It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Darkpr0
Well that doesn't mean that supercruise is a BAD thing,
Originally posted by waynos
Possibly for the first time ever I also must pick up on something Intelgurl; said.
Since when do the USAF have the right to 'define' what supercruise is?Specifying 'mach1.5' rather than just 'above mach 1, and 'in a combat situation' is being rather selective in order to create an area for the Raptor to be unique in, it appears.
Originally posted by emile
Yes, Great Britain was really a Great Aviational Country, the P.1 also flew in supersonic without afterburner at that pass time which is far away from today.
But, the point is 1) why we differentiate subsonic transonic and supersonic?
because in aerodynamics we realized that there are shock waves flow which accompany aircraft cause the fighter almost has no capability to maneuver and unstable. Also as this kind of shock wave flow, fighter flying in transonic will be exhausting fuel much more than usual time.So most of transonic fighter which like F-100 MiG-19 etc. still make dogfight in subsonic speed.
2) Why USAF defined that supercuise must be continue to more 30 minutes? We have known that in aerodynamics cruise speed means the speed was holded you could got a maximal range. But the speed of maximal range would be useless if the cruise speed would be higher, which means a higher cruise speed with maximal range, the time which a fighter fly to complete is shorter.
Now, USAF anounced F-22 has a M.1.72 cruise speed, is it means that time Raptor flying is shorter than which flying at M1.58 in the pass time? Or the rang is smaller than flying M1.58? I am not sure. But I knew that keep a cruise speed at M1.72 without using afterburner for 30 minutes is meaningful.
[edit on 1-10-2005 by emile]