Well, apart from the fact that I had already seen that particular dream
machine, courtesy of Rick B, it is difficult to conceive of the combination of
capabilities: M3.5, 4,000nm range and carrier landing capability.
Oh and to have Low-Observable capabilities with that strange swing-wing
contraption would be pretty difficult -- too many edges. Finally, swing-wing
is an old way of doing things. The USA's military aviation industry has moved
away from changing the wing's shape or size in favour of making clever flight
computers to run fly-by-wire systems.
It's only us Brits who still operate swing-wing, as far as I can make out.
Before I had been more than a couple of years on the Tornado GR1 I realised
that it was a pretty useless way of doing things. The weight of the mechanism,
the extra hydraulic power needed and the extra bulk to accommodate the whole
structure are big disadvantages against the very minor advantage of adjusting
the planform. We should have welded the Tornado's wings at 45degrees 20 years
ago, allowed the flaps to move at that sweep and stopped worrying about the
tiny increments of speed that variable geometry gave us. With a fixed wing we
could simplify the speed limitations as well, and stop practising swept-wing
approaches (an approach in 63/67 wing sweep is a wacky thing to do).
Chris
On 29 Nov 2011, at 17:56, Paul Laughlin wrote:
> My first thought, which I foolishly ignored, was that an aircraft with
> those capabilities would just be away too much for launching off a
> catapult. Or off a carrier at all, for that matter.
> Paul in Portland OR
>
> On 11/29/2011 3:54 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> Yes, the aircraft is a mockup for a film, apparently. But the whole setup
>> looks like a very expensive way to get publicity shots.
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|