Air superiority

[midnight rambler]

True assymetrical 3D thrust vector control, not technology from the mid-'80s and never improved upon or developed any further (that lameass tandem operating 2D TVC as found on the cRaptor and F-35) -

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/8/2/0/2416028.jpg

[VX1]

This is air superiority in my neighborhood.

6368

[midnight rambler]

Very nice.

So that's the completed project?

[VX1]

Very nice.

So that's the completed project?

Thanks... yep, 30 hours into phase 1 flight testing. Having just a little bit of fun.

[Libertarian_Guard]

Father of Naval Aviation


Glenn H. Curtiss, a young entrepreneur from Hammondsport, N.Y., was someone who craved speed. Racing bicycles in the local area led to a passion to go faster and, eventually, he produced lightweight, powerful engines that garnered the attention of "Captain" Thomas Baldwin. Baldwin, a former trapeze artist turned aviator, created the "California Arrow" – a dirigible that became the first aircraft to complete a circuitous flight in 1904. Between 1908 and 1910, Curtiss helped build a number of aircraft and set several early aviation records, including the first long-distance public flight from Albany to Governors Island in New York using the Curtiss "Hudson Flyer" May 29, 1910 - distance of 134 miles.

As the Navy’s interest in aviation heated up in the fall of 1910, Capt. Washington Irving Chambers, Officer in Charge of Aviation Matters for the Navy, arranged for a demonstration of flying an aircraft from the deck of a ship. November 14, 1910, Curtiss’ demonstration pilot, Eugene Ely flew the "Hudson Flyer" from a temporarily erected flight deck on the fo’c’sle of USS Birmingham while at anchor in Chesapeake Bay. Just two months later, Ely demonstrated the ability to land on a ship as well, this time on a temporary deck erected on the fantail of Armored Cruiser USS Pennsylvania in San Francisco Bay.

At nearly the same time these experiments were taking place and hoping to secure an order, Curtiss offered to train Army and Navy Officers for free. The Army and Navy both took up the offer and detailed officers to join Curtiss at his newly-obtained winter flying school on North Island in San Diego Bay. Lt. Theodore Ellyson would arrive just after New Years 1911.

An event pivotal to Naval Aviation, February 17, 1911, Curtiss flew his "hydroaeroplane" in San Diego Bay, landing next to USS Pennsylvania. The ship’s crew hoisted the aircraft aboard, lowered it back to the water, meeting the requirements set by the Secretary of the Navy, convincing him to appropriate money for aviation. May 8, 1911, Chambers placed the requisitions for the Navy’s first aircraft – the A-1 Triad – delivered to Hammondsport July, 1, 1911. This day would later be adopted as the official birth of Naval Aviation.

http://www.glennhcurtissmuseum.org/museum/father_of_naval_aviation.html

[midnight rambler]

Speaking of seaplanes, check out this ultra badass recording setting seaplane from the 1930s, all that brass on it are oil cooling radiators -

http://www.alasindomable.com.ar/macchimc722.jpg


In 1933 and 1934, it set a world record speed for internal combustion powered seaplanes which still stands to this day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_M.C.72

[VX1]

It took some balls taking something I built in the backyard up for the first time, then perhaps even more during the first stall tests, but it's nothing compared to the pioneers of aviation. Like that Macchi... I can't imagine how long the takeoff run was with those wings, but the main danger would be that those floats probably have a maximum hull speed on the water of 65-70kts, and the plane's stall speed couldn't have been any lower than that, considering the top speed, so the pilot would have to land on the water above the stall speed, but below the hull speed, which had to have been a miniscule window, or bad things would happen on either side. Considering gusts and inaccuracy of the airspeed indicator, well, those pilots had big balls.

[midnight rambler]

It took some balls taking something I built in the backyard up for the first time, then perhaps even more during the first stall tests, but it's nothing compared to the pioneers of aviation. Like that Macchi... I can't imagine how long the takeoff run was with those wings, but the main danger would be that those floats probably have a maximum hull speed on the water of 65-70kts, and the plane's stall speed couldn't have been any lower than that, considering the top speed, so the pilot would have to land on the water above the stall speed, but below the hull speed, which had to have been a miniscule window, or bad things would happen on either side. Considering gusts and inaccuracy of the airspeed indicator, well, those pilots had big balls.

If you read that wiki article then you noted the Macchi killed two pilots. Also, after setting the second record at 440 MPH* they opted not to make any more attempts, which I think speaks for itself.

*440 MPH is pretty damn good for the mid-'30s, especially in a seaplane

[midnight rambler]

This is air superiority in my neighborhood.

6368

I thought you were going with another color scheme.

[VX1]

I thought you were going with another color scheme.

