Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

July 1979: Rockwell HiMAT

Image result for rockwell himat

The HiMAT program was a program to develop future fighter aircraft conducted by NASA, with the aircraft developed by Rockwell International. Technologies tested during the aircraft's trial was a fly-by-wire control system, materials not used on previous fighters such as graphite and fiberglass, canards that were close-coupled, no pilot (used remote piloting), a new synthetic vision system that uses 3D to give pilots an all-round view of their surroundings, and winglets on the wingtips. 

sszjKts.png

The aircraft was remote-controlled because the team designing the craft thought it would be safer and cheaper with no pilot. A pilot on the ground would go into a remote cockpit to fly the aircraft where he could see with either a nose camera or a 3D synthetic visual system. 

8mD5G7y.png

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/MunbroKerman/Rockwell-HiMAT

Tomorrows' Craft:

@qzgy's AD-1

Builder's note:

This craft is supposed to be dropped from a B-52, but unfortunately, certain KSP parts prevented me from making it smaller. It still is very manueverable and performs like the real thing. The only difference is it is much larger than it should be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, a bit late.

December 1979: NASA Ames-Dryden 1

The AD-1 was a test program run by NASA to test the merits and effectiveness of an oblique wing design. This means the relative to the body, the wing is at a tilted angle and could, in theory, move back and forth. Robert Jones, an engineer promoted the concept for use on a transport aircraft. Wind tunnel tests showed that compared to a normal aircraft, an oblique design could have much better efficiency. The concept, while not new, being proposed in 1942, was tested on the AD-1

ad1-1.jpgefvz1u1.png

It was designed as a cheap testbed, built by Ames Industrial Co. according to NASA specifications from both Boeing and the Rutan aircraft company. The low cost however, limited what the aircraft could actually accomplish and the complexity of it. Powered by 2 small turbojet engines, it could achieve a maximum speed of 200 mph, though was usually limited to 170 mph. The wheels, which were fixed, were located close to the fuselage to decrease drag. The actual mechanism for the wing was electrically driven through a gear system to change angle, with a sweep up to 60 degrees.

NASA_AD-1_in_flight.jpgvdhT2pF.png

Testing was done incrementally, as is always safe to do. While flights were done in 1979, the first flight to do a full wing sweep was in mid-1981. Testing continued until 1982, before the program was shut down. Jones considered after the flight research that an oblique wing would stll be a viable lifting option for a transport.While working, this airframe had kinda nasty handling at pitches above 45 degrees. It did complete the technical objectives, but did not fully verify the concept on a more suited airframe and at higher transonic speeds. After retirement, it was put on display at the Hiller Aviation Museum in California.

Download: https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/AD-1

Tommorow's aircraft: My Tacit Blue

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, qzgy said:

Sorry, a bit late.

December 1979: NASA Ames-Dryden 1

The AD-1 was a test program run by NASA to test the merits and effectiveness of an oblique wing design. This means the relative to the body, the wing is at a tilted angle and could, in theory, move back and forth. Robert Jones, an engineer promoted the concept for use on a transport aircraft. Wind tunnel tests showed that compared to a normal aircraft, an oblique design could have much better efficiency. The concept, while not new, being proposed in 1942, was tested on the AD-1

ad1-1.jpgefvz1u1.png

It was designed as a cheap testbed, built by Ames Industrial Co. according to NASA specifications from both Boeing and the Rutan aircraft company. The low cost however, limited what the aircraft could actually accomplish and the complexity of it. Powered by 2 small turbojet engines, it could achieve a maximum speed of 200 mph, though was usually limited to 170 mph. The wheels, which were fixed, were located close to the fuselage to decrease drag. The actual mechanism for the wing was electrically driven through a gear system to change angle, with a sweep up to 60 degrees.

NASA_AD-1_in_flight.jpgvdhT2pF.png

Testing was done incrementally, as is always safe to do. While flights were done in 1979, the first flight to do a full wing sweep was in mid-1981. Testing continued until 1982, before the program was shut down. Jones considered after the flight research that an oblique wing would stll be a viable lifting option for a transport.While working, this airframe had kinda nasty handling at pitches above 45 degrees. It did complete the technical objectives, but did not fully verify the concept on a more suited airframe and at higher transonic speeds. After retirement, it was put on display at the Hiller Aviation Museum in California.

Download: https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/AD-1

Tommorow's aircraft: My Tacit Blue

I want to slap NASA what the F werected yall even thinking?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

SCIENCE! 

Nice replica @qzgy, does your wing swivel on this?

Yup! Check the kerbalx page to see directions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A day late, but here nonetheless. Sorry about that.

