Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Aircraft Recognition

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
member_28703
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28703 » 26 Aug 2014 17:02

Boeing as well as Airbus offer performance improvement packages in various forms.
The addon winglets is one of them.Available across various modes..737,757,767
Its usually upto the operator to decide on the cost vs savings of the package.

A typical 737 addon pair costs abt 750,000$ and an additional 100,000$ to fit them.

They weigh abt 300kgs. (Thats addition to the Empty wt of the a/c and the a/c will carry 300kgs less revenue payload)
But on the whole the winglets are a no-brainer for a/c which fly 3hr + sectors regularly as the fuel savings more than offsets the cost of the winglet programe.

Lots of good info here abt 737 winglets
http://www.b737.org.uk/winglets.htm

Amber G.
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5390
Joined: 17 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Amber G. » 07 Oct 2014 06:42

A Pakistan Air Force (PAF) fighter aircraft crashed near Kuchlak, outskirt of Quetta, on Wednesday morning (Oct 1) due to a technical fault:
Image

Q1- What type of plane?


And when Air Commander Tariq Mehmood says:
The Air Headquarter has ordered an inquiry into the incident to determine the exact cause of the crash.
The aircraft crashed in a vacant area and there was no loss of life and property in the area.


Q2- How come No Loss of Property and/or life?
Q3 - I thought exact cause was "technical fault".

chiru
BRFite
Posts: 204
Joined: 17 Jun 2009 12:46
Location: mahishooru

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby chiru » 07 Oct 2014 06:58

Q1) It looks like a JF -17

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Indranil » 07 Oct 2014 07:06

+1 from the ventral strakes.

Amber G. wrote:Q2- How come No Loss of Property and/or life?

On ground.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15079
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby NRao » 24 Oct 2014 06:29

For real oldies:


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 30950
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby shiv » 25 Oct 2014 09:51

NRao wrote:For real oldies:


What is fascinating to me is the number of private companies that were making jets:
Handley-Page Victor
De Havilland Comet
English Electric Lightning (and Canberra, I think)
Hawker Siddeley Buccaneer
and missing from the video, the Avro Vulcan

All were nationalized to become BAe because single companies became unsustainable against American competition. And then even in America, consolidation occurred.

In India we are looking at the reverse.

maks
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 4
Joined: 15 Aug 2009 23:05

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby maks » 31 Oct 2014 00:50

Admins if this is not the correct place for this post - I apologize but this is the closest thread I could find.

I am trying to build the models of the Hurricane iiC flown by Jagdish Chandra Verma and the Spitfire/Hurricane flown by Mohinder Singh Pujji. I am trying to add markings to when Verma shot down his lone Oscar and Pujji for any of his 2 kills. Questions for anyone in the know:

a) What were the markings on Verma's hurricane?
b) Did Pujji fly a hurricane or spitfire (what mark for either) for his confirmed kills and what were the markings for his aircraft? I know he first flew a Hurricane iiB with Amrit written across his cockpit and later a Spit Mk V (Don't know if it was B or C or had had the extra nose scoop for the Mediterranean theatre). However there is no piece I came up with to tell what aircraft he flew when he shot down his 2 Me109s though one article had a suggestion it was a Spitfire Mk V possibly RAF Sq 43?

Many thanks if anyone can enlighten as I have tried to research and hit a dead-end!

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Victor » 01 Nov 2014 18:36

^ The history and public relations depts at Air HQ have been helpful with similar queries. Suggest u contact them if u haven't already.

maks
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 4
Joined: 15 Aug 2009 23:05

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby maks » 01 Nov 2014 19:03

Thanks Victor. Being across a cpl of oceans might make that challenging but that's a great suggestion and will try it out. As a heads up, I am just about finishing a DML Mig-29, a classic Crown Sea Harrier and an Airfix Spitfire PR XIX in IAF colors. Will post pictures as soon as I am done.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_20317 » 09 Jan 2015 21:10

The Migs we love :


Probably the best view to witness the proportions (Romanian Mig-21 Lancer):
Image




So what model is it:
Image




And behold:

Image

Guards Lieutenant Colonel Valentin V. Privalov - military pilot - on 4 June 1965 - MiG-17 - flying under the central arch of the Public Novosibirsk bridge over river Ob - distance between the supports of the bridge = 120 m - height = 30 m - speed = 700 km/h.

