The Aviation Thread [Contains Lots of Awesome Pictures]

Carrier Strike Group 8 made a pretty good 2012 deployment video.


12ish minutes of Super Hornet Porn. The only thing I didn't like was that they didn't use "Highway to the Danger Zone" in that video. :lol:
 
Wow really cool. Thanks for sharing. Didn't know the A380 had a HUD. Never seen any on the cockpit pictures I've seen before.

PS: What are these things i circled?

8UuR6cy.jpg


Also what are the buttons on the control stick used for? It's not like they can fire a missile :p

PS: The panorama is taken at ~ head height. But you can't even see the horizon. How do they control the plane on the ground???

Blue is the Cursor Control Device - basically, a mouse to navigate all the different screens and their menus. Red is the nosewheel steering tiller; most larger aircraft will partially separate the nosewheel steering from the rudder pedals (the pedals still have some steering authority which is used mostly to keep the aircraft straight on taxi, takeoff and landing). No idea what green is, but my guess is that it's a flashlight on a charging pad. Yellow is the compartment for the F/O's quick-don oxygen mask.

That panorama shot is taken well below normal eye level, by the way - by at least a foot and a half or so.
 
Last edited:
Variable sweep wings are quite complicated and thus quite heavy, which is why you don't see them more often. And to add to what KaJun said, they wing sweep and module angle are likely coupled together so one can't happen without the other.

Yeah the system never really offered the promised performance advantages comared to the cost, complexity and the fact a swing wing is a maitenance hog compared to a regular plane. Just about all the swing-winged planes come from the same time period and are now just about gone, with a few exceptions.
 
Also what are the buttons on the control stick used for? It's not like they can fire a missile :p

PS: The panorama is taken at ~ head height. But you can't even see the horizon. How do they control the plane on the ground???

The red button on the stick is most probably push-to-talk for the radios.

On the ground, they use the MFDs to show camera imagery from the tail and the front landing gear, giving them a pretty good view around the plane:

628x471.jpg
 
The red button on the stick is most probably push-to-talk for the radios.

On the ground, they use the MFDs to show camera imagery from the tail and the front landing gear, giving them a pretty good view around the plane:

View attachment 9166



Red button on the stick is the autopilot disconnect button. The area circled in green is a mic.

Red button on the throttles is the auto-throttle disconnect button.
 
Last edited:
You are missing two gold bars for that seat :p

I believe the green thing on idk's picture is a hand held microphone.
 
Last edited:
I know Australia is having serious buyers remorse over the Tiger. I know several current and former Aussies who despise the thing since it STILL isn't operational and wish the government of the day would of bought Apaches or refurbed Cobra's.
 
Reuters - Boeing appears confident about launching folding wing 777X

* Checks Date "

No, it's real. Boeing are thinking about doing this.

The B777X has bigger wings and an increased capacity, but with the folded wings, can fit into a regular B777 parking slot.

Airlines happy and Airport happy! (The Airport company doesn't have to do more re-modeling of taxiways, jetways and parking slots)

Airbus are suggesting that the increased complexity may add a maintenance risk. Well, I guess they would say that anyway, but they may have a point.

:smile:
 
Naval aircraft have pretty much always had folding wings. If it was that much of a maintanace issue thenthey would never be selected by land based air forces.
 
I know Australia is having serious buyers remorse over the Tiger. I know several current and former Aussies who despise the thing since it STILL isn't operational and wish the government of the day would of bought Apaches or refurbed Cobra's.

But it is seriously cool looking :p

Here in Denmark we have had similarly bad luck with the european built AgustaWestland AW-101's we got. So far they have only done 1/4 of the flight hours that was expected due to technical issues. Many think we should have gotten the UH-60/S-70 instead since they are a proven design and we have been very happy with previous Sikorsky helicopters. Luckily it seems our Navy is smarter and is going to get Seahawks to replace our Westland Lynx helicopters.
 
Naval aircraft have pretty much always had folding wings. If it was that much of a maintanace issue thenthey would never be selected by land based air forces.