Oh, I considered many things, and then started learning towards the Navy Corsair F4U scheme, which eventually led me to the Blue Angels, since it had never been done before. Liked the idea of the navy theme with a seaplane (NAVY painted under the wings). Here's how the interior turned out... lot of technology built into it:
6372

[midnight rambler]

That is way cool. Well done. I'm sure that plane is going to give you tons of enjoyment.

[7th trump]

6373
True assymetrical 3D thrust vector control, not technology from the mid-'80s and never improved upon or developed any further (that lameass tandem operating 2D TVC as found on the cRaptor and F-35) -

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/8/2/0/2416028.jpg

[7th trump]

The SU doesn't have air superiority at all.
To have air superiority you must own the sky and the SU-35 doesn't own the sky.
It lacks essential electronics to protect itself....being able to turn on a dime doesnt by any means indicate it has air superiority...it just means it can turn sharply using its vector thrusting.
The US can turn sharply as well using its vector technology....but the US has the upper edge on electronics and missile warfare....the SU-35 is a sitting duck with a tutu around its waist.

[midnight rambler]

This thread is now complete since Odie posted more ignorant nonsense.

Su-27 crash lands wheels up, is flown the following day -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPnaBN95Npw

Crazy Ivan, in a Su-35 -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55c4oWQp3uQ

[7th trump]

This thread is now complete since Odie posted more ignorant nonsense.

Su-27 crash lands wheels up, is flown the following day -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPnaBN95Npw

Crazy Ivan, in a Su-35 -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55c4oWQp3uQ

Crash landing wheels up and being able to fly the next day is NOT air superiority.


The title is misleading!

Air superiority is being able to maintain dominate control of the sky. Being able to turn on a dime is NOT any demonstration of air superiority.
Its a demonstration of agility.....however the commy sympathizers on this board cry.......its not air superiority.


The US holds air superiority with its electronics and missile technology coupled with satelite communication network (commie russia doesnt have this capability)....always has just as it holds naval carrier power.....no other country in the world can fly off ships like we do. Some tried and failed.......just like they failed in their shuttle program.
Russia wants this capability with transmitter towers built on US soil to complete their own GPS system....we're far ahead of them...and they just figured out the internet was built by the US millitary...we were inside russia decades ago and they didnt have any clue.
An airport just recently found out what an old obsolete 1960's spy plane can do to its electronics systems....completely shut them down!
Russia doesnt have the technology...they are still stuck in the 50's trying to be the dominate dogfighting when dogfighting is no longer.
Dogfighting is obsolete when the last of the subsonic prop aircraft were replaced with supersonic aircraft

Today its-
1. see without being seen.
2. push button.
3. watch target get destroyed.
4. move to next target.
Just what do you think we have today in electronics?

[iOWNme]

True assymetrical 3D thrust vector control, not technology from the mid-'80s and never improved upon or developed any further (that lameass tandem operating 2D TVC as found on the cRaptor and F-35) -

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/8/2/0/2416028.jpg


Can you please explain to us layman's what exactly this plane is doing, and how it does it?

[midnight rambler]

Can you please explain to us layman's what exactly this plane is doing, and how it does it?

In the photo in the OP this jet is climbing out directly after take-off, that's condensation forming at the leading edge of the wing and leading edge root extension (LERX) caused by the pilot 'pulling hard' (very steep ascend angle). The glow in the engine nozzles is from the afterburners.

3D thrust vectoring demonstrator -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NArrMPFNdUw

[7th trump]

In the photo in the OP this jet is climbing out directly after take-off, that's condensation forming at the leading edge of the wing and leading edge root extension (LERX) caused by the pilot 'pulling hard' (very steep ascend angle). The glow in the engine nozzles is from the afterburners.

3D thrust vectoring demonstrator -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NArrMPFNdUw

And by no means does this 3d vectoring of exhaust give the aircraft "superiority" over any other combat aircraft armed with the latest missiles.
Any vectoring 2d or 3d doesn't scare a supersonic agile missile locked onto its target.
If anything this vectoring will be a problem as it can only be effective at low speeds.
That aircraft isn't made to use its vectoring to out maneuver a missile that can turn on a dime.
You will never see any vectoring at high speeds.
If the pilots are using vectoring its to late......the craft is going to slow for the missile.
Even if the missile over shot...they turn around and accelerate fast than any aircraft ever thought.
A missile is cheaper than that piece of Russian crap.....besides have you ever heard of any pilot dogfighting a missile?
I bet there's a big eject button in the cockpit next to the vectoring controls.
Wonder if the eject button says "eject when pants fill with pilot shit"?


Ohhh yeah.......ever wonder why you see a lot of these russian aircraft in crash pictures?
I see more crash photos than anything else :(??