The Planes that never were

[Idris2002]

Onwards to a glorious socialist republic mo chara!

A 32 county socialist republic, no less!

 

[spitfire]

A 32 county socialist republic, no less!

Anything else would be unthinkable!

 

[spitfire]

We have appeared to stray onto a new topic. States that never were.

 

[DownwardDog]

better put the drip trays out then, it leaked like a sieve. a sieve with an enormous hole torn in the middle...

i'm pretty sure the RAF looked at the F-14, and possibly the F-15, in the 70's - but government decided that jobs in marginal constituancies, sorry, i mean strategic investment in critical national infrastructure, was more important than having a fighter with a radar in it, or the ability to overtake a hanglider at any kind of altitude... hence the Tornado F2/F3, the fighter you get when you take a low level bomber and paint it grey.

The F-14 and F-15 were both evaluated against ASR.395, the project that eventually gave us the ADV. The main problem with the mighty Tomcat was that its AWG-9 radar was described by the UK MoD at the time as 'too good'. That is, it would be impossible to substitute a UK produced radar as it would be a joke and not a funny one. Simulations at the time demonstrated that the F-14B was three times as effective at killing Backfires as the Tornado ADV.

The F-15 was handicapped by lack of internal volume in the two seater (the RAF were 100% committed to a two person crew for ASR.395) and its UARRSI fuelling system. The RAF then, as now, only had probe/drogue tankers. The F-15 was still the final recommendation of the Chief of the Defence Staff.

Bill Rodgers (for it was he) eventually selected the Tornado ADV in 1976 as he was worried that cancellation would implode the whole Tornado program.

The ADV came good in the end but it took a lot of time and money. After it got HOTAS and the Stage 1+ radar in the early 90s it was a capable platform that could its own. Most of the F3W who flew it held it in high regard. I don't know anyone who would have taken it over the Tomcat though...

 

[Idris2002]

We have appeared to stray onto a new topic. States that never were.

Patience is a virtue.

Back OT, have a look at this:

Spoiler

SNCASO Trident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[pogofish]

Patience is a virtue.

Back OT, have a look at this:

Spoiler

SNCASO Trident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

France had quite some imagination in that era - Check-out the Nord 1500/Griffon and the Leduc Ramjet!

And of course the slightly earlier Fouga GCM-88

Of which there were two versions. The twin-engined one above and another with a single, much bigger jet engine slung between the fuselages!

 

[ViolentPanda]

This just popped up an faceache, never seen it before.

Martin-Baker MB 5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin Baker MB5 experimental fighter

That is beautiful!

 

[gosub]

This just popped up an faceache, never seen it before.

Martin-Baker MB 5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin Baker MB5 experimental fighter

very P39

 

[Idris2002]

The Nakajima G10N, intended for bombing America (but never built):

 

[Cid]

They're not spinning - the ISS is in free fall as are the people inside. What happens in 0G is that the fluids in your inner ear slosh around, making your sense of balance confused. Your brain thinks you've eaten some bad plants and makes you want to spew them back up.

A rotating space station would simulate gravity but would have weird Coriolis effects (remember the spiraling tea in The Expanse?). Also, if the radius was quite small (eg the Discovery in 2001) then your feet would experience more "gravity" than your head which wouldn't be great for your circulation.

See NoXion 's response upthread, says the same thing but the paper he posted is quite interesting. A 5-6rpm ring (36-25 metre radius) seems feasible

NASA had a concept design for an exploration vessel, but doesn't seem to have got anywhere:

Difficult to estimate the radius of the ring from that pic, seems a bit on the small side though - 1g at 9m requires 10rpm, which is the least friendly environment in the paper. I suppose you'd get some benefit even from a low gravity/lower rotation environment though.

 

[HAL9000]

what about using a cable to make the radius large

TETHERED HABITATS
For another example, suppose that the tether is 50 meters long, and the rotation rate is 6 rpm which from the ground experiments would seem an easy rate to adjust to. Then that gives full g once again. Now you travel at a rather faster 16 meters / second, or 36 miles per hour. Your head is at 88% of full g.

Can Spinning Habitats Solve Zero g Problem? And Answer Low g Questions?

 

[Crispy]

Yep tethering is a good way of doing it on the cheap.

 

[Idris2002]

Yep tethering is a good way of doing it on the cheap.

Yes, but if you're going to the bother of mounting a manned mission to mars, or anywhere else, why do it on the cheap?