February 1982: Northrop Tacit Blue

Tacit Blue was a technology demonstrator aircraft to show tat a stealthy surveillance craft with sensors could operate near the front lines without dying. Essentially, it is what Have Blue was to fighter-bombers as it is to surveillance craft. It one component in a larger program dealing with better targeting, reconnaissance and munitions technologies. Tacit Blue also helped validate a number of new stealth developments.

northrop-tacit-blue.jpggOB3AjM.png

Nickanmed 'The Whale', it had two turbofan engines with a flush intake on top, and was controlled by a fly-by-wire system to improve stability. After 135 flights over about 3 years, it was retired to the National Museum of the United States Air Force. Technology developed on Tacit Blue is being used nowadays in the E-8 Joint STARS aircraft

Northrop_Tacit_Blue_Whale.jpgVJRve8Q.png

Download: https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/Tacit-Blue

Tommorow's craft: @Servo's F-16XL

Edited by qzgy
Link to post
Share on other sites

F-16XL Cranked Arrow wing demonstrator aircraft

uutauPH.jpg

The F-16XL was a unique design, utilizing a Cranked arrow wing design. The bizarrely shaped wing combines the advantages of good lift at high speeds (the swept delta section) with the good maneuverability at lower speeds (the less-swept outer section). Additional benefits included a much greater fuel load, plus a very large assortment of hardpoints. The F-16XL carried twice the ordinance of a normal F-14 across 27 hardpoints, at almost twice the range.

309248main_EC96-43831-2_full.jpg

The F-16XL was entered in the Enhanced Tactical Fighter contest, pitted against the F-15E Strike Eagle. Unfortunately for the F-16XL, the Strike Eagle won the contest, and the prototypes were shelved. Several years later, they were reactivated and given to NASA for aerodynamic research. Interestingly enough, the NASA F-16XL accidentally supercruised (Mach 1+ without afterburner) while testing a method of decreasing drag on the wings using a laser-perforated wing glove similar to a golf ball.

c3GxQli.jpg

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/servo/F-16XL

Tomorrow's Craft:

@Munbro Kerman's Northrop F-20 Tigershark

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to post this craft today so the thread can go back on schedule. 

August 1982: Northrop F-20 Tigershark

Image result for f-20

Developed from the similar F-5E Tiger II, the F-20 was a light fighter financed by private corporations and built by Northrop. The F-20 was fitted with a more powerful engine allowing it to be more maneuverable and competitive, and was widely compared to General Dynamic's famous F-16 while being cheaper and lighter in design. 

BTqrpP1.png

Because the F-20 was funded privately, Northrop hoped to sell the F-20 to countries overseas. Changes in policies after the 1980 presidential election prohibited the F-20 to be sold to other countries, leading the F-20 to compete against the F-16 for sales. The program was scrapped in 1986 with three built and one partially built. 

ENrW3yr.png

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/MunbroKerman/F-20-Tigershark

Tomorrows' Craft:

@MiffedStarfish's X-29 and one other X-29

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Servo said:

F-16XL Cranked Arrow wing demonstrator aircraft

uutauPH.jpg

The F-16XL was a unique design, utilizing a Cranked arrow wing design. The bizarrely shaped wing combines the advantages of good lift at high speeds (the swept delta section) with the good maneuverability at lower speeds (the less-swept outer section). Additional benefits included a much greater fuel load, plus a very large assortment of hardpoints. The F-16XL carried twice the ordinance of a normal F-14 across 27 hardpoints, at almost twice the range.

309248main_EC96-43831-2_full.jpg

The F-16XL was entered in the Enhanced Tactical Fighter contest, pitted against the F-15E Strike Eagle. Unfortunately for the F-16XL, the Strike Eagle won the contest, and the prototypes were shelved. Several years later, they were reactivated and given to NASA for aerodynamic research. Interestingly enough, the NASA F-16XL accidentally supercruised (Mach 1+ without afterburner) while testing a method of decreasing drag on the wings using a laser-perforated wing glove similar to a golf ball.

c3GxQli.jpg

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/servo/F-16XL

Tomorrow's Craft:

@Munbro Kerman's Northrop F-20 Tigershark

I LOVE THIS THING!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2017 at 3:22 PM, NotAnAimbot said:

Here we go!

March the 25th 1958: A.V. & Roe Canada CF-105 "Arrow"

0bq8e8U.png

As Soviet bombers became more and more performant, Canada's indigenous fighter, the relatively slow straight-wing CF-100 "Canuck", became more and more obsolete and unable to cope with the new generation of enemy aircraft. Thus development was started on an indigenous interceptor which would operate at 50 000 feet altitude and Mach 2 speed, and the fighter was to be able to reach that altitude in less than five minutes. These specifications were basically asking for one of the best aircraft available at that time.

avro-cf-c05-canadian-intercepter01.jpg

mdAs2Mp.png

The aiframe and engine were completely developed in Canada, the Arrow's planned powerplant being the Orenda "Iroquois" which would have given it Mach 3 capability. A delta wing was chosen for more fuel room and the advantages of a swept wing, while providing for lower landing speeds. Although low speed maneuverability would have been reduced, the Arrow wasn't built to operate in these conditions, for it was expected to mainly fly in a straight line towards bomber formations. Crew was supposed to be of two pilots, one flying the plane and another operating weapons housed behind the pilot.

ypJFdk9.png

Much less of a crowd than the original

avroarrow.jpeg

Image result for avro arrow canadian aviation museum

However, after the appearance of ICBMs, the Arrow was considered obsolete, a more or less controversial decision. The development program for both airframe and engine was ended and prototypes were destroyed, for reasons which still remain unknown or controversial today. The nose section of one of the prototypes was hidden and is now on display at the Canadian Aviation museum in Ottawa, Ontario, and some rumors speak of a secret complete Arrow hidden somewhere, yet to be found today.

