We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.

New answers tagged

2

Planes that fly off aircraft carriers rely on them heavily. They not only have indexer lights in the cockpit, but they also have them on the outside of the plane (usually on the nose gear doors) so the Landing Signals Officer on the boat can see them as well. Depending on the aircraft, they might not even turn on unless the landing gear is down, because ...


2

Right now I'm only imagining two kinds, an airframe factory and an engine factory. The plane's skin needs to be built, as well as all the electronics, all the cables, gauges, radios, guns, missiles, electric wiring, pumps, radar, radar receivers, ejection seats, the plexiglas canopy and windshield, the rubber wheels, etc, etc, ad nauseum. Hundreds of ...


1

To create a lift, the airflow speed on top of the wings should be higher than the airflow speed on the bottom of the wings. That is correct. Lift is the result of a pressure difference between upper and lower side, and pressure is proportional to the inverse of speed squared if no energy is added. But when you keep the engine on the bottom of the wings, ...


1

No, because the air is still turning the same way. It might even help a little bit, depending on the wing shape. To create lift you need lower pressure above the wing than below, but the difference in speed is the effect, not cause of this. The cause is that the air would like to continue moving straight due to inertia, and the pressure decreases above ...


6

To create a lift, the airflow speed on top of the wings should be higher than the airflow speed on the bottom of the wings. No, that's not true. In order to create lift, the pressure on top of the wings must be lower than the pressure on the bottom of the wings. The airflow speed doesn't matter. I'm guessing your thought process is something like this: ...


4

You're going by an old outdated lift theory, still taught in a lot of places. The wing induces a very large package of air to move down as it's going along, and this newtonian action/reaction of this package of air being induced to move down is most of "lift". The Bernoulli part is important, because the pressure differential is a factor and it also is ...


7

There are two big factors at play here: scale and throughput. First, automation is very good at repetitive tasks. The Wolfsburg plant produces over 800,000 cars per year. It's taken 25 years to make almost 600 Typhoons. That means yearly production is different by four orders of magnitude. It's a lot easier to justify the cost of buying, installing, and ...


3

The difference is that airplane construction is a bit closer to house construction x100 than making cars. Cars: Small objects made of a relatively small number of largely preformed parts bolted together. Many operations can be performed by a stationary robot doing the same repetitive things that an assembly line worker did. Easy and cheap to automate as ...


-2

Because they could (just barely) There is universal consensus that Black Buck served no military purpose. It did not impede Argentinian military efforts in any significant way. Its purpose was not to be useful though. It was primarily to make troops there feel that the UK was supporting them. It was a morale-boosting exercise, nothing more (or less). It ...


1

Someone mentioned the harrier wasn't able to carry a bomb heavy enough to crater the runway. The Vulcan's dropped 21x1000lb bombs on the Falklands. The Harriers in the Falklands dropped 1000lb paveways (Laser guided). They could carry 2 normally perhaps even up to 4. So they could and did drop the same size of bomb, probably more accurately. Though there was ...


4

This hasn't been explicitly said, so: The UK didn't have cruise missiles or ICBMs with conventional warheads at the time. The Trident II D5, the UK's only ever ICBM, entered service in 1994: BBC. As for cruise missiles, the BGM-109 Tomahawk has been introduced in 1983 (US) and 1998 (UK): Royal Navy.


10

The UK needed a surgical strike to neutralize the Port Stanley airport in the Falklands so that Argentine airplanes based there couldn't attack the coming UK convoy or the impending UK ground attack. An attack by carrier airplanes wouldn't work because the carriers, and the accompanying task force, would also be in range of the Argentine planes based in ...


27

Because all of Britain's adversaries were either nearby (Warsaw Pact) or too far to economically fight (China). Since Britain's weapons only needed to reach the Caucasus, they simply never developed ultra-long-range assets like the Tu-95 Bear or B-52 Stratofortress. Unfortunately no-one was willing to provide any of those under Lend-Lease. Honestly, even ...


