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.

 

Aviation trivia quiz.

page: 11
11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Imagewerx

Square windows, and metal fatigue.




posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Stngray

In this forum? HA! You're lucky it was up that long.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I think this question is a softball. What airplane was worth/cost more than its weight in gold?



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   
What was the slogan and mission of the 6594th Test Group?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 02:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stngray
a reply to: Imagewerx

Square windows, and metal fatigue.


Something more specific about the windows?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Stngray

The B-2

What was especially unique about the way in which the aircraft that could/would have been the first supersonic VTOL/STOVL aircraft managed to go so fast?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Imagewerx

Cracking at the corners because they were square.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 04:37 AM
link   


What WW2 aircraft is this ?



Kind regards, sorry about the double pic.

Bally
edit on 14-3-2016 by bally001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 04:44 AM
link   
Schematics of the craft.



Regards,

Bally

Dammit, I've given it away lol.


edit on 14-3-2016 by bally001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

It's usually a good idea to trim pics.


edit on 3/14/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: bally001

Bristol Beaufighter.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Stngray

What was especially unique about the way in which the aircraft that could/would have been the first supersonic VTOL/STOVL aircraft managed to go so fast?


XF-109, with it's 4 jet engine V-22 style wing pods and 8 total jet engines?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Close, but wrong side of the pond

And also, you assume that the (slightly older) XF-109 would have even flown in the first place.

I just look at how much trouble Bell had making the V-22 fly, maneuver, and transition on two thrust pillars even with the fine control of fly-by-wire, FADEC AND cyclic/collective rotor control, and I can only imagine how the XF-109 would have "flown" with its manual controls and the throttle response of 1960-era jet engines. I reckon it would have made the Lockheed XFV look as docile as a P-47...
edit on 14-3-2016 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

I just read the "could/would" as including "potential/concepts", not necessarily flown concepts.

I suppose we'll never know if your assessment of the craft is correct or not but unlike the V-22 it had 4 points of vertical thrust. The two engines in each wing pod, and two engines just aft of the pilot.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Aka even more (finicky, 1950's) throttle points to control separately in an attempt to keep the damned thing airborne.

There's a reason why my example, and it's legendary predecessor, used only one engine, with bleed valves for fine control...



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

Are you referring to the P.1127 then?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Imagewerx

Cracking at the corners because they were square.


The reason I remember and this is from memory so might be wrong is that the primary cause was because the rivets holding them in weren't long enough?



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Imagewerx

The square corners put a lot more stress on the skin because of the sharp edges. When they pressure tested one in the water tank there was an explosive failure a lot sooner than they should have seen.

You might be thinking of the windscreen failure that pulled the pilot out in flight. That was because the mechanic used screws that appeared the same but were a tiny bit too short.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Close enough, I was talking about the P.1154 with its unique plenum chamber burning system that made it, at 35,000 lbs wet thrust, the most powerful jet engine in the world in the 1960s.

And the P.1154 made it tantalizingly close to reality, with engines built and tested and fuselages/wings sitting nearly complete on their jigs when it got white-papered out of existence.

But it was such a rad concept, a Harrier with the performance envelope of an F-4 Phantom.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Aluminum fatigue is a hell of a beast. Part of me is still wary of flying the 787 for the same reason, since composite fatigue makes aluminum fatigue look simple and predictable, and commercial operators have never had to maintain a composite aircraft before.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join