+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Hi, I have seen your F-22B where can I find it?
+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted July 23, 2013 Author Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) Man you know you should start to release your stuff... like the He-277, whata beauty more pics of the F-22B? Edited July 23, 2013 by 76.IAP-Blackbird
+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted July 23, 2013 Author Posted July 23, 2013 Looks cool! Needs a double vertail! like the F-23! but great Bird! Thanks man!
+Julhelm Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Believe it or not, that single tail was part of General Dynamics offical submission to the ATF program. So what you have there is 100% real design.
+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted July 23, 2013 Author Posted July 23, 2013 Uh ok, looks realy interesting I like your shadow cat and this design! Thanks for the hard work! But the vertail kills the RCS of this plane
Spinners Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Now do it drinking a glass of water You owe me a new keyboard...
+Julhelm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Uh ok, looks realy interesting I like your shadow cat and this design! Thanks for the hard work! But the vertail kills the RCS of this plane Yeah it does, which is one of the reasons GD lost.
Svetlin Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Apparently wind-tunnel tests have been made with scale models with different vertical tail confugurations. Some pictures posted here: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?166065-YF-23-Black-Widow-II-pictures/page8
+Julhelm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Yes, but none of those would work because of weight and structural reasons which is why GD had to compromise with the vertical tail. If the concept had won, the single tail is what would have been flown. It's almost as if you people think I don't research my models or something.
Gunrunner Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 I think another point that made it lose it was that the distributed radar scheme (its nose section was too small for a radar of the power/range chosen, so the LERX were supposed to house secondary antennas to compensate, the wing pods apparently were supposed to house rearward facing antenna as well) was deemed a technological uncertainty and when added to compromised RCS except in select quadrants, it sealed the fate of GD's proposal.
Svetlin Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Hi Julhelm, I am sorry, there must be a misunderstanding. I am not putting to question how and why you choose which aircraft or which version (final or experimental) you would model - that is entirely up to you of course.
+Julhelm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) I think another point that made it lose it was that the distributed radar scheme (its nose section was too small for a radar of the power/range chosen, so the LERX were supposed to house secondary antennas to compensate, the wing pods apparently were supposed to house rearward facing antenna as well) was deemed a technological uncertainty and when added to compromised RCS except in select quadrants, it sealed the fate of GD's proposal. The other proposals from Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing all used 3 radar arrays with an IRST. GD's had 2 arrays in the LERX and an IRST in the nose. Amazingly GD scored 3rd place ahead of Boeing which had a much better design. Also Lockheed won with a design that was literally unflyable. Edited July 24, 2013 by Julhelm
+76.IAP-Blackbird Posted July 24, 2013 Author Posted July 24, 2013 Looks like there is alot of work for Julhelm on this site, but that desing looks great! Navalized F-22 Hot version
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now