheers Gazrock, you saved me from saying it, though I would add that spaceship one only has the potential to change the world as it has only gone up once so far, its at the same stage as Concorde and Harrier were in 1970

ots; I LOVE the Saro Princess! What a shame that you now buy mushrooms from the supermarket with 'SARO Isle of Wight' stamped on the bottom of the pack.



[edit on 10-1-2005 by waynos]



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000

we are no nearer to regular space flights than we were with the Saturn V series.


Umm really... have you been under a rock the past 6 months no offence intended but Burt Rutans SpaceShipOne won the X-Prize.


I shall disagree with you here. SS1 is useless for anything but tourism, its suborbital with no chance of being developed to orbital capability. Also it went straight up and came straight down again, having just touched the 'agreed' edge of space. Its going to be a long time until a private non government funded company like Scaled Composites puts a manned craft into orbit.



Virgin Galactic says they will be ready to take passengers in 2.5 - 3 years time for a couple hundred thousand vs. the 20 million the Russians want, granted they take you up alot higher then SS1, SpaceShipTwo is already in the works(which will go alot higher then SS1). Get my point



[edit on 10-1-2005 by sardion2000]


Its not jsut the height, its the speed as well. SS2 isnt designed to go into orbit either, its going to be used for tourism.

So, where are our regular space flights? Why cant I go into orbit? Where are all the hotels? Where did the suborbital transoceanic aircraft get to?

Make no mistake, SS1 isnt what we wanted.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   


we are no nearer to regular space flights than we were with the Saturn V series.


This is the quote I was replying too. I was just trying to illustrate that we are alot closer to regular space flights then waynos suspects. Please take it as such Ok?

I totally agree that SS1 hasn't changed the world yet btw very good chance too I would say most innovation comes from the Private sector wether it be for tourism or low-grav experiments. Man I shoulda made myself clearer... OFF TO BED FOR ME heh.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   
You're at perfect liberty to disagree with me but I feel that even with SpaceShip One that statement is accurate, OK we may be a step nearer but its not much to show for 45 years of space shots is it?

I got sidetracked there because several posts ago I was going to say how I like the selctions of the TSR 2 and Avro Arrow.

It might not be obvious but success for these two types would have severely weakened America's grip on the Western aircraft industry so they could have changed the world in their own way.

Australia wanted the TSR 2 but ended up having to buy the F-111, the RAF wanted the Arrow but ended up buying the F-4 Phantom, both of which were obviously US types, who knows which other countries might have selected them over the following decade?

[edit on 10-1-2005 by waynos]



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I agree with Waynos thats its taken far to long for private spaceflight to come of age, but thats probably a good thing, it gave electronics (IE:Computers & Sensors) time to catch up.

and it is finally coming of age.

In a couple years Space Ship 2 will be finished, it will look quit different from its predesesor, It will fold 5 to 8 people, and everyone will have plenty of leg room and there own window, It will cost around $200,000, but they say that within 12 years nearly everyone will be able to go into space. SS1 was designed to go 62 miles up, SS2 will be designed to go 85 miles up. and the 10 mill X-Prize that Scaled Composites won will be a anual event. The X-Prize Cup, will help generate a large space tourism sector. Grant-it, it will only go a third as high as the space shuttle, but its a hell of a start.

and Bigelow has set a new challenge, a $50 million race to build an orbital vehicle capable of carrying up to seven astronauts to an orbital outpost by the end of the decade. He plans to have his inflatable habitat in place cefore then, and will go higher yet, there goal is 100 miles up.

Those 2 alone should make you feel that a spaceflight trip is obtainable in your lifetime, and not you kids or grandkids.



RichardPrice
SS1 is useless for anything but tourism.

Yes its for tourism, because thats what we want! there's allready allot of unmanned spacecraft (probes) floatin' around, on planets or orbiting them or in the works. I love to see pics of space and planets, but seeing it with your own eyes in person, would be amazing. and it will most deffinatly be used for more then just a good view, The cabin of the SS2 will roughly be the size of a Gulfstream V, and they will have trays like a planes, their thinking is, You paid for it, you do whatever you want with the trip, whether that be floating while you look out a window, bring a science experiment up, or buy all the seat for you and your significant other. I think Nasa will buy some seats as well, and probably some universities. It will have its share or experiments done on it.


RichardPrice
its suborbital with no chance of being developed to orbital capability. Also it went straight up and came straight down again, having just touched the 'agreed' edge of space. Its going to be a long time until a private non government funded company like Scaled Composites puts a manned craft into orbit.

What do you consider orbital to be, LEO?
SS2 doesn't have to be just straight up & straight down, Scaled says that if you want they will do a point to point, like mojave to Las Vegas, but obviously not transoceanic.



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
The Flying wings

The Horton IX bomber- alittle too late for the Germans



Jack Northtrops baby the YB-49- alittle too early for the US airforce


It took a awhile but the flying wing bomber came into its own. The B-2 just right





[edit on 10-1-2005 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Okay:

The Me-262: Had it been a priority, it could have changed the course of WWII

The Dehaviland Comet: Had it been sucessfull, Dehavelin (sp) could have been the British Boeing and dominated comercial aviation

The Concord: Too expensive and bad timing



posted on Jan, 11 2005 @ 01:07 AM
link   


Those 2 alone should make you feel that a spaceflight trip is obtainable in your lifetime, and not you kids or grandkids.

Watch it! Some plan to get cryogenically frozen or get medical procedures to prolong their life.

Anyway, ~ what time do you see actual space shuttle class flights for civilians taking place? I'm talking about the altitudes, facilities, and time in orbit.



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   
1. Concord: Bad timing + high cost

2. Flying Wing: Planes like the YB-49 and Horton IX could have changed the world, but the timing was off.

3. WS-606A: This was a USAF flying saucer based fighter design in the 1950's. If it had worked All modern fighter would almost certainly be VTOL, supersonic, and use thrust vectoring. However, the concept was too early and highly unstable so it never made it past the early experimental phase.

Tim



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 06:32 PM
link   


The Caspian Sea Monster - cool name cool vehicle!!



The Russians - Living proof that it don't have to look right to fly right


There have been lots of Wing In Ground effect crart (WIG craft) or Ekranoplan's. They can save on fuel costs as its an efficent way to fly.



posted on Jun, 20 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then


The Caspian Sea Monster - cool name cool vehicle!!



The Russians - Living proof that it don't have to look right to fly right


There have been lots of Wing In Ground effect crart (WIG craft) or Ekranoplan's. They can save on fuel costs as its an efficent way to fly.


just outta curiosity why dont airlines use this effect?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join