37

This is borderline as an aviation question but I will answer it anyway. They didn't use those weapons because they did not have them at the time: Conventional cruise missiles did exist but most were nuclear, and the UK didn't possess any conventional ones. ICBMs with conventional warheads did not and probably still do not exist because they are not a ...


-1

As noted in a comment, the UK did have access to the UGM-27 Polaris submarine launched nuclear missile. Launching a missile from a sub ranged a few hundred miles (or even a few thousand miles) off-shore would have been significantly less risky to UK military personnel and equipment. However... Launching nuclear warheads against a target that you intend to ...


0

Regarding how endorsements work, CFR 61.31 says this about complex aircraft. "No person may act as pilot in command unless": (i) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in a complex airplane, or in a full flight simulator or flight training device that is representative of a complex airplane, and has been found ...


2

As far as the FAA is concerned, if it isn't in your logbook, it didn't happen. I suggest trying to get a copy of your military flight records and recreating a logbook (electronic or paper) of your experience to date. You may want a Certified Flight Instructor (CFI) to work with you on the first few entries to ensure you're doing it the standard way. ...


4

Well you’ll have to comply with the terms of §61.73 in order to convert your military pilot ratings over to civilian pilot certificates and ratings. You would also need to obtain a logbook endorsement to operate a complex and high-performance airplane legally under the FAA’s rules. This really should not be challenging for you. If you really want to rent a ...


0

Because weapons of mass destruction are maintained and developed, the Geneva Convention might not be respected much during wartime. Also, F-35s and F-22s have been mentioned in articles proposing laser weapons systems: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/f-35s-and-f-22s-could-soon-fire-laser-weapons-think-laser-dogfights-83586 https://www....


10

Besides the other answers, international law and the technical complexity of putting a laser on an airframe, lasers have interesting limitations as weapons. Lasers do not deal well with cloud cover. Hundreds of meters of cloud cover between two planes flying on instruments disrupts a laser's coherency, but not a guided missile's accuracy. After passing ...


7

The Geneva Convention only addresses permanent blinding. Temporary blinding is all it would take to render an enemy pilot unable to react for at least long enough for you to employ evasive maneuvers and/or come around for an offensive. That said, one wouldn't even need a laser. Any sufficiently bright LED array would do the job. Of course, this assumes the ...


2

Such a system already exists (in a way) and is in place to warn pilots who improperly enter the DC SFRA area. Im not sure it "dazzles" but it is what you describe and could be extended to do so. You can see an example of it running here.


3

In addition to the already mentioned Geneva convention, there is also the power requirements issue. Lasers powerful enough for combat weapons require more electrical power than can be generated by a fighter (one reason why the YAL-1 was based on a Boeing 747). Also, high power lasers generate a lot of heat. Heat dispersal in a small airframe is difficult, ...


55

Such weapons are not used by countries that abide by the Geneva Convention: It is prohibited to employ laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision, that is to the naked eye or to the eye with corrective eyesight devices. For the U.S.A., page 45 ...


1

In the US, the FAA's requirements for obtaining authorization to fly former ,military aircraft is included in 8900.1 Volume 5, Chapter 9, Section 2. It is quite lengthy and covers more than just former military aircraft. As others have pointed out, most of these aircraft do not have a Type Certificate. They normally have a Special Airworthiness ...


0

In the United States: Legally: A private pilots license, and in the case of the F-22 a multi engine rating (since it has two engines) as well as a type rating per §61.31 since they are turbo jet aircraft. However interestingly neither of those aircraft are on the FAA's type rating list which may be an issue. There is no legal minimum amount of hours ...


28

The Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) exhaust This is answered by the following image (taken from this question, color markings are unrelated to this answer): The item 72 is what you are looking for and it is labelled "APU exhaust". The black residue is soot from incompletely burned fuel. The Eurofighter Typhoon can use its APU to start the main engine or to ...


Top 50 recent answers are included