Airplane appreciation thread

File: ss+(2017-02-15+at+02.54.57).jpg (117KB, 1276x717px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1276x717px

>>33367240
Posting best Jet

File: 1455967596049.jpg (1MB, 3000x2225px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2225px

>>33367240

File: 1467581578427.jpg (100KB, 1000x702px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1000x702px

>>33367326

File: 1394142580999.jpg (48KB, 640x449px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 640x449px

>>33367331

File: 1417489570193.jpg (54KB, 728x490px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 728x490px

>>33367335

File: 1410838204074.jpg (28KB, 800x535px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 800x535px

>>33367338

File: 1438407981976.jpg (144KB, 795x415px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 795x415px

>>33367341

File: 1426747704060.jpg (143KB, 1280x844px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1280x844px

>>33367389

File: 1381694711915.jpg (222KB, 1746x1129px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1746x1129px

>>33367395

>>33367341

Fan art of a stealth Tomcat?

File: XB-38.jpg (223KB, 1800x1209px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1800x1209px

>>33367399
I appreciate all these aircraft for being unique concepts, experiments, etc.

>>33367404
Imagine if the F-14 and F-22 had a baby...

File: 1402007579589.jpg (364KB, 1800x1214px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 1800x1214px

Thank you, based P-12

File: XB-39.jpg (38KB, 500x394px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x394px

>>33367407
Damn it anon I was going to post that. How about a W24 powered B-29? Not quite as sexy I know.

File: 1402015448057.jpg (49KB, 997x797px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 997x797px

>>33367418
Fuck yeah!

File: 9b80432738b338699aaf1c36af0cc54b.jpg (133KB, 791x1024px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 791x1024px

>>33367418

the poor v-3420 never got to shine

>>33367404
concept art for the F-21 super tomcat
http://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-history-f14x.htm

File: 1483580942067.jpg (492KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1920x1200px

Double Ugly

File: NATF 23.jpg (413KB, 3000x620px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 3000x620px

>>33367404
Concept art for the NATF program. That was supposed to be a navalized F-22. Pic related was Northrop's contender.

>>33368010

why does that airplane look like it is moaning in lust/pain while a clear dildo is being shoved up its exhaust pipe?

File: 20170316214622_1.jpg (152KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1920x1080px

I love the Viggen!

File: mcd392.jpg (196KB, 1422x817px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1422x817px

>>33368027

because its an f-86 taken as far as the design will go

File: DB 609.jpg (35KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 800x600px

Post more german engineering

File: NAA Mdel 116 Specs 011.jpg (164KB, 1440x1037px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1440x1037px

>>33368060
>db making a plane

literally a meme

File: Single Seat A-6 Mockup.jpg (274KB, 1600x1459px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 1600x1459px

>>33368027
>Navy wants new subsonic tactical strike aircraft with TF30 turbofan
>NAA takes FJ-4
>Revamps whole fuselage to fit TF30
>Puts attack radar under intake so it can see down
>Strengthens the wing

Everything proposed for that competition was ridiculous.

File: download (2).jpg (87KB, 1024x902px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1024x902px

Stand by for dump

File: BMW Schnellbomber II.jpg (30KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x300px

>>33368079
How about BMW?

File: 1488715069484.jpg (213KB, 960x725px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 960x725px

>>33368153

File: 1487836080715.jpg (894KB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

894KB, 2100x1500px

>>33368160

File: 0389-03-2-7.jpg (253KB, 1443x733px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1443x733px

>>33368160
VIGGEN POSTED

File: shull_sled_image.jpg__1072x720_q85_crop.jpg (103KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 800x533px

>>33368165

File: 1488715193625m.jpg (47KB, 1024x704px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1024x704px

>>33368170

Have another

File: large_000000 (12).jpg (60KB, 800x625px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 800x625px

>>33368183

File: Rockwell NAA NR-349 IMI 02.jpg (81KB, 1600x1008px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1600x1008px

>>33368089
>Everything proposed for that competition was ridiculous.

it has nothing on the f-111 program

>>33368158

also pure meme

File: 1489908478154.jpg (871KB, 2820x1890px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 2820x1890px

>>33368194

File: 800px-Saab_AJS-37_Viggen_37098_52_(SE-DXN)_(9256079273).jpg (71KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x533px

>>33368173
*achieves radar lock*

File: 100614-F-1234S-018.jpg (299KB, 1800x1181px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1800x1181px

>>33368239

File: 943731158c28c45020f4542f57ec5667.jpg (674KB, 1200x1800px) Image search: [Google]

674KB, 1200x1800px

>>33368257
Not with that model tho

File: BoeingModel818TFX-2.jpg (93KB, 900x538px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 900x538px

>>33368237
>it has nothing on the f-111 program
When did I ever say that?

