For Connor and Charl

A forum for everything else that does not fit into the other categories

Postby Splitpin » Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:42 pm

Never sayi dont think about my fellow forumites....... winkyy.gif

Heat shimmer and flames.....




Big wheels.....

User avatar
Splitpin
NZFF Pro
 
Topic author
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:15 pm
Posts: 21332
Location: Christchurch NZ

Postby Ian Warren » Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:57 pm

Don,t ya just love the today,s Cameras and the people behind them cool.gif
Image
User avatar
Ian Warren
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 5:23 pm
Posts: 41187
Location: AREA 51

Postby Charl » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:47 pm

You get about 250 landings on a set of mains, and they don't come cheap.
I've often wondered if it might extend that a lot if you were to spin them up before landing.
A simple wind-driven turbine hub might do.
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Postby Adamski » Fri Jul 08, 2011 12:13 am

Charl wrote:
QUOTE (Charl @ Jul 7 2011,10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've often wondered if it might extend that a lot if you were to spin them up before landing.
A simple wind-driven turbine hub might do.

Funny you should say that ... I've often thought exactly the same thing! Hitting a fairly abrasive surface at 150mph can't be good.

I do remember going on a domestic flight in Poland once - it was a big fixed undercarriage thing - and staring at the wheel outside my window ... it was *totally bald*!!!
Image
User avatar
Adamski
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:22 am
Posts: 5029
Location: Birkenhead, Auckland

Postby AndrewJamez » Fri Jul 08, 2011 3:39 pm

The damn busting Lancs had spinning bombs. They just covered the top half of the cylinder with a shroud and the bottom half was exposed to the airflow which lept it spinning giving the bomb much better bounce so to speak.
AndrewJamez
Sim-holic
 
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 766
Location: Hamilton

Postby Adamski » Fri Jul 08, 2011 4:05 pm

AndrewJamez wrote:
QUOTE (AndrewJamez @ Jul 8 2011,3:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The damn busting Lancs had spinning bombs. They just covered the top half of the cylinder with a shroud and the bottom half was exposed to the airflow which lept it spinning giving the bomb much better bounce so to speak.

So they didn't actually spin them up mechanically beforehand? Clever!!
Image
User avatar
Adamski
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:22 am
Posts: 5029
Location: Birkenhead, Auckland

Postby Charl » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:16 pm

The bomb as delivered was spun by an hydraulic motor - the spin had to be backwards for it to wind its way down the wall.
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Postby Rotordude » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:20 pm

AndrewJamez wrote:
QUOTE (AndrewJamez @ Jul 8 2011,3:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The damn busting Lancs had spinning bombs. They just covered the top half of the cylinder with a shroud and the bottom half was exposed to the airflow which lept it spinning giving the bomb much better bounce so to speak.

The very early prototypes yes, later and operational versions, no.
Upkeep's (type 464) that were used during "Operation Chastise" were belt driven from hydraulic motors to give a reverse spin to the device.
Regards always
Pete
Rotordude
Sim-holic
 
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:50 pm
Posts: 508
Location: Huntly, NZ

Postby connor » Mon Jul 11, 2011 6:40 pm

Didn't see this one here, that is a nice pic! drool.gif I bet he pulled a few G's in that maneuver!

It surprises me that he didn't strike the tail on that actually, it's a wicked pitch he's got on it. cool.gif
connor
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 1616
Location: Christchurch

Postby benwynn » Mon Jul 11, 2011 6:45 pm

Wow
User avatar
benwynn
Senior Member
 
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:11 pm
Posts: 1433
Location: YBBN


Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests