Posted by
Dave Walsh-4 on
URL: https://www.shado-forum.com/Sky-1-tp1500661p1500707.html
At 01:31 PM 5/14/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>Boy and I thought that I came up with some really wild speculation to
>explain the things that are shown, that don't make sense.
>Actually, if you check your flight history books you will find that the
>X-15 did have very small thrusters on it to "Help" manuver while in the
>edges of space, where there wasn't enough air pressure for conventional
>controls to work.
>As to the thought that the forqard thrusters are sealed to avoid an influx
>of sea water, and are blended smoth with the body of the aircraft, so as
>to reduce drag... It works for me. I don't know if we have any air
>enginners out there, or other pilots, so your guess is as good as mine.
>Anyone else have any thoghts on this?
Okay, I'm a pilot and a former U.S. Air Force tech, so I guess my
input is as valid as anyone else's without a degree in aeronautical
engineering! ;-)
On the Sky 1, it would appear that the underwing missile pods have
liquid-fueled reusable rocket engines designed to get the craft airborne
from an undersea launch, after which the air-breathing engine mounted under
the fuselage would take over the job of providing thrust to keep the
aircraft flying. The intake cover would have to be retractable to keep the
engine from ingesting water (Which is why most jet pilots I knew really
hated to fly underwater!), and such mechanisms exist today to protect
delicate turbine compressor blades from sucking in all sorts of stuff from
unconventional runways (dirt, stones, tools, etc...)-- the MiG-29 has
covers that slide over the front of the intakes while louvered vents on the
dorsal of the jet open to allow air to enter the engine. I think the
Northrop YF-23A Black Widow II also had the same function but not having
exact specs on the craft (I only have a model to speculate from) I can'r be
absolutely sure.
There are two rather glaring discrepancies on the Sky 1 studio model I
can see, though-- the intake built into the nose of the aircraft and more
importantly, the lack of an exhaust on the aft section! If the intake is
indeed under the aircraft, the nose intake is completely redundant, and
actually provides a source of drag and instability at high speeds and high
angles of attack. In other words, if he tries to execute a high-speed turn
with the nose intake that goes nowhere, the drag produced by the thing will
flip the aircraft tushy over teakettle, most likely ripping it to pieces!
(Apologies to all for the coarse language! ;-)
And as for the lack of an exhaust, the only thing that could come
close is a grille-like area on the aft end, but this is also in the spot
where the pilot's access chute would most likely be, so sliding up the
tailpipe of a jet engine just doesn't have an attractive idea to it
(Especially if one has heard of the horror stories of aircraft techs being
sucked into the intakes of running jet engines!).
Anyhow, back to the underwing rocket pods-- Luca Oleastri, designer of
the most excellent Flight Sim Toolkit game "SHADO-- Attack SkyBase", came
up with the idea that the craft could indeed land on the ocean for recovery
and reattachment to Diver, using the now-empty rocket boost pods as
flotation devices. Once the aircraft has landed on relatively calm seas,
diver could rendezvous, send out a diver to attach winch cables to the aft
of Sky 1, and Diver could pull the aircraft into docking position and
reattach the docking clamps, refuel and rearm from onboard stores (Or meet
up with a resupply ship for the same reason), then continue with its patrol!
And if there any typos in the above treatise, please remember that I
have excellent speklling skills! My tpying skills, on the other hand... ;-)
"Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines!"
Dave Walsh
Harlington-Straker Sound Productions
[hidden email]