File: 1489308413172.jpg (3MB, 2736x1798px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2736x1798px

>>33368265

File: 1486154579624.jpg (1MB, 2850x1900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2850x1900px

>>33368271

File: corsair.jpg (45KB, 736x537px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 736x537px

>not corsairposting

File: 20170202015021_1.jpg (193KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1920x1080px

>>33368265
My last external Vigg screenshot.

I only have the screens from DCS

File: xRepublic-Vought TFX Model-3.jpg (103KB, 1200x836px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1200x836px

>>33368266

just wanted to post crazy f-111 designs

File: Republic-Fokker-D-24-Alliance.jpg (262KB, 1191x465px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1191x465px

>>33368368
Republic also planned for a STOVL version of that thing.

File: p47h-3.jpg (65KB, 1050x524px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1050x524px

nyello

>>33367240
>don't talk to me or my son ever again

>>33368385
The magnificent hemi powered P-47

File: Ju EF112.jpg (62KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x480px

*blocks your path*

>>33368385
Oy vey

File: 1488879580621.jpg (929KB, 1525x1141px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 1525x1141px

This thread needs more F4

File: mcdonnell_f-4fvs-08-680x576.jpg (32KB, 680x576px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 680x576px

>>33369180
Here ya go

File: HE-100 V1.jpg (63KB, 779x399px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 779x399px

>Be Heinkel
>Design a piston engined fighter that's better than the Bf-109 and the Fw-190 in every respect
>better range and speed despite using the same engine
>capable of 500+mph if using a 2000hp engine
>the retards in charge tell you to stop
>"your job is to make bombers, not fighters. Messerschmitt makes the fighters."
>"J-jawol..."
>Sob quietly as you make bombers for the rest of the war and the morons waste money on space magic jet prototypes that can never be produced in meaningful numbers
>meanwhile Bf-109s and Fw-190s are getting raped by thousands of advanced allied piston engine fighters

>>33369367
the water cooling system was shit, a shrapnel and you are rtb asp becuase that engine is going to melt otherwise

File: 1382091502_76xnz7jty3.jpg (163KB, 1024x719px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1024x719px

>>33369367

It was really because 601 production was maxed out and it needed to use a different engine as a consequence.

The evaporation cooling system didnt help matters much.

File: Heinkel - hanger.jpg (403KB, 1193x756px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1193x756px

>>33369387
>shrapnel and you are rtb asp becuase that engine is going to melt otherwise

Actually the steam was only at a bit more than atmospheric pressure, which means that punctures would leak slowly. There was also a system of cutoff valves so you could take a bit of combat damage.

The problem with being just a bit higher than atmospheric pressure is as altitude increases cooling efficiency drops. And the 100 had issues with cooling at altitude. There were also a bunch of pumps needed to make the system work, and this added complexity not only increased costs but also maintenance requirements, pilot workload and added many more points of failure.

File: 100 field shoot 1.jpg (503KB, 928x675px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 928x675px

>>33369432

File: westland-wyvern-s-4.jpg (41KB, 600x386px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x386px

>turboprops are getting more popular for CAS operations
bring back the wyvern

>>33369620
why was it shitcanned?

File: P61.black.widow.arp.750pix.jpg (2MB, 2820x1900px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2820x1900px

haha time for planefu

File: tumblr_o2u3ycbtri1rqpszmo1_1280.jpg (98KB, 1280x1028px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x1028px

based deathtube

>>33369683
Because whats the point of having turboprops for your aircraft carriers in the 1950s when you could have jets instead

>>33369738
all right. so it flew ok?

>>33369686
its nice, i will grant you that

File: wyvernmarkings.jpg (96KB, 768x1107px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 768x1107px

>>33369756
for a turboprop yeah

File: Wyvern.jpg (546KB, 1200x820px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 1200x820px

>>33369756
Not really. They had a habit of engine flameouts when being launched by catapult and 39 of the 127 built were lost in accidents.

