-  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]

Subject   (new thread)
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Images greater than 300x300 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 701 unique user posts.

  • Blotter updated: 2016-01-30 Show/Hide Show All

File 132985394688.jpg - (914.45KB , 2352x1568 , BMW-F800S-LimitedEdition2010-RightFrontLow.jpg )
1 No. 1 ID: e63b69 Stickied hide watch quickreply [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]
Post it if it's yours and gets you from point A to point B!

No post without picture.
383 posts and 375 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20628 ID: 634497
File 146386713372.jpg - (566.62KB , 1920x2560 , IMG_20160408_101758.jpg )

>It'll take me over a football field to stop at highway speed and 80k gross weight.....
>I'm not worried about bikes though, unless you hit debris in front of me.

That's kind of what I'm talking about, though. The thought that always crosses my mind is basically "What happens if I lay it down with this guy <30 M behind me?"

And yeah, that's rhetorical; I pretty well know what would happen.

>It's oblivious car drivers.

Jesus, don't even get me started, bro.
>> No. 20700 ID: fe32b3
File 146629523816.jpg - (3.51MB , 5312x2988 , tmp_6180-20160618_1905421464070492.jpg )
This was way before I started trippin, but last week I made my last payment, and I still love this car.
Jesus fucking Christ Boof, if I had access to this kind of hardware, my friggin head would explode. Congrats on the Ferrari! Its so pretty!

File 146955149770.jpg - (308.66KB , 894x1600 , ss Udvar 000.jpg )
21058 No. 21058 ID: 9dcda2 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]

> The Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, also called the Udvar-Hazy Center, is the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's annex at Washington Dulles International Airport in the Chantilly area of Fairfax County, Virginia, United States

I checked out the Udvar-Hazy Center. Pretty damn cool. I got a little emotional around the Space Shuttle Discovery. I wasn't trying to document the whole museum, I just snapped some pictures of cool stuff. (With a specific interest in engines.)
90 posts and 88 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21154 ID: 9723b1
File 146967430538.png - (74.37KB , 2091x2506 , US06926231-20050809-D00005.png )
The Russian version just has two lightweight turbojet engines instead of one massive pseudoturbofan. Why did they use the fan? The only advantage of a fan I can think of is better fuel efficiency, but that obviously isn't the case here (or needed).
Why didn't they use two tiny compact turbojet engines? Could even use the Boeing PETA.
>> No. 21155 ID: d4c8ee
File 146967801230.jpg - (1.11MB , 5615x3159 , 140910-M-SR938-996.jpg )
Because separate lift jets have been operationally shown to be inferior due to the added weight and lower power.

Combined lift from the two lift jets on the Yak-38 was 64 kilo Newtons of thrust.

Lift from the original GR3 Harrier's Pegasus (single engine with four directed vents) was 97kN, the AV-8B and GR9 increased this to 105 and 110kN respectively.

Combined lift from the F-35B's Rolls-Royce lift system (tail exhaust, the fan, two wing ducts) is 186kN.
>> No. 21156 ID: 9723b1
The commie version of F-35 is the Yak-141, not Yak-38.

The main reason it's a superior idea is that the thrust of the mini jets is independent of the main engine, whereas in F-35 the fan is sapping power from the engine itself.
Yak-141: [42kN + 42kN front lift] + 152kN main = 235kN. More lift power on a lighter aircraft is why the Yak-141 is a true VTOL whereas F-35 is STOVL.

Especially with something like PETA providing thrust, which has fewer moving parts and can be a load bearing structure member. Only downside is high fuel consumption and noise, but since it's only going to be active during landing and takeoff it's not really an issue.
>> No. 21157 ID: d4c8ee

Key word here is that I said "operationally."

But if we're expanding to "failed prototypes", like the Yak-141 the XV-4, VAK 191B, VJ 101, Mirage Balzac V and Do 31 all tried to use separate vertical jets, and were all canceled for a lack of performance. Likewise the Convair 200 concept (which "inspired" the three-bearing tail pipe on the Yak-141) ended up being shelved for similar reasons before the Sea Control Ship program got killed.

