User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 7:50:33 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As I recall, one had a tire shred itself on takeoff and damage the plane enough to cause a crash shortly after takeoff. The decision was then made to retire them, but that was a decision that had been coming for some time, due to an aging fleet and not really being a money maker. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I thought a bunch of people died on Concorde's and they stopped flying them... The FOD was a piece from a shitty repair on a DC10's thrust reverser. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 7:53:12 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol at that plane, looks ready to break. If you think that's safe, go research American Airlines 587 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 7:58:54 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol at that plane, looks ready to break. If you think that's safe, go research American Airlines 587 You've convinced me. This plane is destined to crash. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 7:59:15 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that does not look structurally sound... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:05:44 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol at that plane, looks ready to break. If you think that's safe, go research American Airlines 587 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:06:19 PM EST
[#6]
http://www.stratolaunch.com
Is the official website of the aircraft Hot linking is messing up on me 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:11:26 PM EST
[#7]
There's a thread going on over in r/aviation about this, I thought I'd pop over there since I wanted to know about the tail section design. A poster claims to have been a subcontractor on part of the wing section and I asked him about the unjoined design:
"One of the early concepts of the aircraft had a joined horizontal stab. I'm actually not sure why they discarded that idea. Probably something to do with weight/rigidity/flex when dropping payload." So who knows the final answer, but it's not like they didn't duly consider this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:14:00 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that does not look structurally sound... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:19:59 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that does not look structurally sound... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:24:24 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I bet that it works great until the tails decide to go in different directions.  Seems to me if you connected the horizontal stabilizers together with one "wing" it would stiffen the whole thing up and allow you to build the front wing much lighter. Which side do you fly it from? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:32:34 PM EST
[#11]
I've met Burt numerous times and have been to Scaled a few times as well. Burt is prolific, I'll give him that. And, some of his vehicles were pretty ingenious. But not all of them. In fact, he has had a few stinkers just like everybody else. Anyone remember the Beech Starship? Burt's bunch did the "pre-production prototype" for Beech. Problem was, it wasn't a pre-production prototype. It was just something that looked kinda like what they wanted on the outside. The company had to completely re-engineer the entire vehicle from scratch so that it could be certified and produced on a production line rather than a custom shop. Same thing happened with the prototype of the T-46 that Rutan built.
Speaking of airworthy, how many Rutan designed vehicles have been certified? None that I'm aware of (but I'd be happy to be proven wrong). There is a HUGE difference between a one-off experimental prototype that <might> work or might not and an actual airworthy, certifiable aircraft ready for production (and the carriage of people). Scaled is willing to take risks since they only do prototypes and seldom more than one or two. The concept of using a carrier plane to act as the "first stage" of an orbital rocket is a sound one, if technically challenging. I'm not convinced this particular vehicle will do that job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:37:09 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that does not look structurally sound... The torque on that inner wing segment in turbulence???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:37:58 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots of B747 parts in that aircraft, apparently 2 were scavenged for the engines, undercarriage, avionics and a bunch of other stuff. Not a new concept either, just take a look at Scaled Composites White Knight.  Rutan's folks have been building dual fuselage aircraft for decades.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:40:00 PM EST
[#14]
I've flown uglier...
I would have no problem flying that Bitch if the pay was right! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:43:12 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since Scaled Composites are the folks that actually built this thing, well, you know. Rutan's folks have been building dual fuselage aircraft for decades.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lots of B747 parts in that aircraft, apparently 2 were scavenged for the engines, undercarriage, avionics and a bunch of other stuff. Not a new concept either, just take a look at Scaled Composites White Knight. Rutan's folks have been building dual fuselage aircraft for decades. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:44:09 PM EST
[#16]
The Windows Vista of airplanes!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:47:34 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've met Burt numerous times and have been to Scaled a few times as well. Burt is prolific, I'll give him that. And, some of his vehicles were pretty ingenious. But not all of them. In fact, he has had a few stinkers just like everybody else. Anyone remember the Beech Starship? Burt's bunch did the "pre-production prototype" for Beech. Problem was, it wasn't a pre-production prototype. It was just something that looked kinda like what they wanted on the outside. The company had to completely re-engineer the entire vehicle from scratch so that it could be certified and produced on a production line rather than a custom shop. Same thing happened with the prototype of the T-46 that Rutan built. 
Beech wanted an 85% scale proof-of-concept. It was never supposed to be anywhere near a production model. And Scaled built the thing in 9 months, what a failure...
