Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 4:11 PM
Fri Nov 27
3 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/12/09
Ooooh, I like this comments thread. This must be where all the airheads hang out.
Any other pilots among my Planelopnik brethren?
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
It is pretty crazy to see a prop plane do it, though. Same principle, but you generally don't associate that much thrust with a prop.
10/12/09
The Staggerwing was a popular model in the '30s air races. It won the 1933 Texaco Trophy Race and won the Bendix trophy in 1936 and came in 3rd in 1938.
Modern air shows and the Red Bull Air Race series keep the spirit of early aviation alive.
10/12/09
10/12/09
@engineerd: Speaking of cool biplanes and modern airshows, I'd have to say this is one of the coolest modern biplanes currently in use. Does speeds averaging around 250mph at Reno, keeping it at the top of the Gold in the biplane class.
10/12/09
10/12/09
I wonder if he had time to take a polaroid of the F/A-18 pilot.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
It's also damned fast, as biplanes go. Don't forget, that thing can gain speed going straight up. There's not many planes that do that.
According to wikipedia - which means it might be 100% BS, but in this case we have photographic evidence suggesting otherwise - Tucker is the ONLY civvie permitted to fly in close formation with the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds.
10/12/09
@Elhigh: "forest of ailerons"...no joke. Look at how big the control surfaces are on that plane. It's a wonder it doesn't just rip apart mid-manuever.
10/12/09
Truly one of the best I've ever seen.
10/12/09
When you are flying like that, the ground is simple a point of reference, nothing more.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
The fourth generation fighters (F-14, F-15, F-16, and F/A-18) could be flown at very high speeds, and at very low speeds. The difficulty is that when flying at those speeds, the plane loses a lot of light, and the only way to maximize lift at those speeds is to fly with a high angle of attack (AOA).
Of them, the F-14 and the F/A-18 were the most impressive. Due to their need to operate from an aircraft carrier, their low-speed performance was almost unmatched for a great many years. The F-14 in particular was interesting because you could still fly it, even with the wings stalled; the shape of its body created a blended lifting surface, and 40% of the F-14's lift actually came from the aircraft's body, not the wings. That's why the F-14 surprised a lot of people with how agile it was.
One standard for armchair estimating a plane's agility is to calculate its wingload, i.e., how much weight does the aircraft carry per square foot of lifting area. Going by wing area alone, the Tomcat came out to around 96lbs/square foot, which is terrible. But if you went by total lifting area, including the body, it came out to be around 48lbs/square foot, which is superb.
/Plane nerd.
10/12/09
10/12/09
This just screams for an engine swap! Preferably with the subi 360.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
Have you ever seen the HiMAT demonstrators? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiMAT
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
I like my planes the way I like my women, slim, sleek, maneuverable, and not TOO fast, with properly angled vertical stabilizers = F/A-18.
07/15/09
The F-14 is actually extremely agile at low speeds, so much so that baring the S-3, it was one of the easiest jets to land on a carrier. Granted, the F/A-18 has a slightly better instantaneous turn rate, but that has more to do with the fact it has a FBW system, while the F-14 is hydraulic.
Also, I, too, like my planes the way I like my women: once I turn the throttle up, I like them to be able to go for a while. Not something that F/A-18 can do all that well.
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/14/09
07/13/09
Clever.
Not much of a lawn, however.
Is someone having fun with tilt-shift-esque lenses?
07/13/09
07/14/09