A project like that would cost billions/trillions anyway, or so I'd imagine - if you're going to spend that much, why settle for an El Cheapo tethered habitat?

 

[NoXion]

Yes, but if you're going to the bother of mounting a manned mission to mars, or anywhere else, why do it on the cheap?

A project like that would cost billions/trillions anyway, or so I'd imagine - if you're going to spend that much, why settle for an El Cheapo tethered habitat?

Because the costs involved aren't purely monetary. There is the energy cost involved in launching the stuff into orbit and across interplanetary space. Given the same budget in terms of money, a spacecraft with a tethered rotating section is going to be able to haul more mass than a spacecraft with a rigid rotating section.

 

[Idris2002]

Because the costs involved aren't purely monetary. There is the energy cost involved in launching the stuff into orbit and across interplanetary space. Given the same budget in terms of money, a spacecraft with a tethered rotating section is going to be able to haul more mass than a spacecraft with a rigid rotating section.

But the same thing applies, whether you're spending are monetary or otherwise - if you're spending all that money, or energy to get out of the gravity well and across the universe, why skimp?

 

[NoXion]

But the same thing applies, whether you're spending are monetary or otherwise - if you're spending all that money, or energy to get out of the gravity well and across the universe, why skimp?

Because budgets are ultimately limited. If you can do more using the same amount of materials, why not go ahead and do it? If you're concerned about structural integrity, then using multiple cables will provide additional failsafes for a marginal increase in cost.

 

[Crispy]

But the same thing applies, whether you're spending are monetary or otherwise - if you're spending all that money, or energy to get out of the gravity well and across the universe, why skimp?

When it comes to mass, you want to skimp, because it's so phenomenally expensive to launch each kg.

 

[A380]

Nimrod AEW3. How many hospitals could we have had if we had brought the A3 Sentry from the start?

 

[gosub]

Nimrod AEW3. How many hospitals could we have had if we had brought the A3 Sentry from the start?

Probably none but we'd still have harriers for the carrier, vtol trained pilots and a fixed wing FAA

 

[DownwardDog]

Nimrod AEW3. How many hospitals could we have had if we had brought the A3 Sentry from the start?

It cost about 600m quid; I doubt the NHS can build a bus stop for that sort of money.

The rocky road to the E-3 starts way before the Nimrod AEW. The RAF actually started the project that would end with the E-3 in 1944! They originally wanted to do what they called 'Airborne Control and Interception' using a modified Boeing C-97 Stratofreighter. The British aircraft industy went mildly mental at this proposal and successfully lobbied the government to compel the RAF to select a British built airframe. The lucky winner was the GAC Hamilcar X. It didn't work. After that there was then about four decades of pissing about with various other platforms:

Bristol 170 Freighter
Bristol Britannia
Bristol BEWARE
Three different VC-10 based concepts
Comet with a dorsal E3 style radome (we're getting close, lads!)
Andover AEW with FASS antennae
E-2K Hawkeye (made lots of UK specific 'improvements' so it ended up too expensive)
HS 748 with the radar from the Hawkeye
HS 748 with FASS radar
Nimrod AEW (complete disaster, the wheels actually came off in 1984 when RAF deputation flew on an E-3 and were 'horrified' at its capabilities in comparison to Nimrod AEW but it staggered on until 1986)
Shackleton AEW (a chance to enjoy aviation from another era, but at least made it into service)
P3 with Hawkeye radar
Re-engined BAC 1-11 with 4 x Adour
Hawkrod (Nimrod with Hawkeye radar)

At this point British Aerospace had the absolute fucking cheek to propose that government buy the BAe 844 'Super Tanker' which was an A310 based AAR platform that had the Nimrod AEW's radars bolted on to it. This idea had support in cabinet but was swiftly and mercilessly handbagged by M. Thatcher.

and finally...

Boeing E-3 entered service in 1991, 47 years after the project started.

 

[DownwardDog]

Probably none but we'd still have harriers for the carrier, vtol trained pilots and a fixed wing FAA

The Sea Harriers were doomed as soon as RR fucked up the Pegasus 106 upgrade that reduced blade life by about 80%. It was also utterly irrelevant by the mid-noughties as it had no PGM capability. The 600m spunked on the AEW fiasco wouldn't have touched the sides when it came to correcting those two massive defects.

 

[BigTom]

It cost about 600m quid; I doubt the NHS can build a bus stop for that sort of money.