Privalov was facing court-martial, but the Defense Minister, Marshal Malinovsky decided to keep the pilot in the ranks.

[url]defendingrussia.ru/people/valentin_privalov_mne_ochen_tyazhelo_bez_neba_ya_vse_vremya_letayu_vo_sne[/url]

"I'll tell you without any modesty, - says Privalov - Gorky was" born to crawl can not fly, "and I was born to fly!"

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 02 Feb 2015 21:52

..

Image

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 629
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_20067 » 02 Feb 2015 21:57

looks like early prototype of SR-71 Blackbird

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 02 Feb 2015 22:04

Nope :wink:

Those designs can be seen here -

Image

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_23694 » 02 Feb 2015 22:45

brar_w wrote:..

Image


Boeing joint strike fighter

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 02 Feb 2015 22:48

dhiraj wrote:
Boeing joint strike fighter


Not quite! Boeing used a delta wing, and the design at the time was 7 months pregnant with the X-45 :wink:
Last edited by brar_w on 02 Feb 2015 22:54, edited 1 time in total.

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 629
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_20067 » 02 Feb 2015 22:52

brar_w wrote:..

Image


mcdonnell douglas jsf

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_23694 » 02 Feb 2015 22:52

brar_w wrote:
dhiraj wrote:
Boeing joint strike fighter


Not quite!


McDonnell Douglas MRF wind tunnel model later bought by Boeing

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 02 Feb 2015 22:55

dhiraj wrote:
McDonnell Douglas MRF wind tunnel model later bought by Boeing


Bingo! The design wasn't bought by boeing, they didn't (the acquisition) integrate till much later but yeah Boeing did buy some sense on how to design a real fighter through that acquisition. Now for bonus (and to check whether this was from memory or using google) please guess which iteration this design was for that particular team based out of St. Louis

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Indranil » 02 Feb 2015 23:16

I had no idea of this one. Is this a follow on of the 287-1006 studies?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 02 Feb 2015 23:29

indranilroy wrote:I had no idea of this one. Is this a follow on of the 287-1006 studies?



Around the same time. The eventual design submitted by MD was obviously as a team (post JAST study) with The heavy weight in Northrop Grumman (coming out of a poorly implemented acquisition/merger) but this particular design was the third of their internal effort. Of course as the story unfolded MD continued to show the show the middle finger to the Marines and did not listen to that half of the program requirement and eventually lost. The original competition was thought to be between MD (and team) and Lockheed. Boeing weren't even in the picture until they agreed to jointly fund their test aircraft just to get in the door (they had to fund the testing as well). That's why there are two X-32's in the JSF history, one developed by Lockheed and the other by Boeing. MD's effort was probably the best from a purely CTOL aspect of the designs submitted (because they thought that STOVL won't be a very big thing from a design perspective for the acquisition people) and this was throughout the process whether it was their own internal design effort or the collective designs that were eventually tested/submitted. Much Like Lockheed in the B-2 competition or Northrop and MD during the ATF, the team lost out because A) They did not draw the correct conclusion from the draft RFP, and B ) They did not manage the design risk properly while the winner(s) did. There were so many different designs developed and tested in the tunnel (by all teams) as the RFI's and RFP's evolved that one could just sit with a catalogue and see which designs are reflected in future projects around the world, particularly some of the things coming out of South Korea and Turkey.

Image

Image

Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Indranil » 02 Feb 2015 23:51

Thank you for the information.