The Corsair was faster and carried a similar payload (albeit it couldn't carry a torpedo), and the Skyraider had double the payload capacity at the cost of a lower top speed.

It was the best prop attacker the Royal Navy ever had though, and a beautiful plane.

File: 1375312540215.jpg (223KB, 980x1470px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 980x1470px

Still one of my favorite images I ever got from this board, and I'm addicted to /k/ memes.

File: mosquito.jpg (169KB, 1180x664px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1180x664px

Mosquito. Made of wood. Started life as a fast unarmed bomber, then gained machine guns and cannon in nose, operated variously as night fighter, pathfinder bomber, precision low-level bomber, high altitude ariel reconnisance and there wass even a variant with a fast load 6-pounder cannon to fuck up U-boats.

Crew of 2, 2 Merlins, faster than many single-engined fighters, bomb load nearly as much as the original spec of the Flying Fortress.

Now that's versatility.

Sadly, none left flying.

>>33369825
The aesthetic of 1950s naval aviation is incredible

File: XF4D-1Skyray124587.jpg (317KB, 1024x703px) Image search: [Google]

317KB, 1024x703px

>>33369853
>1950s naval aviation

File: TFX fighter jet.jpg (63KB, 645x605px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 645x605px

>>33367240
What do you guys think of the planned Turkish-British fighter jet, the TF-X?

Not much is known about it but it seems like it will be a stealth air-superiority fighter with two engines.

File: 25D6851400000578-2960251-image-a-119_1424367466030.jpg (237KB, 962x974px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 962x974px

>>33369881
1950s aviation in general

>>33369904
this
english planes are pretty in a odd way. the same way as your couson, in fact.

>>33369887
Well given the direction Turkey's heading, they'll probably be on their own soon. Turkey lacks the domestic industry to really develop a fifth-generation fighter, although this is probably planned to help them build an industry that could do so.

But with them going out of their way to sabotage relations with both the West and Russia, they're going to have a hard time finding a partner with the expertise they need to get a workable fighter.

>>33369840
the wooden wonder was just that. you like the sea hornet?

File: hnnng.jpg (57KB, 562x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 562x480px

>>33369904
Unfortunately this is my last aviation related photo

Not British or 1950s but I think it's cool nontheless

File: mikoyan-gurevich_mig-25rb_russia_-_air_force_an2195954.jpg (247KB, 1200x656px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1200x656px

a plane so ugly it's beautiful

>>33369983
dat bucc

HNNNG

>>33370007
>sergi lets go mach 3
>no sergi plane will explode
>lets do it anyway

File: English Electric Lightning.jpg (21KB, 428x338px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 428x338px

>>33369904
English Electric Lightening - one of my favourites. Designed simply to get to altitude fast and scare the shit out of marauding Russian Bears. Used fuel like it was going out of fashion, but could stand on its tail and go ballistic.

>>33369927
>you like the sea hornet?
Didn't know much about them, desu. From a quick look it looks like a Mossie with folding wings - I'll do some more reading.

Mossie was also called the "Flying Matchbox", as back then matchboxes were sometimes made of thin wood.

>>33370142
>desu
I'm bloody sure I didn't type that - I never use "desu"

>>33370150
what did you try to say senpai?

>>33370150
f
a
m turns into senpai, so you must have said somthing else

>>33370150
t b h turns into desu

>>33370264
Ah, thanks. I did use that, to be honest

test desu

I didn't think 4chan still used word filters since roody-poos stopped on /b/. Interesting it should be faggoty weeaboo

>>33370178
>ifunny

File: 080530-F-6184M-027.jpg (969KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

969KB, 1800x1200px

This thread is severely lacking in F-16.

File: 2f8851316290beafd07107186e4b3c44.jpg (22KB, 500x369px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x369px

fav plane

File: Super_Guppy_N941_NASA_landing_(crop).jpg (556KB, 2700x1620px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 2700x1620px

N00bs don't know turboprops consume less fuel when speed doesn't matter.

>>33370646
lovely plane. you know it could land its self?

File: 010xf90.jpg (222KB, 1280x513px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 1280x513px

>>33369904

>>33370657
I didn't, but now that I do I'm even more sad the Victor went outta service, it's a perfectly serviceable strategic bomber...

