New Typhoon pics

Vulcan = double delta.

Viggen = double delta.

The perfect halfway between lift and manouverability for fast jets. The modern equivalent of Reginald Mitchell's elipse.

I guess as the threat environment has increased exponentially no-one is willing to build a big bomber. But what would a re-heating turbo-fanned Vulcan be capable of?

thanks waynos!
knew it was etheir you or sminkey that told us that nice little fact.

The biggest thing that surprises me about a vulcan beating f15's, or infact any modern interceptor would be the ability for a modern fighter to launch stand-off, medium range missles. Doesnt mater what alltitude, im sure even an old AIM7 Sparrow could reach it if launched from the f15's max alltitude. Or at low alltitude, i was under the impression that "look down, shoot down" features where available in the F15, and were quiet effective at filtering ground "noise" (for lack of a better word) and tracking targets at low level. After all, they were designed to take out cruise missles.
Maybe ive been missled.
Then again, we dont know what "rules of engagement" either aircraft had to adhere to...

Originally posted by BrAin0fJ
Then again, we dont know what "rules of engagement" either aircraft had to adhere to...

- As I understand it the 'mission' was for the 2x F15's to try to gun down the Vulcan as if they had expended their missiles. They couldn't get anywhere near on it never mind stay on it at the height and speed he was working, apparantly.

I wouldn't be too confident about a missile shot either. Vulcans carried great big generators which pumped out a hell of a lot of a lot of watts of solid jamming noise and spoofing.....not to mention the sheer amount of just damned clever boxes she carried.

(and, just to be pedantic, we had Sparrow too....not to mention the superior, later, Skyflash....so we could most likely have laughed that one off. )

Up to the start/mid 1980's the Vulcan could do it's job alright and no mistake.



[edit on 10-11-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Vulcan = double delta.

Viggen = double delta.

The perfect halfway between lift and manouverability for fast jets. The modern equivalent of Reginald Mitchell's elipse.

I guess as the threat environment has increased exponentially no-one is willing to build a big bomber. But what would a re-heating turbo-fanned Vulcan be capable of?

I hate to be pedantic but neither thwe Vulcan nor the Viggen are double deltas. The Draken, F-16XL and BAe EAP are examples of double delta's. The Vulcan was a tailless delta, a la Mirage and Concorde while the Viggen was a delta canard.

Originally posted by waynos

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Vulcan = double delta.

Viggen = double delta.

The perfect halfway between lift and manouverability for fast jets. The modern equivalent of Reginald Mitchell's elipse.

I guess as the threat environment has increased exponentially no-one is willing to build a big bomber. But what would a re-heating turbo-fanned Vulcan be capable of?

I hate to be pedantic but neither thwe Vulcan nor the Viggen are double deltas. The Draken, F-16XL and BAe EAP are examples of double delta's. The Vulcan was a tailless delta, a la Mirage and Concorde while the Viggen was a delta canard.

Actually Ive heard the concorde be referred to as a double delta before, due to the shape of its wings (they do have two distinct curvatures in them).

Going back to the typhoon, one of my compadres works at warton (if I goto the bottom of my road I can see the planes take off, its great, been seeing them for years now just practising) but they're having really bad problems, its flying, but not as its supposed to be doing, the front aeroplanes (if thats what they're called) simply fly off when they're used, the electronics are really dodgy aswell....

not sure if anyones interested tho, saw a new plane the other day, it was hovering for about 6 minutes over the runway (it couldn't have been a harrier because it a, didn't look like one and b, harriers can't hover for that amount of time) so should be interesting to see what they come up with next...

and finally, from what me mate says, theres a secret stealth project at warton, he couldn't tell me whats going on there, because he's just not allowed into the shelter, but thats the word on the site....