I sympathize with them. Aerodynamically speaking, it is an impossible task. Internal volume and weight are a fighter aircrafts worst enemies for performance.There is an extremely large school of people who don't think CTOL and VSTOL should be merged, especially for US which has the wherewithals to support fighters optimized for either requirements. Anyways, we both know about both sides of this argument.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 03 Feb 2015 00:06

I somewhat agree, but from a purely competition perspective one has to design around the RFP received or else back out and not compete otherwise you risk of loosing a ton of business and being acquired by someone else (and thats what happened to them - but in a way it was a good thing as the next decade should show us). This has happened before with Kelly Johnson doing his own thing on the LWF and ticking the USAF off that ultimately contributed to his retiring from Lockheed. Otherwise, the JSF was the only way either of the three services could afford a new aircraft and therefore the challenge was wide i.e. design an aircraft that exceeds the performance of all the aircraft it is replacing in relevant conditions and incorporates the huge advances in stealth, sensors and avionics made since the legacy jets were designed. Thats what the OEM's were asked to deliver and that is what they set out to demonstrate. The ATF gave them a very high mach super cruise requirement along with the ability to hold a very low signature at that speed. Heck even the watered down F-22 (from the original ATF requirements) can go supersonic on dry power at sea level, yet that all comes at a cost. The JSF approach was then as it is now, to utilizes the enormous advances in materials, stealth, sensors and avionics and package them into a platform that balanced design and performance with affordability. One can easily go out and compare what the Brits or the french spent on a handful of Rafale's or Typhoons or even what the USAF spent on a handful of F-22's. Looked from that angle the 350 Billion odd acquisition cost of 2400 odd F-35's spread over 3 variants is a bargain given the capability.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Indranil » 03 Feb 2015 05:00

The real argument is never F-35 vs Eurofighters, or F-35 vs F-22. The real question is what the F-35 could have been using the enormous advances in materials, stealth, sensors and avionics and package and not bound by the unnecessary baggages placed on it. Anyways, let's stop this discussion.

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 05 Feb 2015 16:54

I really like this thread and here is my pooch to the avid sky-watchers.
Image

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 629
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_20067 » 05 Feb 2015 17:12

GopiN wrote:I really like this thread and here is my pooch to the avid sky-watchers.
Image

Me-323

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 05 Feb 2015 17:33

Prithwiraj wrote:
GopiN wrote:I really like this thread and here is my pooch to the avid sky-watchers.
Image

Me-323

:shock: Correct

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 09 Feb 2015 05:56

Pretty straight forward..

Image

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 738
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Khalsa » 10 Feb 2015 01:19

brar_w wrote:Pretty straight forward..

Image


Indian AMCA

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4929
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Indranil » 10 Feb 2015 04:36

X-32

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1409
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Sid » 10 Feb 2015 05:03

Boeing JSF, that was one ugly looking bird.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 10 Feb 2015 08:00

All Wrong... :D

This is the Boeing ATF Submission (1986) for the competition that eventually led to the F-22A.

ImageImage
Image

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 10 Feb 2015 15:24

Image
Please to identify the said plane

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 10 Feb 2015 19:04

^^ This was a graphic that lockheed released in the late 80's talking about one of their designs that they considered at one point. This design was officially never, ever submitted under any request for information or request for proposal. All the way up until the mid 1980's, lockheed martin was pushing the "battle-cruiser" concept for the ATF which bore a resemblance to the YF12/SR71 families. The history of the ATF program is extremely interesting particularly the back and forth between the USAF, the Pentagon and the contractors. At the time the RFP was being drafted they grossly underestimated the capabilities in stealth. They then had to get folks that were familiar with the ongoing efforts on stealth (F-117 and B-2) into the picture and then just 8 days after the RFP was released, they amended it and added considerably stealth requirements. The All aspect stealth (as opposed to frontal) was a big win for Northrop and Lockheed since they had tremendous volume of R&D on stealth and shaping and had by then received the sort of computers and had developed algorithms to develop stealthy curved shapes. According to the program boss who managed the entire program they had " 2 excellent designs, 3 very good designs and other designs where the contractors had no idea what the hell they were doing".