>>33370774
why do tyhe british army not use any heavy bombers anymore?

File: BMW Strahljäger III.jpg (32KB, 580x435px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 580x435px

BMW makes the best planes

File: f18fgunf22020lz.jpg (38KB, 704x526px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 704x526px

I'm just randomly dumping anyone got specific plane requests?

>>33370807
Strategic bombing is a meme.

Didn't see the point in paying for planes we'd never use.

File: f37gif.gif (379KB, 600x328px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 600x328px

one of the coolest plane designs ever.

>>33370807
Well, in the evolving battlefield of today... yaddayaddayadda... we figured that the Panavia Tornado would be good enough for the precision bombing you usually see now a-days, instead of carpetbombing the ever living shit outta sovvies, we needed to drop laser guided bombs on some hajis.

File: Dream-Chaser.jpg (57KB, 1236x824px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1236x824px

I know capsules are safer because they can abort during launch, and with orion, dragon and boeing all in the mix this thing prob wont get funding but I hope it does because it is sexy as fuck

File: iranf313.jpg (126KB, 780x520px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 780x520px

irans 5th gen fighter

>>33371067
Jesus look at that rump

File: BoeingX32JointStrikeFighter2.jpg (44KB, 602x239px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 602x239px

was this and the f-35 really the best muricas aerospace industry could come up with? or is just the idea of a multi role fighter (especially with vtol) fundamentally flawed ?

There's a starfighter making low passes over the airport next to my apaetment. Trying to get a good pic.

File: B-1B_over_the_pacific_ocean.jpg (457KB, 2000x1328px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 2000x1328px

>>33371179
why do ALL other nations use ramps on there carrier except America?
pic not related

File: Boeing X-32 7.jpg (332KB, 950x1006px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 950x1006px

>>33371132

the final design was better

File: 1490020200754a.jpg (321KB, 1323x600px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1323x600px

>>33368060
>>33368079

>>33371346
was it just on paper tho? did they ever make a working prototype?

File: Dsc_0035.jpg (129KB, 1334x875px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1334x875px

>>33371420

they built a mockup and thats it

it would have been built if boeing won the competition

File: cdp_boe_misc_018.jpg (3MB, 3000x2400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2400px

>>33371622

hehehehehe

File: 1469914505445.jpg (58KB, 600x372px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 600x372px

>>33371200
>>33371214

Fucking ukrop. They just love destroying the most aerodynamically sex aircraft ever made.

File: 1489263034907.jpg (74KB, 1024x605px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1024x605px

Still think it would have performed better than the F22

>>33371420
Boeing made a mockup. When the maneuverability requirements were changed late in the program, Boeing realized that the X-32 wouldn't be able to meet it, but it was too late to change the design. So they hastily made a bunch of changes, adding a tail and dropping the retarded single-piece composite wing of the X-32 and tried to convince the DoD that their entirely new plane was worth winning the JSF contract after the shitshow that was the X-32.

>>33372300

Do you think you know more than the heads of the USAF?

>>33367977
Sounds like bullshit. Swing wings are outdated in modern aircraft because we use specialised flaps to change the properties of wings in order to optimise their performance at different air speeds.

File: BoeingX32JointStrikeFighter1.jpg (52KB, 800x416px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 800x416px

it just looks to fat to fly
I think a plane that's meant to do all things kinda ends up just being bad at all things

>>33372491
This was the late 80's / early 90's when the Tomcat and F-111 were still in service. Flaperons and slats can only get you so far with a jet that's already as heavy as the F-14D without any CATOBAR strengthening.

Plenty more NATF info here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2730.0.html

>>33371411
I see you

File: 1479819093363.jpg (314KB, 1400x1004px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1400x1004px

Mods are asleep. Post Drakens!

File: 1370470633950.jpg (139KB, 1536x1024px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1536x1024px

>>33372999

File: 187e090511f4d1e68a22b0ae7cb265a5.jpg (47KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1024x768px

There is a criminal lack of Jaaaaaaaaag in this thread.

File: RAF_Sepecat_Jaguar_T2A_Lofting-1.jpg (982KB, 1280x897px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 1280x897px

>>33373125

>>33367389
What the hell is that?

