Damn, that's one big airplane.

[Cyrus]

I can't back it up factually, but I doubt that any capure could capture an object moving that fast, that clearly. If they aren't landing, the F-15 would probably be going at least four hundred mph. That would require a ridicualously high framerate, and even then I don't think it coudl be clear enough to read to small paint on the side. Also, the photo has perfectly focused on the plane. I also don't buy the fact that there would be no engine blast visible. If the framerate was that good it should have captured the hot air behind it, and that has no distance on it.

heh yeah, ok. I don't think you have a clue what your talking about buddy.

 

[brewnog]

What do they machine? Do they control the entire profile of the wing or just in sections? I have never heard of them doing that.

They mill the wing skins, it's incredible. They're done in 20 sections, the largest of which is 35 metres long and varies in thickness between 6 and 28mm. This machining ultimately controls the profile, but the sections are then creep formed for 24 hours at 250C in a huge autoclave.

Will try and dig out some pictures of the mill, it's pretty impressive.

 

[J77]

^ that autoclave is impressive.

I went to a seminar by one of their guys before the launch. At the time, was impressed by the amount of transport links they built to connect the different manufacturing centres.

 

[DaveC426913]

400 mph is not required to go in straight and level flight. It's probably doing half that speed, which is about as fast as an Indy car. If it is photoshopped, then my hat's off to who did it. That is a masterpiece of work there. I can usually spot the doctored pics pretty easlily.

It's a Sukhoi, not an F-15.

I thought it was an F-18. (That was dumb, F-18 has round intakes, not raked) But it's certainly not an F-15!


I confess, I could detect no PhotoShopping either. Nothing where the front gear should be, and nothing where the rear gear should be.

Easy enough to 'shop the tarmac, sure - but if you crank up the gain to show detail in the shadowed underwing area where the rear gear should be, it has detail that should not be there if someone had 'shopped it. And there is no artifacting whatsoever.

Additionally, the plane is not level - it has a slight roll to port, which it could not have if on the tarmac.

My initial assertion that this is 'shopped is way shakier now.

 

[FredGarvin]

I thought it was an F-18. (That was dumb, F-18 has round intakes, not raked)

The Super Hornets have squared off, larger intakes now.

 

[Cyrus]

I honestly don't see how one could possibly confuse the two...

 

[russ_watters]

And from a slightly forward of center camera angle, it isn't hard to mistake a noticeably positive angle of attack (necessary for 200kt flight) for a roll to port...

I think it is real too.

 

[berkeman]

She is flown by Russian Gromov Flight Research Institute`s senior test pilot, Kvochur, only 2 meters above ground,without extending landing gears!

I remember reading in one of Chuck Yeager's books about how he felt the "ground effect" as he got ready to land his X-1. He said something like he thought he could probably even land in the lake bed if he was blindfolded. Probably a bit of an exaggeration, but that Russian pilot is probably using the ground effect to help him know how close he is to the tarmac. Gutsy pass for sure!

 

[Cyrus]

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&h=67&w=120&type=asf&rurl=www.ifilm.com%2Fifilmdetail%2F2684873%3Frefsite%3D7063%26ns%3D1&vurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifilm.com%2Fplayer%3FifilmId%3D2684873%26refsite%3D7063&back=p%3Dlow%2Bairplane%26ei%3DUTF-8%26cv%3Dg%26fr%3Dslv1-%26b%3D21&turl=re2.mm-da.yimg.com%2Fimage%2F1644856177&name=Low+Flying+747&no=31&tt=79&p=low+airplane&oid=4e643f98b7bb5d7e&dur=16&src=p&pld=780x515

If you want to see the 747 landing at St. Maarten.

 

[Cyrus]

Please people, enough with the conspiracy theories.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6547793592971674062&q=tomcat&pl=true

...I guess they must have photoshopped this video too huh?

 

[DaveC426913]

I honestly don't see how one could possibly confuse the two...

Which two? A Sukhoi and a Hornet? The two are much more alike than either is to a 14, 15 or 16, wouldn't you say?

I didn't confuse them so much as only give it a cursory glance. F18 is a very well-known plane, and it never occurred to me to check more carefully.

 

[DaveC426913]

And from a slightly forward of center camera angle, it isn't hard to mistake a noticeably positive angle of attack (necessary for 200kt flight) for a roll to port...

I think it is real too.

What mistake?? I am not confusing the angle of attack (pitch) with a roll!

