Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Planes that never were

Wasn't there one that fired downwards

There were several IIRC - The XF-104, (Starfighter Prototype) for one:

5940b293b96a5f842bae8ed822410757.jpg


Which got changed to a conventional upward-firing seat pretty quick:


The Russians quite liked them - At least two aircraft used them, maybe more?

The Myasishchev M50 (Roughly equivalent to B-58 Hustler), although only a couple were ever built. IIRC only one actually flew?

ladder_02.jpg


And the Tu-22, which did go into major serial production:

hFL1Zo9.jpg


:eek:

Although later, the Russian K-36 ejection seat became the safest and most effective ejection system ever designed, with a 97% success rate. So much so that in 1996, the USAF came close to buying it for themselves!

The K-36 is also the only ejection seat so far designed from the outset to be safe for men and women to use.

We won't mention the K-37 though, a helicopter system that fires the pilot upwards through the (hopefully detached) rotor blades!

And of course:

129878.jpg


:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Last edited:
how hard would the decision to bang out have been?

Faced with the prospect of imminent death, not hard at all, I reckon.

The type of individual who would get in a stew over that sort of decision wouldn't have been flying a V-bomber in the first place. Military aviation is a hard game...
 
Plus, Norman Tebbitt (sp.) was a Vulcan pilot, so I reckon he'd find it pretty easy, to be fair...
 
Still better than the Vulcan, the four guys downstairs had no ejection seats but the two pilots did. The rockets of the pilots' seats fired down into the crew compartment; how hard would the decision to bang out have been?

Vulcans - rear crew disabling pilots ejector seats in flight - PPRuNe Forums

What yer man said - with the addition that if the downstairs crew haven't got bang seats then they aren't getting out, as the aircraft commander you have to decide whether your crew would be best served being strapped in a burning, disintegrating aircraft, or getting a blast in the face from Martin Baker's finest...
 
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...
In Ireland, first you get the jet interceptors, then you get the money, then you get the women.

First we get the jet interceptors… And then?
 
That's hilarious! Surely Ireland doesn't have any indigenous arms corporations to feed that sort of pork to? If it's not corruption and bribery, then what on earth would the point of it be? Any nation that actually has the capability to attack Ireland from the air could flatten the place in a day, even if they spent 10% of their GDP on defence.
 
This isn't a toy or something from a terrible plagiarised children's book by Sarah Ferguson. It's a model of the Hawker Siddeley P.139B. It was a proposal for a carrier-based (hence the small dimensions) AEW aircraft with two internal radomes (hence the dumpiness).

Hawker_Siddeley_P.139B_model.png
 
I LOVE those planes - I remember seeing, I think, the original Hee Bee Gee Bee in a magazine or a boys comic or something - I think that it's a pylon racing plane
 
a trip to the TSR2 hanger at the RAF Museum at Cosford (free, good cafe) is excellent for the 'what the fuck were they thinking?' moment. lots of pointy airframes that look like a 5yo designed them and a bunch of Dads in a shed built them...
 
There was also a fairly serious proposal to modify surplus but still airworthy B52s for cargo and passenger-use by Pan-Am back in the early 1970s and it got surprisingly far down the road - It was the 1973 oil crisis that finally killed it-off.

Any cost saving from the modified planes was going to be completely wiped-out by the cost of keeping them in fuel - And the limitation on passenger numbers (around 80?)/cargo load in the conversions meant they were never going to be able make it cost effective.

I was once stuck at Bremen airport for a few hours and had a ringside seat for the loading of several wings into the old Airbus, Stratofreighter-based Guppy. That was quite a bit of careful shoehorning with lots of guys clambering about/measuring before they shut the front and when it finally took-off I think it must have needed every inch of the runway! :eek:
 
Last edited:
It's a DFS.39 :)

Lippisch DFS.39

In 1936, the German designer A.Lippish creates a new type of tailless aircraft DFS.39 ( "Delta" 4c). This experimental aircraft was a nizkoplan a tractor propeller and fuselage, gradually passing into the vertical tail. To improve directional stability, which is particularly difficult to achieve in the scheme "tailless" with a tractor propeller, the aircraft wing ends are folded down. The tests were successful, and the aircraft was declared airworthy. Developing this type of "tailless" Lippish built tailless aircraft with vertical fins DFS.194 larger area (limb ends of the wing down is not provided).

The use of aerodynamic twist along the span of the wing, along with a small sweep angle allowed Lippishu improve the bearing properties of the wings it "tailless". However, a small sweep has resulted, in the opinion of assessors, to the deterioration of the damping characteristics in "beskhvostok" Lippisha. In addition, the effectiveness of enforcement and the longitudinal track control down because of the small shoulder their actions.

As shown by subsequent experience, the system of aerodynamic twist Lippishem proposed, it is not the best. When mounted on the wing tips of the inverted deviation profile differentiated elevons significantly affect the longitudinal balance of the aircraft.
 
Anyway, getting back to the ejector seat thing: Neil Armstrong ejects from a test run of the lunar lander apparatus;

 
Vickers Valiant Type C

Overview

Role
Heavy Bomber
Type of Propulsion
Propeller
Design & Manufacturing
Place of Origin
United Kingdom
Manufacturer(s)
Vickers
Designed by
Vickers
Designed
1942-1943ish
Bombs & Torpedoes
Max Bomb Load
10,000kg (22046.2lbs)
Bomb Loadouts
25x 400kg
Dimensions & Construction
Weight
Max Weight: 80,731kg
Length
29m
Wingspan
64m
Wing Area
270 m2
Powerplant & Parts
Powerplant
6x Unknown model Centaurus Radial. Between 12000 and 19320 horsepower.
Powerplant Subtype
Radial
Performance
Max Speed
615km/h (382mph) @ 7,620m (25,000ft)

iu
 
Back
Top Bottom