>152kN main

That's afterburner thrust, which would not be used for vertical flight, due to the Yak-141 being unable to hover for more than 150 seconds due to heat buildup. Dry thrust for the 141 was 108kN.

>Especially with something like PETA providing thrust, which has fewer moving parts and can be a load bearing structure member. Only downside is high fuel consumption and noise, but since it's only going to be active during landing and takeoff it's not really an issue.

Two whole jet engines is "fewer moving parts" than a power takeoff driving a fan? Okay then.
>> No. 21158 ID: 385f49
>Two whole jet engines is "fewer moving parts" than a power takeoff driving a fan? Okay then.
With LM, you never know... >>21145

No. 20292 ID: 9dcda2 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
  Northrop F5 Freedom Fighter HD

I want one.
53 posts and 37 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20365 ID: 83d63c
  XB-70 VALKYRIE BOMBARDERO NUCLEAR SILENCIOSO!! - GTA 5 Mod STUNT MONTAGE - Tramcaman https://youtu.be/oqpk_QIpo4Q
Should use the sprawling city maps of the GTA games with the aircraft and mechanics of Ace Combat.
>> No. 20366 ID: 83d63c
  But since this is an aircraft documentaries thread...
Great Planes | North American XB-70 Valkyrie | Documentary https://youtu.be/FrYhiNhp-L0
Ahead of its time - the XB-70 Valkyrie could travel at three times the speed of sound. Over more than a half century after its first flight, the XB-70 is still one of aviation's most interesting achievements.
>> No. 20397 ID: 7c90e8
File 145997292475.jpg - (358.57KB , 1520x1022 , Canadair_CF-116A_Freedom_Fighter_01_April_1987_jpe.jpg )
CF-5 is interesting, 240 of the original 847 F-5 Freedom fighters were CF-5s.

Some changes were:
- A complex pneumatic landing gear which allowed the CF-5 to boost themselves off the airfield quicker.
- A midair refueling probe because of large Canadian airspaces.
- Much better navigation systems, also because of large patrol airspaces.
- Engines which were less powerful but more capable of handling FOD.

As a result of the weaker engines it could just barely exit the transonic flight regime.
>> No. 20440 ID: 9dcda2
Something a little different:
Air Crash Confidential S01E01 Pilot Error
>> No. 21152 ID: 088449

Ooo, this one's really good. It includes a section on the J79 engine development. Apparently, the first fighter engine to include variable stators. (Stay-tors)

So smokey.

No. 8774 ID: a8a5cc hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
  >The US Navy has completed the first ever catapult launch of the Northrop Grumman X-47B unmanned combat air system demonstrator (UCAS-D) aircraft at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, earlier today. Apparently it went very well, the Navy sent over this video of the launch earlier this evening.

>The catapult shot is a crucial step towards the jet's initial sea-trials, which are expected next year (the X-47B that's on Truman right now is merely doing deck-handling exercises). The sea-trials will involve catapult launches, arrested recoveries and having the X-47B fly the pattern around the "boat" while coordinating with carrier's air traffic controllers. The idea behind the UCAS-D is to prove that an autonomous unmanned aircraft can safely operate at sea onboard a carrier.

>If the X-47B fails, the prospects for the follow-on Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft program would dim markedly. The Navy is counting on the X-47B to pave the way for that program.


Pretty fucking cool.
86 posts and 61 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21055 ID: 1e7925

Lots of talk about this at work. The AI mostly improved on the existing AI opponent, it's not really OMG TERMINATOR AI thing.

The U Cincinnati article is a little less hype-y. The linked white paper comes across as an infomercial for the guys' fuzzy logic algorithm.


>> No. 21056 ID: 396316
Yeah no shit it doesn't require a lot of processing power to calculate vectors in a completely controlled environment, I've been getting my ass kicked by AI since ace combat two.

It's when it gets into uncontrolled environments that things get a lot more complicated.

