[FWD] Whoops! Wrong stealth pic in previous post!

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:43:50 GMT, Bruce Palmer
wrote:

I think maneuverability is the top concern with FSW aircraft. At least
that's what the X-29 guys in the next building told me when I was at
Grumman.

....From what I'd gathered from various sources at the time, one of the
manuverability issues had to do with the fact that the damn thing
would not retain any stability no matter how wired by you got the
flaps to fly if you had anything mounted on the wings in the shape of,
say, weapons. While I don't believe they flew the X-29 in that config
during testing, they did reportedly do some wind tunnel tests which
really threw them a curve ball. Wouldn't surprise me if that was
behind the Air Farce's later push towards all weapons being internally
stored until use.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...

It's the "Talon," piloted by Jessica Biel.

I bet her harness would've cost a bit to design.

In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote:

Scott Lowther wrote:

OM wrote:


http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/upfi...53/Bz78777.jpg



That's from the forthcoming flick "Stealth," which promises to be
craptacular.


Still that is almost exactly how it's supposed to look...assuming it
exists, of course. Those aerilons and flaps make some mighty impressive
leading edge slats when the wings are swung forward, don't they? I hope
they are going to extend the wings before they catapult it, though.
Impressive mock-up, assuming it's full size- better looking than the
Firefox. Is the bulge on the sides of the nose supposed to be a
refueling probe, or some sort of secret weapon?
(This is what the thing's supposed to be:
http://www.air-attack.com/page.php?pid=9 )

Pat

Gee, that's a real prop??? For a real movie??? Please tell me you're
joking. I saw that pic set on the carrie deck and my first thought was
that it was very bad kitbash that some 12-year old had Photo-chopped
onto the pic of flight deck operations.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
~ Robert A. Heinlein
http://www.angryherb.net

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...

Gee, that's a real prop??? For a real movie??? Please tell me you're
joking. I saw that pic set on the carrie deck and my first thought was
that it was very bad kitbash that some 12-year old had Photo-chopped
onto the pic of flight deck operations.

If that is "Photo-chopped", it is very well done. If it had been a pic of
a F-14 or F-18, I would not have thought twice about it.

Scott Lowther wrote:

It's the "Talon," piloted by Jessica Biel.

"Plot Outline: Deeply ensconced in a top-secret military program, three
pilots struggle to bring an artificial intelligence program under
control ... before it initiates the next world war."

Apparently, one of the planes has an AI that goes HAL/Skynet, and they
have to send another one up to bring it down. Yes, indeedy... somebody
sure put soem deep thought into this...


Couldn't they just talk it into playing a game of chess?
Not very many new plots in the world, are there?
I'm still ****ed that the remake of "Them!" fell through... with
computer animated giant ants, it could have been a lot of fun.



Sadly, the design isn;t straight switchblade. There aremalso the forward
swept (!), variable dihedral tailplanes to consider,


You want to see some loopy tailfins, take a gander at this:
http://www.stavatti.com/f26/f26_arrangement.html

the fact that none
of the angles line up in the plan view (stealth = 0), the relatively
gigantic canopy that still somehow fails to provide much of a view, and
the massively drooped nose (way below the "waterline."

The palen looks "cool," but it screams "dumbass."


"It's so sophisticated that we can't understand its aerodynamics and
stealth...yeah....that's the ticket."


Pat

Scott Lowther wrote:

That's a gun, I think, based on some other views of it. There appear to
be two, one on either side.


That's going to get a tad bright in the cockpit at night, isn't it? And
a bit loud also, as supersonic shells go flying past you- while their
burnt powder residue goes straight back into the engine intakes, nicely
dirtying up the motors, A-10 style.

Pat

Bruce Palmer wrote:

I think maneuverability is the top concern with FSW aircraft. At least
that's what the X-29 guys in the next building told me when I was at
Grumman.


In this case, the Northrop design was apparently to give you three
different ways to fly; wings fully out for maneuverable low speed flight
as well as takeoff and landing; wings swept forward for maneuverable
high speed flight; wings swung all the way up alongside the body for
efficient supersonic cruising flight...probably _very_ supersonic; this
looks like something designed to supercruise at around Mach 2.


X-29 was one of the only things Grumman had going for it when it started
to bite the dust. Not that Northrop couldn't have done it by themselves...


I always liked the YF-23; the fuselage/engine bay setup on the
aircraft's top was one of the slickest solutions to the "Area Rule" I
ever saw.

Pat

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

Gee, that's a real prop??? For a real movie???

Yes, a full-scale mockup aboard the USS Abe Lincoln.


--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

Pat Flannery wrote:

Scott Lowther wrote:

That's a gun, I think, based on some other views of it. There appear to
be two, one on either side.


That's going to get a tad bright in the cockpit at night, isn't it? And
a bit loud also, as supersonic shells go flying past you- while their
burnt powder residue goes straight back into the engine intakes, nicely
dirtying up the motors, A-10 style.


Pffff. Details.

--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

In article ,
"JNICHOLS" wrote:

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...

Gee, that's a real prop??? For a real movie??? Please tell me you're
joking. I saw that pic set on the carrie deck and my first thought was
that it was very bad kitbash that some 12-year old had Photo-chopped
onto the pic of flight deck operations.

If that is "Photo-chopped", it is very well done. If it had been a pic of
a F-14 or F-18, I would not have thought twice about it.

Clone and edge-feathering plug-ins make for very convincing fakes,
especially at low, 96 dpi web-centric resolutions.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
~ Robert A. Heinlein
http://www.angryherb.net