The camera has a vantage point well above the tarmac, and is looking down at a several degree angle (which is why the horizon is way off the top of the pic). Yet even looking down upon the craft, the port wing - including its red trailing wingtip - are completely eclipsed behind the fuselage.

Draw a point anywhere that you think the port wingtiop trailing edge might be hiding, draw a line from the trailing edge of each wingtip. No matter how you draw it, it is going to intesect the tarmack somewhere in the background. The two wingtips are not level. Try any other two corresponding points on the craft. None are parallel to the ground.

Besides, why are we disagreeing? My assertion that the craft is in a slight roll is evidence in favour of the case that it is in flight and not on the ground.

 

[Cyrus]

To me, apples and oranges. I guess you don't love airplanes like Fred and I.

Did you just watch the video? It's not the same plane, but it proves the point.

 

[DaveC426913]

To me, apples and oranges. I guess you don't love airplanes like Fred and I.

Well ouch.:yuck:

I'm pretty good, but not up on late model foreign types.

Actually, I feel pretty foolish for leaping before looking. I should never have mistaken that for an F-18, what with those obviously F15-esque intake ports and F15-esque rudders. I did question the monster "tailbone", but put it down to model variation.

It's not the same plane, but it proves the point.

I've pretty much recanted my suspicion after examining the evidence in the photo.

 

[russ_watters]

I think I misread your post - I thought you were saying it looked like a bad cut-and-paste. Sorry.

 

[FredGarvin]

Enjoy that F-14 video while you can. Almost all of the squadrons are retiring them. I believe there is only one active squadron left. Bummer.

 

[Cyrus]

Enjoy that F-14 video while you can. Almost all of the squadrons are retiring them. I believe there is only one active squadron left. Bummer.

Can you hear this outside your window that far way fred?

NOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OO!
!

 

[FredGarvin]

I believe September is the end...sigh.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/navyweapons/a/f14lastflight.htm
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,94327,00.html
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,90808,00.html

 

[Cyrus]

The nice thing about my school is that it's on the flight path to Andrews AFB. So every day if you look up you can see Marine One doing circles around campus.. Or you can see the blue Hueys that VIP condy, Rummy or Cheney doing circles. I don't know why they have to sit there and do circle after circle around campus, I guess its because they are trying to look down girls shirts from up there. Or every once in a while you can see KC-135 tankers on their approach. Oh yeah, and then there's the new's choppers, and the Maryland state police helicopter too. That place is literally buzzing with helicopters all the time. Saw a Chinook the other day too, and a few black hawks. Oh, and there is a small airpark right next door too, so you can hear the cessnas and bonanza's taking off on full power as they climb out on departure.

 

[FredGarvin]

That place is literally buzzing with helicopters all the time.

Pure heaven!

Saw a Chinook the other day too...

The only true aircraft worth even mentioning. One must make sure he genuflects when you say that holiest of names.

 

[brewnog]

I get Chinook's going over work quite often, they're bloody awesome machines. Not quite as scary as the time I was rock climbing in the French Alps one summer evening, and an Apache ascended in front of the sunset, silhouetting its arsenal, and pointing straight at me! Possibly one of the most menacing shapes mankind has ever designed!

 

[FredGarvin]

I actually had quite a few opportunities to fly with a bunch of the British chaps from the 18th squadron when I was stationed in Germany. Those guys knew how to have a good time after an airshow. The last time I saw any of them was the Air Tatoo in Middle Wallop in 1990. Good times.

BTW...For all of you aircraft junkies...I got to stand next to, under and near the only existing XB-70 in existence today (amongst other historic aircraft). Talk about a great day.

 

[Astronuc]

I actually had quite a few opportunities to fly with a bunch of the British chaps from the 18th squadron when I was stationed in Germany. Those guys knew how to have a good time after an airshow. The last time I saw any of them was the Air Tatoo in Middle Wallop in 1990. Good times.

BTW...For all of you aircraft junkies...I got to stand next to, under and near the only existing XB-70 in existence today (amongst other historic aircraft). Talk about a great day.

Cool!

Also, for those who want to follow a particular flight (US I think) - http://flightaware.com/

They were tracking Continental Flight 3161, an ERJ that blew two tires on the left landing gear during takeoff in Houston today. The plane landed safely at 06:22PM CDT (1922 EDT).

 

[DaveC426913]

BTW...For all of you aircraft junkies...I got to stand next to, under and near the only existing XB-70 in existence today (amongst other historic aircraft). Talk about a great day.

Sweet.