Instead of having every grid point mapped in a computer and every moving object accounted for, in a real world the AI would have to collect data and build a HIGHLY IMPERFECT picture of the world around it. For example there would be no way to predict and react to simple things like enemy flak blowing up near or a sensor going out.

Also a lot more important is the ability to decide where the pilot fits in the overall tactical, strategic and even political landscape. If he shoots down that Israeli jet will the pilot be starting a thermonuclear war? Is that passenger jet out of Iran a simple airliner or a converted chemical weapons delivery system, and how to make a value judgement?
>> No. 21141 ID: 30f399
File 146960469072.jpg - (750.24KB , 1500x828 , US UAV X-47B Northrop-Grumman J-UCAS RC bomber 5.jpg )
The AI would build an imperfect picture of the world around it, like how human pilots do, but people can make sound judgments based on common sense and experience (difficult to quantify and translate into a computer program), but an AI could just ignore things that are not threats or concerning to the mission. Such as being mindful of areas it is not supposed to enter, the ground or navigational hazards, or threats such as enemy radar, anti-aircraft artillery or missiles. When fighting an aerial dogfight, the AI could be programmed to concentrate on the most pressing concerns in order of importance, such as enemy aircraft, flak and SAMs.
And as for predicting the trajectory of enemy flak, that would be the AI's forte as long as its sensors are effective (and the sensors it is sharing with its network). If the AI indeed thinks and reacts with logical decisions hundreds of times faster than a human can, it could weave through flak and obstructions like an ace in the prosecution of its mission.
And determining who to attack, the AI would be governed by the rules of engagement, just like human pilots are, but the AI might make unfortunate judgment calls.
>> No. 21142 ID: 30f399
File 146960622757.jpg - (163.20KB , 1600x1143 , US bomb AIM-9X Sidewinder missile by Raytheon 1.jpg )
Now imagine if such sophistication could be imparted to missiles. If the missile's sensors are precise enough to correctly identify the enemy aircraft it was locked on to, the missile's AI might be effective in ignoring counter-measures and predicting the aircraft's movements to plot the best course to destroy the aircraft.
- US Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder missile.
>> No. 21143 ID: 30f399
File 146960631447.jpg - (90.17KB , 1152x722 , US bomb AIM-9X Sidewinder missile seeker head 2.jpg )
"You're not fooling anyone, flyboy."

File 146023209316.jpg - (173.88KB , 800x600 , My BJ40.jpg )
20439 No. 20439 ID: cad48c hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
So after much thought, I've decided to sell off the BJ40 I was working on. While I enjoy the hell out of the cantankerous bastard, it's not really a viable option for my daily driver needs for a couple reasons -- most notably, finding parts is a pain in the ass and only going to get worse.

So now I'm in the market for something new and looking for ideas. I'm looking for a 4WD SUV (or much less preferably pickup), probably mid/full-sized. While I like the capacity of a pickup, it rains enough here and I find utility in having capacity for 3-4 people that the enclosed space of a SUV is likely a better tradeoff. Having said that, I do want to be able to chuck a range day's worth of gear in the back without much trouble. Most of my driving will be on paved roads/highways, but I want to be able to get offroad easily enough, though obviously I'm willing to give up crazy extreme rock-crawling ability in the name of practical road driving.

So far this has lead me to look at 4Runners, newer Land Cruisers, and XTerras. I've got about 10K to throw at this, can wiggle a bit. Here's my real problem though -- I'd prefer a diesel, but the American market seems to hate them outside of absurdly large pickups.

Anyone have any other ideas?
29 posts and 6 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20723 ID: 2a7fd5
File 14665070696.jpg - (56.77KB , 506x286 , WHYWHYWHY.jpg )

>Swapping Japanese or American lel simplicity for overengineered euroshit
Pic related.

>Wanting to pay the euroshit tax on top of the diesel parts tax
Pic related.

If you absolutely WANT to pay a premium on parts and have a bad time working on your own vehicle, why not go for a Mercedes OM617 or OM601? Hell, in >>20685 it looks like there might even be room for an OM617 (the straight-5) in there.