 

Builder's notes

AG3 toggles the afterburners. Not much else really, except a warning against strong yawing or rolling at high speeds. This causes the fuselage's side wing panels to create lots of lift and destabilize the plane, something which I've partially fixed with SAS modules.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/apgvfoz4vtcfpvp/CF-105 Arrow.craft?dl=0

Oh what could have been... :(  It seems like every one of my fellow Canadians hates the fact that it was cancelled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

December 1984: Grumman X-29

1920px-Grumman-X29-InFlight.jpg

dyPIhzr.jpg

"The Grumman X-29 was built as a testbed for forward-swept wings and canard control surfaces, and was notable for being the first aircraft to break the sound barrier with a forward swept wing configuration on the 13th of December 1985. Due to the inherent instabilty of the plane, the pilot was assisted by three onboard computers making forty corections a second. Contrary to expectations, this system limited the aircraft to relativly average manueverability, though it performed very well testing high angles of attack. The design was made possible by use of carbon composite wing materials to counter the twisting of the wing in flight.

1280px-X-29_at_High_Angle_of_Attack_with

Operational History

The X-29 flew from December 1984 to August 1992, with both aircraft flying a combined total of over 400 research missions. It was only the third forward-swept wing plane design to fly, with NASA reporting that it proved a number of new technologies. Both aircraft made are on display in the Research and Development Gallery at the National Museum of the United States Air Force and Armstrong Flight Research center, respectively.

Download Link

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q8j10mf40g4yoi6/Grumman X-29.craft?dl=0

Unfortunately take-off with the replica is a little hard, it may require you to either yaw of the side of the runway or taxi to the end and pull up then. Landing is fine though. In flight it is very manuerable, but unlikley to spin or stall at normal speeds, though SAS is recommended to be left on, it simulates Fly-By-Wire stability.

Edited by MiffedStarfish
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like how you used multiple control surfaces to fit the wings. 

I think that the X-29's wings weren't supposed to resist bending through the use of ultra-tough materials, but to have a negative AoA behaviour that prevented stalling as they twisted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MatterBeam said:

I really like how you used multiple control surfaces to fit the wings. 

I think that the X-29's wings weren't supposed to resist bending through the use of ultra-tough materials, but to have a negative AoA behaviour that prevented stalling as they twisted. 

WIKIPEDIA, YOU LIED!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MiffedStarfish said:

WIKIPEDIA, YOU LIED!

Actually, Wikipedia didn't

It says exactly what he said, sort of. The materials were designed in such a way and built to prevent structural failure by twisting with negtive AoA. Its complicated

Edited by qzgy
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

December 1984: Grumman X-29

1920px-Grumman-X29-InFlight.jpg

dyPIhzr.jpg

"The Grumman X-29 was built as a testbed for forward-swept wings and canard control surfaces, and was notable for being the first aircraft to break the sound barrier with a forward swept wing configuration on the 13th of December 1985. Due to the inherent instabilty of the plane, the pilot was assisted by three onboard computers making forty corections a second. Contrary to expectations, this system limited the aircraft to relativly average manueverability, though it performed very well testing high angles of attack. The design was made possible by use of carbon composite wing materials to counter the twisting of the wing in flight.

1280px-X-29_at_High_Angle_of_Attack_with

Operational History

The X-29 flew from December 1984 to August 1992, with both aircraft flying a combined total of over 400 research missions. It was only the third forward-swept wing plane design to fly, with NASA reporting that it proved a number of new technologies. Both aircraft made are on display in the Research and Development Gallery at the National Museum of the United States Air Force and Armstrong Flight Research center, respectively.

Download Link

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q8j10mf40g4yoi6/Grumman X-29.craft?dl=0

Unfortunately take-off with the replica is a little hard, it may require you to either yaw of the side of the runway or taxi to the end and pull up then. Landing is fine though. In flight it is very manuerable, but unlikley to spin or stall at normal speeds, though SAS is recommended to be left on, it simulates Fly-By-Wire stability.

Can you give a Kerbalx link please. (Thanks you thank you tank you! It is beautiful!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, eagle92lightning said:

Can you give a Kerbalx link please. (Thanks you thank you tank you! It is beautiful!!!)

Why can't you use the Dropbox link? If you need I'll put one up tomorrow, I can't right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

Why can't you use the Dropbox link? If you need I'll put one up tomorrow, I can't right now.

I don't have a dropbox account.

19 hours ago, YoeriCookie said:

could you please refrain from quoting the entire post?

Will do I am sorry. (Have problems quoting things on my phone)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...