Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by Acrojet, Jun 6, 2016.
I hope that their aircraft skills are better than their web site design skills.
I doubt it, the aircraft is too big, too expensive, too inperformant and too inappropriate for private ownership. The numbers are also not right, so it is just a beautiful drawing of someone's dream.
Yup, totally different concept. That's way out of most people's ability to own. $5 million??? Good luck selling that thing.
On another note. A buddy of mine just sent me pictures of the 1/2 scale Saab military jet. And get this, it's totally an R/C aircraft!
And this pic for sizing a reference:
Looks kind of funny, totally does not look like a real Gripen.
On the other hand, there was an L-39 selling for $285k. It was even painted the same way as the BD-10 many years ago.
Ya but, it's still pretty cool. And an actual L-39 is nice, but it's on the high end of ownership. But hey to each his own, right?
Here's a video of its first flight
Its the paint color. The outline of the aircraft looks pretty good, but the paint is quite a bit too light. As a general rule, its easier to identify and aircraft with darker paint than with lighter. Ive come across planes repainted in light civilian colors and thought to myself "what the heck is that?"
I've seen the Gripen many times and it's paint is quite light in real life too.
What do you think, would the Gripen be a great aircraft for a small single seat 1:2 scale jet homebuilt..?
I like it's lines and look It's the canard that would make me hesitate
Half scale would give a wingspan of 14 feet. :shock:
Hope you also supply the 1 to 1 thrust/weight ratio with afterburners for takeoff.
I would go with half scale U2.
It does look funny. The shape of the canopy is all.. weird. And the pilots head is waaaay to big. It might be 1/2 scale, but it's not a ~very good~ scale. This is an anti-example to what AcroJet is trying to do.
Why? It has been a proven concept for many years...
Such a small close coupled Canard and longitudinal stability is what I meant
Not the canard concept in general
I've sat in one of the operational U-2's (compliments of the Air Force). I think you could do a half scale, but the cockpit would be very tight, even without all of the military hardware.
I don't see why a 50s-60s era fighter wouldn't be a great candidate for a modern, efficient, affordable jet powerplant.
I'd be OK with a F-84 or F9F. Or maybe a Fishbed... or F-100. Or both. Or all of the above.
Also the Volksjäger built with composites and not questionable plywood, would be a hot little ride.
It's all pure conjecture and the list could go on forever but hey. Dreams right?
The F16 is definitely cool though, and depending on the kit I could see some variants off the F16 like the Japanese F-2 mentioned previously, or the Israeli 2-seat variants would be awesome as well.
True. But cockpit size is a problem for almost any half scale.
The U2 wingspan might be daunting at 103 feet. The half scale of 51.5 feet is still huge.
Figuring a half scale at 1/16 in weight, I get 894 pounds empty and 2500 gross.
My Grob has 54 foot wings.... Hmmm
An F-86 Saber Jet would be my vote, particularly if I can have it in polished aluminum.
T-33 / F-80
What will the neighbors think?
Separate names with a comma.