The ALH in that Xterra is somewhat better than earlier engines. For one, they run the oil pump on a chain from the crankshaft, and the vacuum pump off the end of the camshaft, as opposed to running an extra jackshaft like on the 1.6IDI and the first gen TDI. But, it does run the water pump off the (already stressed) timing belt. Since it's a diesel, it's an interference engine.
The Mercedes engines are chain timed, and they run the water pump from an accessory drive belt.

So, you've got your swap. That costs $7000+. And you get 30+MPG. Great. A 1.6L automatic Sidekick gets about 30 MPG, and they can be found for $2000-4000.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
>> No. 21029 ID: f2112f
File 146656461964.jpg - (14.46KB , 480x270 , 12189770_10153817033884758_365100022701893514_n.jpg )

He used to be married to OM617's but moved to TDI's. He explained why once but I don't remember enough details not to butcher the reasoning. It doesn't cost him $7000 to do the swap, that's what he sells them for.

Pic is a TDI Jetta towing a Pathfinder. That turned some heads.
>> No. 21041 ID: cad48c
Probably just going to stick to my 4Runner plan, put another 200K on whatever I find, and when it finally wears the fuck out maybe I'll have enough banked to get something interesting. Maybe we'll see some interesting diesels in the market by then that aren't a total pain in the dick.
>> No. 21043 ID: f87148
File 146670344793.jpg - (53.17KB , 344x257 , land_rover_tdi.jpg )
This thread inspired me to finally do a bit of searching regarding something that's been lurking in the far back recesses of my mind for years now, and ohhh shit, there's someone who actually does this commercially!

>> No. 21054 ID: d23ffe
I've been looking around for the same. I like my expedition, but I'd prefer a diesel.

Jeep made a Liberty with a diesel for a while, rare but you can find them.

No Amarok yet, but the Touareg and mid size VW have been available for a while, both in diesel with 4wd.

The EPA is horribly out of control. When the nation was being crippled by near $4/gal gas. The EPA was fining the crap out fuel companies for failure to meet impossible standards, which was adding something like another 20 cents per gallon, that's border line economic treason.

While economy doesn't directly equal lower emissions. It can greatly reduce the footprint. Every unit of gas from the crude coming out of the ground to evaporation at the pump increases polution. Not to mention meeting the standards often leads to poor mpg, which is self defeating.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

File 145686585625.jpg - (1.67MB , 2592x1944 , KIMG0233.jpg )
19982 No. 19982 ID: a70f76 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Celebrating /v/ surviving the revamp, let's talk about the latest repair/replacement/upgrade/any maintenance whatsoever we've had to perform on our vehicles.

On my way to work this morning, my rear end slumped out of nowhere, no apparent cause. I thought I had a flat initially, but started to realize that it was my shocks after experiencing no handling issues.

Limped into work, looked at it for a few minutes, had to clock in, then 2 hours later during my 15 minute break, I pulled the side panels off and discovered this. Apparently the retaining washer broke and the shock came off the bushing and was wedged between the exhausted and the frame.

Thank God, it's an easy fix and I work in a shop, plenty of tools at my disposal. Loosened the exhaust, freed the shock, realigned it and stole a washer from the Grainger box to reattach it and even reinforced it.

I spent that two hours stressing about the possibilities, thinking I was going to be spending more money or missing work.
39 posts and 7 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21039 ID: 79b400
It'd honestly go nowhere. There's no way I can prove in court that it was a result of them just forgetting. I know better, there's definitely no leak. I park on bright concrete most of the time, I'd notice something eventually. Every thing is clean on the inside, nothing where it shouldn't be. I actually clean inside it quite a bit.

I think steering business away them from is a better option in the long run. Their reviews are just getting worse on Google and I believe my story trumps their various complaints.
>> No. 21044 ID: d0d811
Problem was the cam chain came out of alignment. Slightly stretched, but it will run reliably until I can replace it.

They set aside everything the previous mechanics did wrong to show me what they had to do. It was infuriating.
>> No. 21047 ID: 79b400
Okay, amend that. It will not run reliably, currently will not start. Now I need to come up with $350.
>> No. 21048 ID: 9ea451
File 146715900917.jpg - (111.38KB , 1140x488 , Burning-Money-cropped.jpg )
>> No. 21049 ID: 79b400
Amend that amendment. It will now cost me $450 because of it needing a few other parts.