Great pics The Typhoon is shaping up to be a very nice plane and it's good to see Europe working a indiginous design rather than just buying planes from Russia or the US. The more countries making indiginous planes the more designs i have to look at

[edit on 18-11-2004 by Trent]

Originally posted by keithy g
Going back to the typhoon, one of my compadres works at warton (if I goto the bottom of my road I can see the planes take off, its great, been seeing them for years now just practising) but they're having really bad problems, its flying, but not as its supposed to be doing, the front aeroplanes (if thats what they're called) simply fly off when they're used, the electronics are really dodgy aswell....

- I'm sorry I completely do not believe this story about the canards or the electronics.

A major set of failures in either would cause the aircraft to crash as
1) the canards are vital - at all times and are in use at all times - to the Typhoon remaining flight-worthy and controlable

and

2) the 'electronics' - if we are talking about the significant and tricky/difficult electronics - are what keeps the plane in the air as it cannot 'naturally' fly at all such is the extreme degree of it's 'relaxed stablity'.

Are you sure you don't work on the F22 or F35 in the USA?

You beat me to it sminkey If people are going to diss they could at least take the trouble to base it in fact.

also, simply in the interest of accuracy;

Actually Ive heard the concorde be referred to as a double delta before, due to the shape of its wings (they do have two distinct curvatures in them).

It isn't curvature that defines what is a double delta, the double curvature of the Concorde wing makes it an 'ogival delta' or 'ogee' wing depending on your preference.

first of all, I don't work for warton, I work for the fire service, secondly, my mate is working as an electronical engineer for bae, so we could look at it like this, what he says is more likely to be correct than your instant critiscms, I'd be suprised if any of you have even seen one in flight (where as I just saw one go over my head whilst I was walking me dog), obviously if its in the air, then its not major problems, but its manouverability are severly hampered by the front canards (sorry for my earlier mistake) and the electronics do indeed have some major glitches (which has been the case from day one )

I'd like to add btw that I wasn't slagging the plane off, I was simply pointing out its downfalls, its an amazing plane, and I've seen the test pilots do some seriously crazy stuff in them, but its not performing to what was planned is more like what I was trying to get across

Originally posted by keithy g
first of all, I don't work for warton, I work for the fire service, secondly, my mate is working as an electronical engineer for bae, so we could look at it like this, what he says is more likely to be correct than your instant critiscms, I'd be suprised if any of you have even seen one in flight (where as I just saw one go over my head whilst I was walking me dog), obviously if its in the air, then its not major problems, but its manouverability are severly hampered by the front canards (sorry for my earlier mistake) and the electronics do indeed have some major glitches (which has been the case from day one

)

I'd like to add btw that I wasn't slagging the plane off, I was simply pointing out its downfalls, its an amazing plane, and I've seen the test pilots do some seriously crazy stuff in them, but its not performing to what was planned is more like what I was trying to get across

Well, Ive just rung a mate on this, whoes father is one of the UK test pilots on the Eurofighter, and asked him to ask his father on both these subjects, so when I get an answer I shall come back to you.

But personally, I have not heard of ANY canard issues with the Eurofighter, indeed last I heard they were producing better performance than expected, with more manoueverability and airflow direction than in scale models. If there was a canard issue, it would have been picked up on some 5 or 10 years ago and rectified then, these sorts of things dont just pop up 14 years into a project. The canards are a fairly central design point of the aircraft, and any issues with them wouldnt have remained until now.

well from what my accomplice is saying (got loads of names for me mate, tis quite cool really) one of em flew off in flight not too long ago, literally ripped off mid flight, very hush hush like, peeps shouldn't be talking about it, landed in a local field so I've been told, however the field bit is hard to believe, as farmers round here will tell a tale for a pint no worries.

The problems are there, but i'm also intrigued as to what the test pilot said, I just believe my associate from face value as he's been working on them from the start of his working life. Be nice to know if he's lying or not, if ya know what I mean. Admitadely even I'm sceptical, but i'll stick by the person until I get set proof otherwise, they are my friend, I feel I should do now