Kula66 Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 I haven't watched the YF-23 vids yet, but I will. Does anybody else see shades of the old B-57 or Gloucester Meteor in the YF-23s shape? It certainly doesn't look the part for a super agile fighter ... By B-57 don't you mean Canberra? ;)
MBot Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 Any idea why they dropped the single canopy on the F-35 ... that frame must reduce vis and they've obviously master the technology on the 16 and 22. Just a wild guess, but beeing a ground pounder primary the F-35 might have a higher chance to suffer bird-strikes. At least that is the reason Japan went to a framed canopy from the F-16 to F-2.
Kula66 Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 Just a wild guess, but beeing a ground pounder primary the F-35 might have a higher chance to suffer bird-strikes. At least that is the reason Japan went to a framed canopy from the F-16 to F-2. Good point ... but isn't it a replacement for the F-16, a jack of all trades ... which does have a one piece.
britgliderpilot Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 Good point ... but isn't it a replacement for the F-16, a jack of all trades ... which does have a one piece. Wasn't originally designed to be a jack of all trades, though - the original plan was for a lightweight air superiority day fighter. A thread at F-16.net discusses some F-35 canopy stuff, look here: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=6618&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=1d0f1392b4ecd05d79c3d764995992c2 This bit was scary, though: If the F-16 canopy does not jettison the seat will not fire, its mechanically impossible. Whoa. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Anytime Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 Can"t say I see either of those aircraft in the F-23 design. How does the HMD give the pilot an unobstructed view?? AT. I'm just speculating here, but it might have been a measure taken to shave a square milimeter or two off its RCS. It might have been something they had to do in order to reach the desired RCS. Visibility won't be much of a problem for the F-22 and F-35 though, since the HMD will pretty much give the pilot a full, spherical view of his surroundings, regardless of opaque aircraft parts. I haven't watched the YF-23 vids yet, but I will. Does anybody else see shades of the old B-57 or Gloucester Meteor in the YF-23s shape?
Force_Feedback Posted January 28, 2007 Posted January 28, 2007 Wasn't originally designed to be a jack of all trades, though - the original plan was for a lightweight air superiority day fighter. A thread at F-16.net discusses some F-35 canopy stuff, look here: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=6618&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=1d0f1392b4ecd05d79c3d764995992c2 This bit was scary, though: Whoa. It's very normal and is applied on lots of other aircraft, the Mig-29 and su-27 series for example (except the newer mods that have canopy breakers, like the mig-29KUB). The main reason is that the catapult doesn't have enough force to shatter the canopy, and even if it did, it would require some additional breaking lines (MDC) to split it open. All this is accomplished by a 2-3m steel wire, attatched in one end to the canopy frame, and the other holds a catapult gas line. So, if that firing pin remains there, no actual ejection will happen. Exactly the same prinicpe is used on the mig-29/su-27, as they lack any kind of rocket propulsion to remove the canopy. This was done for safety reasons, because rockets can be quite unpredictable and a maintenance hazard. Also, rocket actuated canopy removal has the unpleasant side effect of ripping eihter the canopy frame, the transparency or both, so having chunks of metal and plexiglass near the pilot's head is not always desireable. On the mig-29 canopy jettison is done by firstly cutting the locks (explosive bolts) and then a gas generating cartridge inside the canopy ducts gas through like three nozzles (maybe two, forgot how many there were), so no actual superheated exhaust is expelled through those ducts. Also, the rear actuator operated in an overload mode, giving the maximum designed pressure (probably damaging the actuation system in the process). The big disadvantage of this system however is that it requires more time to operate, and at low speeds it can cause potentially fatal injury because of the little impulse of the gas generating ducts. So, that's why pilots are discouraged from ejecting below 75 km/h, bacause the canopy can fall back on their heads, or the seat can smash into it while ejecting. However, the removal of the canopy by rocket is something like 3 times faster than that of cartridge actuated gas lines because the gas travels faster, and doesn't have to go through all the ducts first. It also enables safe zero-zero ejections by adequately propelling the canopy away from the aircraft. At higher speeds the performance differences become less important as the airstream takes care of the canopy problem. So rocket actuated jettison is faster, but not safer, gas ducts are less powerful, and can't operate well at low speeds. I guess it's the difference in design philosophy, the K-36 was designed to safely eject the pilot, with a minimum of injuries allowed, Western seats are designed to safe the life of the pilot, no matter the cost, often resulting in severe injuries. Newer K-36 seats have algorythms to decide wether time of of the essence (high sinkrate, low alt) or not, and adjust the performance accordingly, to optimise the fictional performance/survivability curve. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
Guest IguanaKing Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Can"t say I see either of those aircraft in the F-23 design. Heh...no imagination. J/K ;) Its just the layout of the wings and engines that remind me a great deal of the other two aircraft. Kula66, yep I meant the Canberra...had to use the American designation for it though. :D How does the HMD give the pilot an unobstructed view?? AT. Have you seen anything about the array of CCD cameras that are all over the exterior of the F-35 which feed video information to the HMD based on head position? Its supposed to allow the pilot to be able to "see through" solid parts of his own aircraft with the HMD.
Mike Cinch Perry Posted January 30, 2007 Posted January 30, 2007 Hmm..................................
Luse Posted September 5, 2012 Posted September 5, 2012 Holy Necropost Batman... 2007, There was NO need to bring this thread out, ever. :joystick: STT Radar issue is leftover code.
Recommended Posts