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 10 Feb 2015 19:15

brar_w wrote:^^ This was a graphic that lockheed released in the late 80's talking about one of their designs that they considered at one point. This design was officially never, ever submitted under any request for information or request for proposal. All the way up until the mid 1980's, lockheed martin was pushing the "battle-cruiser" concept for the ATF which bore a resemblance to the YF12/SR71 families. The history of the ATF program is extremely interesting particularly the back and forth between the USAF, the Pentagon and the contractors. At the time the RFP was being drafted they grossly underestimated the capabilities in stealth. They then had to get folks that were familiar with the ongoing efforts on stealth (F-117 and B-2) into the picture and then just 8 days after the RFP was released, they amended it and added considerably stealth requirements. The All aspect stealth (as opposed to frontal) was a big win for Northrop and Lockheed since they had tremendous volume of R&D on stealth and shaping and had by then received the sort of computers and had developed algorithms to develop stealthy curved shapes. According to the program boss who managed the entire program they had " 2 excellent designs, 3 very good designs and other designs where the contractors had no idea what the hell they were doing".

And we have a winner .. Yes, this was the LM "Rounded stealth" Concept (A concept also pursued by the Soviets at that time) This was the diametric opposite of the stealth shaping we see today wherein the rounded edges redistribute radio waves over such a large arc that the Receiver cannot pick this out of the clutter.
My mistake to post it right after you posted an ATF design
:cry:

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 316
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Boreas » 10 Feb 2015 19:23

more of the same breed, who lost to raptor - http://yf-23.net/Lockheed.html

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby brar_w » 10 Feb 2015 19:53

Boreas wrote:more of the same breed, who lost to raptor - http://yf-23.net/Lockheed.html


The top one is a derivative of the battle cruiser concepts, the second was a graphic released for media consumption and nothing that they took very seriously at the time (at least form the submitted documents). The third is the most important picture of the lot, since it shows the evolution (Codeonemagazine has a full section on this). Lockheed was very smart in involving General Dynamics into their design efforts after they were down-selected. The borrowed the ATF wing designs directly form GD's design team. Northrop on the other hand didn't really use McDonnell Douglas much and pretty much carried their design from the earlier competition (for the down-select) whereas they could have reduced the weight significantly had they spent more time on enhancing the YF23.

My mistake to post it right after you posted an ATF design


One point however, this was a general design for lockheed leading up to the ATF design team's creation. It was not a part of their ATF effort either at the RFI stage or the RFP stage. The evolving designs can be seen here :

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/m ... 7_7236.JPG

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 738
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby Khalsa » 11 Feb 2015 01:29

brar_w wrote:All Wrong... :D

This is the Boeing ATF Submission (1986) for the competition that eventually led to the F-22A.

ImageImage
Image


Great ...

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 04 Mar 2015 16:45

An easy one for the gurus, but the guy who figures it out also has to give a small explanation of this aircraft..
Image

sudhan
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 01 Jul 2009 17:53
Location: Timbuktoo..

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby sudhan » 04 Mar 2015 16:48

^^ Looks like the BA609.. Of course it is the 'Osprey'esque tiltrotor plane.. Fly like a plane land like a chopper..

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Aircraft Recognition

Postby member_28640 » 04 Mar 2015 17:16

It was the BA-609 now its the AW-609(Was a Bell/Agusta westland collab - Bell Bowed out).. Tilt rotor yes, but my favorite part is the forward swept wings. Has a smaller footprint than a V-22 and is expected to be cheaper too.. First was aimed at big Oil execs then focus shifted to people who have the luxury of a plane with the ability to land in Helipads.. Amazingly this Tilt rotor can be flown by 1 pilot in Instrument rules condition. Italian military has expressed interest, I hope so do our special forces.. Would make a formidable plane to land troops in enemy lands and pick them up in double speed


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ashthor, Bala Vignesh, devendra.fonia, kvraghav, rohitvats, vmalik, Yogi T and 50 guests