.com.unity Forums - Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- TO&Es (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=108)

- - Jets & Planes but no UAV's here. (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=46891)

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mobhack (Post 835250)

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99 (Post 835247)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mobhack (Post 835246)

The problem with the F-35 and ejection apparently comes from the massive weight of the VR helmet thingy the pilots have to wear. Undergoing rapid rocket acceleration that occurs with ejector seats, the pilot's neck seems to have a severe problem coping with all this and so is likely to be snapped by the massive whiplash effect.

So the people making the F35 lost sight of the restrictions the human body places on stuff? Really?

Apparently so.

Then again, stuff that is cool in the design shop sometimes does not work well when exposed to reality. I worked on a Sea King airborne sonobouy system (that rapidly grew into a mission system), and the initial design used a track ball. That worked fine till it was installed in a real helicopter, which vibrates like a wobbly thing. The trackball then produced its own jiggle from the vibes. Had to be replaced with a stiff stick controller.

This VR helmet may have to be shelved if its so deadly, waiting for possible future tech that is light enough to be put in a normal weight flight helmet?. Pilots certainly do not have time to fish out a neck brace from storage somewhere in the cockpit and fit it properly, before pulling the eject handle!.

Ahh, the voice of experience and common sense. Just why I always doubted Lockheed Martin a bit.
I used to be accused of being a McDonald Douglas fan boy by F35 fanboys. I always thought it very strange, being a Englishman and a infantry soldier who served in Northern Ireland and Africa. Like I care all that much about US aircraft makers. Ffs.

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Tracking China

Following the possible IOC of the first Y-20 Airlifters back in June 2016, China now apparently has signed a deal with Antonov to resume An-225 production.

http://www.janes.com/article/63341/c...225-production

Quote:

China and Ukraine have signed an agreement to recommence production of the Antonov An-225 'Cossack' strategic airlifter, media from both countries have reported.

The agreement signed between the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) and Antonov on 30 August gives China access to the aircraft's designs and technologies for the purposes of domestic production, according to China's STCN news organisation and the Ukrainian Business Channel (UBR).

What I think this means: Probability of An-225 #2 being completed as a test bed goes up a bit more; with an all-new Chinese very heavy strategic airlifter (Y-21??) entering service in about eight years, sized more towards C-5 capabilities than An-225.

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

I seem to recall reading someplace that the Russian ejection seat basically immobilizes the pilot when it ejects.
http://www.military.com/video/aircra...r/903159086001
Perhaps they just need a modified ejection seat that immobilizes the pilots neck, or a lighter helmet display.

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 835262)

Love the carrier shot where he ejects underwater and lands on the flight deck! :shock:

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scorpio_rocks (Post 835266)

Love the carrier shot where he ejects underwater and lands on the flight deck! :shock:

It beats being run over by a carrier...........

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 835262)

Interesting video. Fair number of Air Show crashes...

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99 (Post 835361)

Interesting video. Fair number of Air Show crashes...

Probably because at an Air Show everyone and their brother has a camera, whereas a crash in the middle of nowhere ...

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 835368)

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99 (Post 835361)

Interesting video. Fair number of Air Show crashes...

Probably because at an Air Show everyone and their brother has a camera, whereas a crash in the middle of nowhere ...

...that and the fact they tend to be doing difficult manoeuvrers close to the ground so have to bail rather than having space to level it out".

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scorpio_rocks (Post 835373)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 835368)

Quote:

Originally Posted by IronDuke99 (Post 835361)

Interesting video. Fair number of Air Show crashes...

Probably because at an Air Show everyone and their brother has a camera, whereas a crash in the middle of nowhere ...

...that and the fact they tend to be doing difficult manoeuvrers close to the ground so have to bail rather than having space to level it out".

All no doubt true. You would think that air show aircraft would be on the top line for maintenance, etc, though. Makes you wonder how many crashes they have 'off camera' perhaps?

Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

That thought occured to me as well.........you don't send second rate pilots to do airshows where everyone watches your every move and you don't send second rate ground crews to service the aircraft......however what you may try to do as a hotshot fighter pilot is push the envelope too far to prove you can do it .....or be told to run it on the edge by your superiors to prove a political point