My luck is great.

File 146547055617.jpg - (3.28MB , 3712x2088 , P1000686.jpg )
20667 No. 20667 ID: 87888c hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]

Really, guys? This isn't a Clyde ferry that's going to spend its life in nice cool water; this is a globally deployable ship that should be expected to spend time "east of Suez". Sufficient cooling capacity should have been built in.
21 posts and 13 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20696 ID: 9723b1
>The reason it's inhumane is first of all that fuel-air bombs deflagrate instead of explode, moving air more completely and causing a vacuum effect that can rupture capiliaries in lungs at a greater range. This is a very slow and painful death.
ie blast lung.

It's possible to survive a FAE only to live with a lowered lung capacity and a scarred lung for years.
>> No. 20726 ID: 4cec2f
apparently the MOD *forgot* to specify warm water operations to RR.

Unfortunately Britain props up BAe and RR as "domestic industries".
>> No. 21028 ID: f86534
Those companies would be replaced by tons better ones the moment the monopoly was over. Just like Oshkosh raped AMG.
>> No. 21045 ID: 385f49
Rocked pods, especially for aircraft, have shitty aim even for the the initial purpose (they are designed that way to provide wide cone for maximum effectiveness). But on the ground, when they are starting without initial speed, they have even shittier aim then that, because more speed provides more stability for the rocket. I.e., the range of this firework contraption is probably below 300 meters compared to 1000+ for normal firing mode from plane.

In effect, this kind of "weapon" is only suitable for terror tactics like shelling populated areas or diversion tactics.

>And last of all, if a Fuel-Air bomb doesn't explode at all, the ethylene oxide fuel simply disperses in the air as an aerosol, acting as a chemical weapon.
Interestingly enough, these kind of weapons can also be used for burning out chemical weapons - it's not like it's 100% effective, but better then nothing.
>> No. 21046 ID: 9723b1
File 146678773665.jpg - (107.70KB , 740x367 , CRV7-PG.jpg )
>more speed provides more stability for the rocket
This is because the rockets are launched smoothbore, then small fins pop out to spin the rocket in flight and give it some gyroscopic stability. The problem here is that during the initial period before the rocket is spun fully, the fins only produce WOBBLING in the air, which greatly harms accuracy.

tl;dr fin limitations cause rockets to suffer a lot from accuracy problems.

One way to cut on the wobble is to increase the speed of the aircraft, which shortens the period during which the rocket isn't spinning. But the REAL solution is to do what the Canadians did, internalize the fins into the rocket exhaust, which completely removes the wobble problem.
>Unguided rockets are normally spin stabilized, like a rifle bullet. The spin is imparted by small fins at the rear of the rocket body that flip out into the airstream once the rocket leaves its launch tube. The fins take a short time to open, and more time to start the rocket spinning. During this period the rockets can drift significantly from their original aim point. The CRV7 solved this problem by adding small vanes projecting into the rocket exhaust to start the rocket spinning even before it left the launch tube, greatly increasing accuracy. A salvo of CRV7's will impact the target area in one-third the footprint of older designs.

The CRV7 is the most accurate unguided aircraft rocket in the world.
>The weapon was originally quoted to have a dispersion of 4 milliradians, but testing with the CF-18 Hornet demonstrated it was even lower, at 3 milliradians.[4] This is considerably better than the autocannon that arm most aircraft; the widely used M61 Vulcan is rated at 8 milliradians, while the much larger and considerably heavier GAU-8 is rated at 5 milliradians.[5]

A CRV7 is just as accurate when launched from a ground vehicle, pic related it's actually as accurate as a 105mm light gun.

File 146639950187.jpg - (0.98MB , 2203x2938 , u4fK3xp.jpg )
20709 No. 20709 ID: f49edb hide watch quickreply [Reply]
Blowouts, man.
>> No. 21040 ID: cf7a47
Ever hear the story about the C5 (or was it a C17?) that had the blowout while a dude was leaning on the tire?