Beech screwed the pooch on the Starship, not Scaled. ETA: I just looked up the T-46 as I wasn't familiar with it. Not even remotely the same situation as Fairchild themselves wanted a 62% scale testbed, built by Ames, with Scaled subcontracted to build the structure, systems and do the flight testing. They won the trainer competition, and then it was canceled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 8:51:39 PM EST
[#18]
Awesome! Love innovation, risk, new things & projects that while not necessarily profitable you learn something while doing something unique
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 9:12:43 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And the Germans had an exemplary record with their dirigibles until the Hindenburg disaster.t Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lots of B747 parts in that aircraft, apparently 2 were scavenged for the engines, undercarriage, avionics and a bunch of other stuff. Not a new concept either, just take a look at Scaled Composites White Knight. Rutan's folks have been building dual fuselage aircraft for decades.Exchange the hydrogen for helium, and the last refuge of your argument fails. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 9:13:40 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Orbital Science Corp has been wheezing the idea along for decades, but it's never proven to be particularly clever. This just doubles down on a poor business model. It's not the measly velocity that matters, it's the significant altitude and percent of atmosphere that doesn't have to be penetrated. So this method of ferrying the second vehicle to the upper atmosphere would allow more "cargo" or payload to be put out there, in place of all of the fuel load not needed. Seems pretty solid, but kind of lacking in ingenuity. The aircraft itself does look impressive, to appear so spindly yet carry huge loads. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2017 9:21:38 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think even if this isn't cheaper than what Space X is building it is going to have a useful place because of the extreme flexibility in the launch window and the variety of orbits it can quickly enter for rendezvous. This delivers a capability that governments would really want and need, or anyone who needs to intercept something in orbit on the order of hours and days rather than weeks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 3:10:12 AM EST
[#22]
I guess no one here has read about active flight controls. Sensors in the airframe measure stresses and g loads and make minute corrections on individual control surfaces to keep everything in line. All fly by wire.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 3:28:41 AM EST
[#23]
This fucking thread man.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 3:35:43 AM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's the stupidest thing I've seen today |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 3:37:31 AM EST
[#25]
I really don't see that thing doing anything other than breaking the fuck up on its maiden flight
(And killing everyone crewing it).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 4:51:58 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean where the pilot broke the stabilizer off because he didn't know how to respond to turbulence properly? Newsflash, all planes can be made to disintegrate in mid-air when they are flown outside their design parameters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:02:03 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess no one here has read about active flight controls. Sensors in the airframe measure stresses and g loads and make minute corrections on individual control surfaces to keep everything in line. All fly by wire. It requires active intervention to keep it from being twisted apart. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:17:07 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not an aeronautical engineer but that shit don't look right to me. ETA: Why is it that the cockpit/nose sections of those planes look familiar? Almost like they were scabbed off another airframe or something. To cut development costs, many of the aircraft systems have been adopted from the Boeing 747-400, including the engines, avionics, flight deck, landing gear and other systems. Two former United Airlines Boeing 747-400 aircraft (Serial numbers 28715 & 28716) were acquired and taken to the Mojave Air & Space Port for cannibalization.[9][19] You would think they would leave the radome cover. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:18:43 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that's an odd bird. If they whole goal was to launch a rocket from the plane, why not strap it to the top, carrying it all the way up there, and then go inverted and drop the rocket to take off? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:22:48 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1) everyone is acting like the center wing section is providing no lift. 2) Twin Mustang 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:44:38 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Proving that it is structurally unsound. It requires active intervention to keep it from being twisted apart. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I guess no one here has read about active flight controls. Sensors in the airframe measure stresses and g loads and make minute corrections on individual control surfaces to keep everything in line. All fly by wire. It requires active intervention to keep it from being twisted apart. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 6:53:05 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope SpaceX doesn't put them out of business before this thing can fly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 7:00:37 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who is Paul Allen? Woody Allen's little brother? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 7:11:27 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why do I feel like steering that thing is going to be like Siamese twins fighting over a blowjob? 
Can't breathe....  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 7:13:56 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you ever hear the saying, "Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, but it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands.” |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 7:14:31 PM EST
[#36]
Super cool.
To all the skeptics- make a better design, get funding, and get it made or shut the fuck up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2017 7:45:23 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that does not look structurally sound... its going to break in half . and spin in circles |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 4:06:06 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryI can picture the two German pilots fighting for control of that middle engine.