When I was in Elvira NY, I had the chance to go for a flight in a B-17. They were just going through their pre-flight, and they had an extra seat. I couldn't justify the $350 to the wife though.

 

[Astronuc]

Sweet.

When I was in Elvira NY, I had the chance to go for a flight in a B-17. They were just going through their pre-flight, and they had an extra seat. I couldn't justify the $350 to the wife though.

Ouch! Yeah, wives are funny about things like that. :uhh:

 

[cronxeh]

Enjoy that F-14 video while you can. Almost all of the squadrons are retiring them. I believe there is only one active squadron left. Bummer.

I wonder if its possible to buy retired airplanes before they end up in Arizona's scrap yard

 

[russ_watters]

Probably not. Military hardware like that generally has to be decades obsolete and possibly even non-functioning to be legal for civilians to own.

 

[FredGarvin]

Sweet.

When I was in Elvira NY, I had the chance to go for a flight in a B-17. They were just going through their pre-flight, and they had an extra seat. I couldn't justify the $350 to the wife though.

My wife would know better...she knows there are only a couple of areas that she has no chance of swaying my intentions. Aircraft are number one.

P.S. Astro...you need to clean out your mailbox. It's full!

 

[Astronuc]

Probably not. Military hardware like that generally has to be decades obsolete and possibly even non-functioning to be legal for civilians to own.

I am not aware of any private citizen owning a supersonic military aircraft, and I am sure that there would be limitations on what engines would be available.

One might have better luck buing an old Russian or Chinese MiG, or the like. Speaking of which - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4962466.stm

Chinese man buys MiG through eBay

A Chinese businessman has bought an old MiG-21f fighter jet for nearly $25,000 (£14,000) on eBay to decorate his office, a Chinese newspaper reports.

Zhang Cheng bought the Soviet-made jet from a seller in the United States, where it is said to be in excellent condition though last flown in 1995.

And back in 1994 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/lancashire/3989019.stm

Vulcan bomber sale nets £15,000 - The former RAF nuclear bomber put up for auction on the internet has been sold for £15,000 to a pub landlord.

I'd love to have a Vulcan bomber.


IIRC, there are some old guys like the Lockheed T-33/F-80 Shooting Star and the T-34 around, and perhaps some F-86/F-100/F-102's, maybe even some F-104's. One might be able to get one, but one would probably have to be a member of the Confederate Air Force or Air National Guard.

P.S. Astro...you need to clean out your mailbox. It's full!

It's open again.

 

[DaveC426913]

I am not aware of any private citizen owning a supersonic military aircraft, and I am sure that there would be limitations on what engines would be available.

There's a guy down in Texas who owns one of the world's largest private collections of aircraft. He had an astonishing number and variety. Can't remember a thing about him though.

 

[brewnog]

The researcher I worked for at UMIST went away quite often to try and source jet engines for the Aerospace Engineering department. We had a few Rolls Royce Trents around the place, but he had quite a lot of contacts.

I was impressed when he told me he'd been offered a Rolls Royce Olympus engine (ie Concorde) free of charge, disappointed when he turned it down due to lack of space; but I was absolutely gobsmacked when he returned from a business trip to China to tell me he'd been offered a Mig 25 for something like £4000!

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

Probably not. Military hardware like that generally has to be decades obsolete and possibly even non-functioning to be legal for civilians to own.

That is mostly true. It is possible to buy a retired airframe from the air force, however it is usually just that the airframe, no engines, avionics, electrical/electronics, ect.

 

[wolram]

I have been saving up for ages.

http://www.incredible-adventures.com/graphics/capetown.pdf

I will never be able to afford it

 

[Mk]

I wonder if its possible to buy retired airplanes before they end up in Arizona's scrap yard

I'd like to take stuff from the scrapyards here. They got tanks and planes and some cool scientific equipment I hear. Illegal though.

 

[FredGarvin]

I'd love to have a Vulcan bomber.

Wow. A Vulcan? That is some serious history right there. I think there is only one flying in the world right now.

Any piece of government asset that people want to purchase has to go through a pretty lengthy "decommissioning" process. That is usually followed up by arranged auctions of some kind (at least for the stuff that I have ever been interested in). The thing about something like an F-14 is that they will keep a certain amount in mothballs for quite a while as a "just in case" measure. I haven't read anything about it, but I can not imagine that they will scrap all of them right off the bat.

I have heard stories of folks getting a hold of Chinese MiGs with armament still in them. Even so, I couldn't afford the space to park something let alone refurbish and maintain one (not to mention fill the tanks).