Military Plane discussion thread - Let’s talk Fighter/Attacker planes.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
765843992929f8.jpg
 
Oh boy! I didn't know this thread existed!

Let me read up on it and....
Kamov Ka-52 said:
Variable geometry is a meme ~snip~
Click to expand...
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

I mean in all actuality I do agree with you. Anymore Variable Geometry is a maintenance sink and a reliability pitfall.

However, as previously mentioned, there is a reason for it existing in the first place:

Many years ago, back before this new fangled technology called "fly-by-Wire" came along, if you designed a plane for high speeds (as was the trend at the time), it would be unstable at lower speeds (as in landing speeds).

This became a real problem as these fancy new jets (many times piloted by very experienced aviators), were losing control in take-offs, landings, and other low speed maneuvers.

The problems was so great, that a solution had to be found. One of the better solutions to come out of years of research was to simply make it to where the pilot could "tune" the airframe to be more stable at their various operating speeds.

And that was how the Variable-Sweep Wing was born. Move the wings forward when slow, move the wings back when going balls to the wall.

It was the best solution at the time, and most new aircraft being designed at the time had at least a "B-Type" design which included the feature.

Then a few short years later Fly-By-Wire came into existence. It solved the stability issue cheaply... by moving the responsibility of handling the issue over to the computer.
 
BONE_Buddy said:
Oh boy! I didn't know this thread existed!

Let me read up on it and....

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

I mean in all actuality I do agree with you. Anymore Variable Geometry is a maintenance sink and a reliability pitfall.

However, as previously mentioned, there is a reason for it existing in the first place:

Many years ago, back before this new fangled technology called "fly-by-Wire" came along, if you designed a plane for high speeds (as was the trend at the time), it would be unstable at lower speeds (as in landing speeds).

This became a real problem as these fancy new jets (many times piloted by very experienced aviators), were losing control in take-offs, landings, and other low speed maneuvers.

The problems was so great, that a solution had to be found. One of the better solutions to come out of years of research was to simply make it to where the pilot could "tune" the airframe to be more stable at their various operating speeds.

And that was how the Variable-Sweep Wing was born. Move the wings forward when slow, move the wings back when going balls to the wall.

It was the best solution at the time, and most new aircraft being designed at the time had at least a "B-Type" design which included the feature.

Then a few short years later Fly-By-Wire came into existence. It solved the stability issue cheaply... by moving the responsibility of handling the issue over to the computer.
Click to expand...
The operational benefits were irrelevant because they were all hangar queens. :smug:
 
RA-5C Vigilante said:
STOP HURTING HIS FEELINGS HE'S A GOOD B-1 HE DINDU NUFFIN
Click to expand...
BONE_Buddy said:
I feel personally attacked.

This is cyberbullying.

I am going to go to the internet police!
Click to expand...

You both seem upset that my co-axial rotors are a battle proven technology instead of a gimmick and will likely be a prominent technology in the next procurement round of military helicopters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom