Guest tom sixbey Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 i've seen some of those myself.. -if i'm not mistaken, some of them use composite fiber airframes! hehehe -the last thing i'd want to see when i'm pulling a split-S is my wings de-laminating off of the fuselage! P-51's are still pretty common in legitimate trim arent they? - i think i've seen at least one of them at every airshow i've ever been to (airworthy ones at that!) . One time i was so lucky to see 2 airworthy B-17s roll off of a ramp and make a flight at an airshow in west memphis airport when i was 8 years old!! - talk about a jaw-dropper! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patzky1 Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 MMMMMMMMM, 1200 hp alison engine... Actually, I don't think it's that common to see P-51's in airworthy condition anymore as they have by now gotten a significant amount of oxidation (aluminum rust) on the wing spars and it's just too expensive to fix. A good, well-maintained one will cost some serious bucks nowadays as a result, but including many other factors. However, I might just be talking outta my arse. Anyone gonna set me straight? Pat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueovalz Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Some of the early jets are becoming more commonplace now. At the last show I went to, I became overly engrossed (according to my spouse) talking to a MIG-15 owner about his plane. Most interesting topic: he had to add 700lbs of lead ballast in the intake splitter to offset the removal of the cannons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom sixbey Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 thats sounds about right... - However i wonder if any of these old birds still have functioning armaments (i'm pretty sure there's an FAR out their that prohibits it though). when it comes to aluminum oxidation - a little bit is a good (and necessary) thing for the outer surface of aluminum. It actually makes the surface stronger, but i dont know anything about mass oxidation problems. I didnt know that it would oxidize beyond the outer surface of the metal. While thinking about this topic, i did some browsing on the web, and i found a company that offers the technical drawings and construction plans for several WW2 fighter planes... It gets me thinking.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatorx Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 ....functional armament would be highly frowned upon. There are a lot of warbirds flying around the Chicago area, even some Korean vintage jets (one absolutely gorgeous F-86 with polished skin) and ex-soviet jet trainers. You could probably pick up a T-6 Texan in flyable condition for the price of an inexpensive house (or expensive car!) and have something classic looking that's aerobatic to boot.... Personally, I'd like a Beechcraft V-35 with the turboprop conversion - would make for a nice all weather cruiser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom sixbey Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 arent F-86's supposed to be hard to control? - i've heard that when they exceeded mach 1, certain control axis would invert! - i dont know how that could happen, but i am no expert on supersonic aerodynamics... - BTW is Miegs field still open up there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatorx Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Meigs is closed forever, and is in the process of being converted into a lakefront park in loving memory of the current Mayor........ Regarding the F-86 - I'm a seriously subsonic guy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueovalz Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 axis control reversal was a common problem when breaking mach1 was first experimented with on the very earliest experiments. With the improved frabrication techniques, materials and design, the reversal problem was eliminated on the production fighters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatorx Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 ....the fix (then) was the incorporation of the flying tail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom sixbey Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 by "flying tail" do you mean a T-tail - thus getting the horizontal stabilizor out of the downwash? - or something else entirely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatorx Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Conventional subsonic aircraft, have fixed tail surfaces, which have hinged elevators at the rear to control pitch. Supersonic aircraft however are fitted with all-moving "flying" or slab tail surface. This is where the whole horizontal stabilizer fins are able to move at an incidence relative to the aircrafts fuselage. (The T tail is one of such design- but think F-15 for a good example)) The advantage of this design is that in supersonic airflow, changes in camber do not significantly effect the lift (compressibility in the supersonic airflow will keep a hindged device - like a trailing elevator on a fixed horizontal stabilizer- from moving. Deflection of the hinged elevator on subsonic aircraft does produce a lift, because the angle of attack is effectively being changed. Supersonic airflow can readily negotiate the sharp inclination of the slab tail surface, and a further advantage is that there is less drag than on the camber surface. The control force is also greater with the slab tail design, it helps to avoid stall of the tailplane in violent maneuvers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom sixbey Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 i understand now - i know what you are talking about on the F15 also - essentially a stabilator right? - in many instances they also have anti servo tabs for a better control feel at low speed dont they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aviatorx Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 yup....essentially a trade off of a small camber control surface to a very large one that sometimes also incorporates differential (stabilator) control for increased roll authority.....cool stuff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 tuff z Posted December 3, 2003 Share Posted December 3, 2003 i flew huey medevac uh-1h's while in college [after my 3 yr stint on active duty as a mech] and then kc130's in the corps after college. my ticket; commercial, instrument, single & multi engine land & rotorcraft. not flown since i left the marines in 94. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.