On aircraft carriers though folding wings are an absolute necessity to fit a reasonable number of aircraft aboard. For the F/A-18, Northrop actually developed F-18L - a land-based export version with lightened, strengthened non-folding wing, which would make the aircraft more agile and less prone to mechanical failure. It was scrapped for various reasons though.
 
In Norway we are supposed to replace our fleet of Lynx and Sea King rescue helicopters with NH-90, or that's been the plan for the past 10 years... Problem is they can't deliver the damn things, so we're close to canceling the whole deal, and buy Blackhawks in stead very soon if they don't start delivering them. First priority is for our new frigates...
 
In Norway we are supposed to replace our fleet of Lynx and Sea King rescue helicopters with NH-90, or that's been the plan for the past 10 years... Problem is they can't deliver the damn things, so we're close to canceling the whole deal, and buy Blackhawks in stead very soon if they don't start delivering them. First priority is for our new frigates...

The Seahawk is a pretty cool and versitile chopper. You really can't go wrong with them since they have a large customer base and lots of 3rd party support and customizations.

Also I really like the way the Nasen frigates look.

On aircraft carriers though folding wings are an absolute necessity to fit a reasonable number of aircraft aboard. For the F/A-18, Northrop actually developed F-18L - a land-based export version with lightened, strengthened non-folding wing, which would make the aircraft more agile and less prone to mechanical failure. It was scrapped for various reasons though.

Except no customer was willing to buy the F-18L and be the only customer. I'm just saying there is nothing special, hard or apparantly maintenance intensive about folding wings.
 
None of your helicopter procurement stories measure up to the clusterfuck that happened (and is still happening) here in Canada.

Back in the mid-1980s, our government was looking to replace our then-old Sea King ASW helicopters and Sea Knight SAR helicopters with a common aircraft. A competition was held and the EH101 (now the AW101) won; orders were placed for 50 aircraft, with the aircraft planned to enter service in the mid-1990s. However, the political climate changed (the Cold War ended) and the Conservative government, then in power, was voted out of office. The incoming Liberals, feeling (quite correctly) that the program was way overbudget (the early 1990s saw a series of spending cuts by all levels of government in Canada) cancelled the program, paying $500 million in penalties in the process, with a promise to re-evaluate the needs of the Canadian Forces.

Fast forward to 1998, when it became clear that the Sea Knights were absolutely at the end of their service life and desperately in need of replacement. The government held a hasty competition and ended up buying the CH-149 Cormorant - a scaled-back version of the original AW101 variant we were originally going to buy. At the same time, a number of high-profile incidents with the Sea King fleet hastened their replacement too. The government held another competition and decided to buy a navalised version of the Sikorsky H-92, to be called the CH-148 Cyclone in service, with first deliveries taking place in 2008. The issue here is that despite being the best candidate for the job, the AW101 was denied the contract as it would have been extremely embarrassing for the government to buy the AW101, having cancelled it eight years prior.

So, now it's 2013, and despite assurances from Sikorsky that the aircraft is on it's way, we still haven't had a single Cyclone delivered to the Canadian Forces, and to top it all off, there have been serious doubts raised about the safety of the basic aircraft in this particular role.

if they change their wing angle, do the mountings of those pods change along, or are the missiles suddenly pointing to the pilot?

Going back a bit, but the mechanism to actuate the pylons is likely rather simple. I don't have any information on the Tornado, but the F-111's pylon system is rather simple:

lXc38bv.jpg


Basically, the pylons are mounted in swiveling mounts and are connected to the wing box via an actuator rod; as the wings move, the rod very simply keeps the pylons aligned with the airflow.
 
Fast forward to 1998, when it became clear that the Sea Knights were absolutely at the end of their service life and desperately in need of replacement.

ours are still in operation :lol:
expected to be replaced by end of 2014 by NH-90s
(that's still a long way, plenty of time left to postpone that date...)
 
Last edited:
Top