Left pilot: "It's mine!" Right pilot: "Nine! Mine!" Left pilot: "Nine, dumkoff! Mine!" Right pilot: "Switszer! Mine!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 5:16:40 AM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
load that sucker with 4 to 8 mother of all bombs and then when it drops the bombs it does so in a synchronized manner so that each bomb precisely follows the path of the one before for the grandady of all bunker penetraters. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Think of the Vulcan machine gun that could fit in the middle  That would be awesome to watch. It could carry the weight of 25 MOABs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 5:18:32 AM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why carry a bunch of 2,000lb bombs when you can load a single weapon with 550,000lbs of AFX-757 for a half-kiloton yield? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That plane has fantastic thigh gap. Also, how many 2,000 pound bombs could it carry? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 5:19:56 AM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Meh... The Germans did it first... Presenting the Heinkel HE-111Z http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Visschedijk/Additions/Heinkel%20He%20111%20Z_3-view.jpg http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/51040.jpg http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugzeuge/heinkel/he111z1.jpg http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/messerschmitt-me-321-glider.png |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 5:31:04 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As I recall, one had a tire shred itself on takeoff and damage the plane enough to cause a crash shortly after takeoff. The decision was then made to retire them, but that was a decision that had been coming for some time, due to an aging fleet and not really being a money maker. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I thought a bunch of people died on Concorde's and they stopped flying them... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 1:36:55 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
+1 The torque on that inner wing segment in turbulence???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 1:53:37 PM EST
[#44]
Newish rocket...
New airborne launch platform... What could go wrong?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2017 2:57:19 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess no one here has read about active flight controls. Sensors in the airframe measure stresses and g loads and make minute corrections on individual control surfaces to keep everything in line. All fly by wire. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2017 5:11:54 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the love of god, what does the Hindenburg disaster have to do with a modern heavy-lift transport? The German dirigible design was very stable. Surprisingly durable. Conventional wisdom says a bag full of hydrogen gas should be pretty easy to set aflame or "pop" leading to the Zeppelin's demise. But Zeppelin combat experience proved a little different. They were very hard to ignite. Commercial Zeppelins were not abandoned because they were not safe, back in their time. Travel by Zeppelin or Blimp is very inefficient and costly. Finally, the only large sources of helium was in the United States, and the U.S. wasn't selling any helium to the Germans. Exchange the hydrogen for helium, and the last refuge of your argument fails. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lots of B747 parts in that aircraft, apparently 2 were scavenged for the engines, undercarriage, avionics and a bunch of other stuff. Not a new concept either, just take a look at Scaled Composites White Knight. Rutan's folks have been building dual fuselage aircraft for decades.Exchange the hydrogen for helium, and the last refuge of your argument fails. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2017 5:17:09 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Concorde stopped flying because it was a money loser after the World Bank and International Monetary Fund banned their employees from booking Concorde flights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2017 5:18:24 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean where the pilot broke the stabilizer off because he didn't know how to respond to turbulence properly? Newsflash, all planes can be made to disintegrate in mid-air when they are flown outside their design parameters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2017 9:19:28 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And it might help to not make the skin out of highly-flammable gun cotton, also. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And the Germans had an exemplary record with their dirigibles until the Hindenburg disaster. Exchange the hydrogen for helium, and the last refuge of your argument fails. This is the generalized version of the “rocket fuel” and “thermite” myths. Certain hydrogen advocates have tried to argue that the Hindenburg’s covering was so highly flammable that it was the covering — and not the hydrogen — which was the primary factor in the ship’s rapid destruction. In fact, the Hindenburg’s covering, while certainly combustible, was not especially flammable and actually burned quite slowly. Many sections of the covering burned only when exposed to the direct heat of burning hydrogen (as seen in the films and photographs of the disaster) and large areas of the covering never burned at all, indicating that the covering could not have been highly flammable. Historical evidence exists that Hindenburg’s covering was made of cotton canvas doped with a solution of cellulose acetate butyrate, to which aluminum powder (and in some places iron oxide) had been added. Canvas doped with cellulose acetate butyrate is combustible but nonflammable; in other words, it will burn if held in a flame, but tends to self-extinguish when removed from heat. [See, The Hindenburg Fire: Hydrogen or Incendiary Paint?, A. J. Dessler, D. E. Overs, and W. H. Appleby, “Dessler/Overs/Appleby,”] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2017 9:18:54 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Proving that it is structurally unsound. It requires active intervention to keep it from being twisted apart. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
