What is it

Actually, if you look at the hi-res images, you can see that it IS in fact a full-scale mock-up of an airplane sitting on a real carrier deck. The giveaway is that it chained down and chocked on the cat.

I was fooled too...at first - the cameras wouldn't be out of place for a test aircraft undergoing initial CV testing...but there is a giveaway there also...the camera crew (and some of the additional personel on deck) aren't wearing cranials...

Actually, it looks far more like the planform of the proposed Naval variant of the YF-23 than of the A/F-117X. Yes - there was an NATF study that died with the YF-23, which was the ATF proposal. It was a canarded configuration with a butterfly tail, but with the wings aft and fixed. This mock-up is somewhere between that, and Sci-Am's Switchblade. Nicely done, though...someone did their homework here.

This wouldn't be a hard model to scratch build...hmmnnn...

I meant to say it was a full size mockup. What I don't get is, why the small step up area just behind the canopy that looks like a air intake. I agree that the cameras wouldn't be out of place for a test aircraft undergoing initial CV testing.

If you where to modify the rear section of the YF-23, the modified front section of the Mig Firefox or a Mig 31 and scratch build wings and air intakes. You could have a decent replica of the plane.

Gary

If I were reverse engineering this thing, I'd say the the duct over the canopy would be an ECS intake of some sort - there's some sort of radiator looking thing in the duct...not a bad place for one, but then there's those two scoops on either side of the canopy as well. And what looks to be an IFR probe door in an unlikely spot. I'd also be interested in seeing some CFD on how those intakes perform at high AOA...

The front end actually looks a lot like the forebody of an Su-27IB - the one with the side by side cockpit...just scaled to match the back end of the airplane. Take that, the aft end of a YF-23, modified bits of an F-117 center section, a set of modified Tomcat wings, and Tomcat landing gear and I bet you could get real close to it.

- Rufus

m.gary.kroman wrote:

I looked. ICK! It would NEVER fly - not with those reversed Tomcat wings with the big droopy leading-edge slats on them, that used to be flaps and ailerons, I'd guess. And there's NO rear visibility - how the hell ya gonna check your six and eyeball your opponent in 'real' combat - with a cannon at close range. :) And Hollywood ain' funny - it's criminal what we let them get away with - no way is that a stealth bird.

But Ms Biel ain't bad. ;P

RobG

Sure it would/could fly - with a proper flight control computer. The trailing edge flaps just become leading edge flaps with the wings full forward...the F/A-18 has had leading edge flaps from the outset. In this case, the FCC would just revise the control law based on the position of the wing. They're only drooping in the picture because the hyds have bled off. I'd be more worried about where you get the hyd power to move the wings forward at speed in flight.

And who cares about aft visiblity on a stealth penetrator? This jet should never get into a dogfight because no one should ever see it...

Rob,

Check out this website

Yes, Jessica Biel ain't bad for a pilot. Makes you want to join the Navy, doesn't it. ;-)

Gary

And I came up with another theory on the duct over the canopy. That one, in conjunction with the ones under the splitter plates could be cold air inlets to feed the ductwork around the single center exhaust.

Wrapping the center of the nozzle in cold air would help reduce the IR signature of the jet in the rear hemishpere. I'd postulate two engines feeding a single non-annular AB surrounded by the round exits seen in the aft photo..the round exits would be the cold air exhausts, fed by the inlets up front.

Yeah...right...hands off my idea, Clancy.

Yes, the cold air ducts would lower the Infer Red signature of the jet exhaust.

Another theory about the nozzles surrounding the exhaust duct (I believe there are two exhaust duct, one for each engine) is that they are Pulse Detonation Jet Engines for Mach three flight. :D

Gary

That or flare, chaff, and/or "rearward firing missile" launcher tubes ala "Firefox". Who cares about aft viz when you've got all that?..

This had a rear facing camera

Our office managers old English teacher has met Clint Eastwood during the making of Firefox.

The teacher wrote the book

Nah, there rearward firing Photon Torpedo launching tubes. "Beam me up Scotty" :D

Gary

So you are saying that the English teacher was Craig Thomas, who wrote the novel Firefox? What did Craig have to say about Eastwood? A model kit review of the Planet X model, reffers to the Firefox as the MIG

1. formatting link
   Gary

That's what it was called in the movie, before, of course, the real MiG 31 was known.

Wulf

Da Comrade, that is true. The real Mig 31 Foxhound is an improved version of it's cousin the Mig 25 Foxbat.

Gary

I'd love to comment but for some reason I can't see *any* .mil websites, all I get is a 'Cannot find server' message. Any ideas why, anybody?

I'm using Wanadoo broadband, Norton Firewall Internet Security and have medium security on IE6.

Nick

Contact your ISP, "Wanadoo". Perhaps they are not really the "Internet", but a "Content Provider", such as AOL; and are filtering what you have access to.

Nick,

Try to paste the

Gary

Yes it was and the office manager did not like him.

Gentlemen, theorise all you want. I still say it's one ugly aircraft and I don't want to build a model of it. :P Or even see the movie.. unless you guys UNANIMOUSLY tell me it's worth my 12 clams. And no getting together behind my back... :)

RobG