- Joined
- 27 December 2005
- Messages
- 17,027
- Reaction score
- 22,264
Lots to discuss and post about this, but to start a short video uploaded by flateric:
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmU5l7Rk8FA
flateric said:Good entry point for Ti alloys is here
...
If forum members are interested, I can post Lockheed Horizons article on titanium alloys usage in aerospace industry from from 60s era.
...
Correctly, it is only the metastable beta alloys which are heat treatable by solution treatment and ageing. Fully stable beta alloys can only be annealed.
Source: Titanium Information Group
rousseau said:What a long pylon that is!
KJ_Lesnick said:Are you guys sure that pylon can fly at the plane's full design speed?
KJ_Lesnick
Loren said:KJ_Lesnick the B-58 routinely flew with a large external fuel tank a more than Mach 2.0
KJ_Lesnick said:Loren said:KJ_Lesnick the B-58 routinely flew with a large external fuel tank a more than Mach 2.0
True, but the XF-103 was *way* faster than Mach 2...
Kendra J. Lesnick
sferrin said:but the B-58 stayed at high speed longer. The XF-103 would have been a sprinter something like a faster F-104. It wouldn't have been at high speed for long periods of time.
KJ_Lesnick said:sferrin said:but the B-58 stayed at high speed longer. The XF-103 would have been a sprinter something like a faster F-104. It wouldn't have been at high speed for long periods of time.
You sure? Considering all the variable geometry in the design (variable incidence wings to allow the nose to be level with the horizon at all speeds in level flight), the obsessive need for clean lines even the removal of a canopy, and the fact that ramjets are quite efficient at Mach 3+ for endurance or for speed?
I kind of thought the XF-103 would have been an extended-dasher -- not quite a cruiser, but more than a dasher...
Kendra Lesnick
KJ_Lesnick said:sferrin said:but the B-58 stayed at high speed longer. The XF-103 would have been a sprinter something like a faster F-104. It wouldn't have been at high speed for long periods of time.
You sure? Considering all the variable geometry in the design (variable incidence wings to allow the nose to be level with the horizon at all speeds in level flight), the obsessive need for clean lines even the removal of a canopy, and the fact that ramjets are quite efficient at Mach 3+ for endurance or for speed?
I kind of thought the XF-103 would have been an extended-dasher -- not quite a cruiser, but more than a dasher...
rickshaw said:Surely an "extended-dasher" means that it has a great deal more ability to change that vector if its wrong?
All the missile bay doors were positioned at the side of the airframe, so neither engine airflow nor hot gas injection would have been a problem. Give the guys who designed it some credit, will ya?lantinian said:I curious what happens when you open the missile bay doors positioned right before the inlet at Mach 3. How does that affect the airflow at those high speeds.
Also, to prevent hot gas injection, the missile release mechanism would have to be similar to F-22, with the missile separating from the aircraft before igniting its engines. And all that at twice the cruising speeds of F-22 and 30 years prior to it. WOW!
I just see some big technical difficulties there.
All the missile bay doors were positioned at the side of the airframe