Oddly, that's roughly about what it cost to build the QE Hospital in Birmingham.. £627m, although cos of PFI it'll actually cost a couple of billion over the next 30 years or something QE was opened in 2011 I think, recently anyway and is a big hospital - teaching hospital as well. iirc there are about a dozen bus stops out the front [/derail]

 

[A380]

The Sea Harriers were doomed as soon as RR fucked up the Pegasus 106 upgrade that reduced blade life by about 80%. It was also utterly irrelevant by the mid-noughties as it had no PGM capability. The 600m spunked on the AEW fiasco wouldn't have touched the sides when it came to correcting those two massive defects.

I had an old boss who flew on Shackletons up to 1990!

I'm sure most people who look on here know, but it was basically a Lancaster (well a Lincoln); in service till 91! And some people say we didn't have a coherent defence policy...

 

[Idris2002]

If No.1 Fighter Squadron had stayed in business...

They might be back in business some day, if this story from last year is any indication. The Irish bourgeoisie like nothing better than trying to imitate the "cool kids" in London and Washington.

"The Irish Government has often used the excuse that since we are such a small country we can’t afford to spend money equipping our air corps with jets. Yet figures show that other countries with similar or smaller GPD per head can afford them."

How much to protect skies above Ireland?

Any jets they do purchase (at what cost to social housing, health care, etc.?) will be bargain basement stuff though, so an Irish F1-11 will remain in the "planes that never will be" file.

 

[DownwardDog]

They might be back in business some day, if this story from last year is any indication. The Irish bourgeoisie like nothing better than trying to imitate the "cool kids" in London and Washington.

"The Irish Government has often used the excuse that since we are such a small country we can’t afford to spend money equipping our air corps with jets. Yet figures show that other countries with similar or smaller GPD per head can afford them."

How much to protect skies above Ireland?

Any jets they do purchase (at what cost to social housing, health care, etc.?) will be bargain basement stuff though, so an Irish F1-11 will remain in the "planes that never will be" file.

This would explain the otherwise mystifying purchase of 7 x PC-9M . Why buy an advanced turboprop trainer if you've got no fast jets for which to train crew?

There will be plenty of Dutch and Belgian F-16s looking for a new owner in the next few years...

 

[ffsear]

The Russian Luner lander. Obviously never used!

 

[Idris2002]

This would explain the otherwise mystifying purchase of 7 x PC-9M . Why buy an advanced turboprop trainer if you've got no fast jets for which to train crew?

There will be plenty of Dutch and Belgian F-16s looking for a new owner in the next few years...

We can tug our forelocks to them as they zip past.

 

[Pickman's model]

The Russian Luner lander. Obviously never used!

yeh so few lunes to land

 

[pogofish]

I had an old boss who flew on Shackletons up to 1990!

I'm sure most people who look on here know, but it was basically a Lancaster (well a Lincoln); in service till 91! And some people say we didn't have a coherent defence policy...

Another childhood memory was the Rosehearty Bombing Range - a small bombing/target range in the sea right by the town of the same name that served RAF Lossiemouth. Most of the time it was Buccaneers, Sea Harriers and other jets but on very rare occasions you would get treated to the sight of a Shackleton, right down low above the waves, trying to hit the target - usually in vain!

 

[HAL9000]

The Russian Luner lander. Obviously never used!

The soviet kit looks too heavy to fly. American lunar lander struggled to get the weight down so it could be lunched into space

American Lunar Lander

• Seats were taken out, just some cables to hold the astronauts in place.
• Windows were taken out, to start with it had big windows like a helicopter. By the end of the design process, 2 small triangular windows for astronauts to look out of.
  
• Aluminum structure was chemically milled to reduce its thickness and save weight.

The crew compartment was cylindrical in section in a welded and riveted construction, 92 inches in diameter and 42 inches deep, giving a habitable volume of 160 cubic feet, just sufficient for the two crewmembers to stand side by side. Due to the weight saving programs the compartment skin was reduced to a thickness of 0.012 inches, the equivalent of approximately three layers of kitchen foil.

Apollo LM crew cabin: pressure vessel skin - collectSPACE: Messages

• Multiple layers of materials were used to make a thermal blanket around the descent stage, the outer layer being metalized Mylar which looked like gold foil. This was to stop the tanks in the descent stage over heating and bursting. Looked cheap and rubbish, but it worked.

Why does the ascent stage of Apollo 11's lunar module look like it's made of paper?