God damn.
>> No. 21042 ID: f87148
File 146670327473.jpg - (9.22KB , 275x183 , orangutan_oh_sht.jpg )

Cleanup on aisle C5!

File 146654336437.jpg - (709.83KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_091352.jpg )
20725 No. 20725 ID: d5e5a4 hide watch quickreply [Reply] [First 100 posts] [Last 50 posts]
Visited the National Museum of the USAF in Dayton OH last week.
The place is huge, and they just opened up their 4th hangar to the public, full of X-planes. Admission is free. I spent 6 hours there, and didn't even come close to putting a dent in stuff to see and read about.

Most pics are presented without comment.
298 posts and 298 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21026 ID: d5e5a4
File 14665519176.jpg - (716.42KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_114519.jpg )
>> No. 21027 ID: d5e5a4
File 146655195143.jpg - (606.13KB , 1328x747 , 20160616_115242.jpg )
>> No. 21030 ID: f2112f
File 146656504564.jpg - (73.19KB , 960x720 , 13445682_1264206026953290_4014710712259818109_n.jpg )

Shiny... I need to go there one of these days. Today started the Sentimental Journey Fly-in in Lock Haven, The C-54 Spirit of Freedom is there again this year. I will of course be abusing my free access to take all the pictures.
>> No. 21034 ID: bf2165
Hey! You're in my neck of the woods. I still havn't been to see the 4th hanger, I really need to do that.
>> No. 21057 ID: 9dcda2
A little late, but cool shit man.

File 146630795778.jpg - (117.75KB , 768x516 , NAPO-Su-34-2.jpg )
20703 No. 20703 ID: 9723b1 Locked hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Su-34's were sent to bomb terrorists over Syria on Friday, and carried out a strike.

The terrorists called Obama for help to block the Russians until they could re-arm. Obama ordered F-18s scrambled to intercept and endanger the Su-34s without firing on them.

Su-34s successfully evaded the F-18s wtf? isn't F-18 a fighter? until the F-18s had to return for refueling.

The Su-34s then completed their bombing run and finised off not only the remaining terrorists, but also their logistics services that were in the process of rearming the terrorists safe in the knowledge that F-18s protected them.

5 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 20714 ID: 0d59ae
It doesn't matter if they're pro or anti-ISIS, if they are destabilizing the country though terror, they are islamic terrorists. From Syrian government point of view, every armed group in the country killing civilians is a bad one. It doesn't matter if the group is Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS or FSA, all are islamic terrorists bent on subverting the legitimate rule of law.

This is why Russia doesn't make a distinction when bombing any group that isn't the Syrian government in Syria, there's no fucking point. All of these groups are organized criminals at the very least.

>Even the Kurdish communists have started getting called "terrorists" by non-Turkish pro-Syrian media after they pushed ISIS out of northern Iraq and blitzkried into Syria.
Certain Kurdish factions have decided that if they cannot make a state in Turkey, they will make a state in weakened Syria. To this end they have resorted to terrorism and allying with other forces destabilizing Syria.

Calling certain Kurdish factions terrorists is calling a spade a spade, it is not politicized language, it is a fact. However not all Kurds have decided on this course of action and Syrian media is so far being careful about distinguishing between the groups.
>> No. 20715 ID: b430d1
File 146645745494.jpg - (32.50KB , 469x463 , 140649141794.jpg )
(this is what fascist enablers actually believe.)
>> No. 20716 ID: 3b6910
What the fuck are you doing? This isn't the designated shitposting board, get the fuck out.
>> No. 20718 ID: ebb4ba
It is when Sergei drinks more than his vodka ration and posts his "Obama is literally ISIS hitler, thank putin that putin is protecting the world" in /v/ rather than /n/
>> No. 20722 ID: 369bd6
File 146649563192.jpg - (63.09KB , 265x335 , 64399074.jpg )
Cease shitting up /v/ please.

Delete post []
Report post
Previous [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]