>>33370812
Why are modern fighters so fucking huge

>>33371047
>>33371033
fake and gay
http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/a37.asp

File: afx_lockheed_boeing_gd_01.jpg (34KB, 550x312px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 550x312px

>>33372491
>Swing wings are outdated in modern aircraft because we use specialised flaps to change the properties of wings in order to optimise their performance at different air speeds.
Anon, flaps have been a thing for about 100 years now. The truth is, no special airfoils are going to undo the effects of overall layout.

Subsonic cruise efficiency is always going to be a function of aspect ratio, so a high aspect ratio is almost guaranteed to be more efficient than a low aspect ratio one (unless you manage to spectacularly fuck up the high aspect ratio wing). And maximum lift coefficients decrease with sweep, so an unswept wing is going to have much better low-speed performance. Plus, the behavior of the low-aspect deltas that are so popular today tends to fuck with traditional ideas of flaps - the lift curve slope is much lower, and vortex lift becomes a major component of the low-speed lift.

The real reason that swing wings haven't been used for a while is that no requirements have called for it. The obsession with swing wings (and, earlier, VTOL) was due to the idea that airstrikes would knock out airfields by damaging runways. The idea was a STOL aircraft would require near total destruction of the airfield before the runways were unusable. However, in practice, runways turned out to be far easier to repair than expected, so the STOL focus was dropped (most notably from the ATF).

Aboard carriers, swing-wings were only really needed for huge fleet defense interceptors like the F-14. These not only dwarfed other aircraft on the ship, but they needed an efficient loiter that a conventional fighter wing could not give them. With NATF requirements similar to the F-14, it makes perfect sense to have swing wings. Hell, the F/A-XX might even be swing wing if the requirements are right.

>>33371346
>better
>>33371622
>>33371663
>there are actually people that would like this over F-35

good god

>>33368010
>right in the peepeepoopoo

>>33368257
*accepts US missile anyway because diversity is good*

>>33372491
> Swing wings are outdated in modern aircraft because we use specialised flaps to change the properties of wings in order to optimise their performance at different air speeds.
Wrong. Flaps can offer lift at low-speed, but without the span of an unswept wing, that lift comes at the cost of boatloads of induced drag. Flaps will never give a short, stubby wing the L/D and range that an unswept wing will.

>>33376782
>Muh aspect ratio
It's really span. Chord length has no direct impact on induced drag. The only reason people fuss over aspect ratio is because aerodynamicists are (rightfully) obsessed with non-dimensionalizing everything so that they can apply scaling laws more easily for their wind tunnel models.
>Plus, the behavior of the low-aspect deltas that are so popular today tends to fuck with traditional ideas of flaps
To an extent, yes...
> - the lift curve slope is much lower
That's not it at all. In fact, that's just even MORE reason to favor flaps - so you can get a higher lift coefficient WITHOUT a ridiculous, tail-striking, visibility-obscuring high AOA. The reason why low-aspect deltas (especially of the tailless variety) don't work well with conventional flaps is the enormous pitching moments they produce on a long-chord wing. In the case of tailless deltas it's simply not an option at all, since trailing edge elevons are the most effective means of pitch control.


>STOL
Swing wings don't actually offer that great of STOL performance either. What they gain in maximum lift, they lose in both weight and acceleration penalty resulting from the added structural mass.

>>33367341
this had the possibility to be more of a

>Muh Dick: The Plane

than the F-111

why do swing wings get my dick so hard lads

>>33377749
>Swing wings don't actually offer that great of STOL performance either. What they gain in maximum lift, they lose in both weight and acceleration penalty resulting from the added structural mass.
Not true STOL like the ATF originally called for (something like 500m takeoff/landing IIRC) but STOL from the perspective of the generation of fighters that came before swing wings really started to be come a thing.

As far as the weight penalty, it's really not as bad as people think. It's only about a 4% weight penalty - enough to make it not worth it for most planes, but it's still viable if you've got competing requirements for high and low speeds.

>>33371263
America not poorfag

>>33372409
Like most folks aren't.

>>33367240
No, they made all my years of swordsmanship go to ruin. No matter how high I jump or how fast I swing, my blade can't hurt these horrid weapons man should never wield.

And swords are the only true weapon man has ever made.

>>33381126
What if planes didn't have guns?

>>33370142
senpai

>>33370637
did the guy smoking the cig get in trouble