FA+
Shop
944
Views
Views
7
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Designs / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 576 x 720
File Size 35 kB
Report this content
More from Blacktail_F-A
One of the best warplanes that never flew, the Arie (Hebrwew for "Lion") was designed by Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) to meet a 1973 Israeli Air Force requirement for an Air Superiority Fighter capable of Mach 2.4 @ 75000 feet.
Through designing and manufacturing the earlier Kfir (the "Lion Cub", which was essentially a reverse-engineered Dassault Mirage 3), IAI had gained warplane-bulding experience that would prove invaluble in creating a fully-indigenous fighter.
Though the design phase was complete (IAI had even selected 2 F100 turbofans as the powerplant), two incidents occured that hindered it's development; the Yom Kippur war in 1973, and the availability of the F-15 Eagle for export in 1976. The War slowed the Arie's development long enough for the F-15 to overtake it, and the availability of ready-made F-15 effectively killed the Arie, which hadn't yet been built, flown, or tested as a prototype (which all would have been very expensive, and before any production would have commenced, either).
Without an Air Superiority role to fulfill, IAI decided to "minaturise" the Arie into a Tactical Fighter, as the IAF still needed a new one --- this resulted in the Lavi ("Young Lion"), which ulimately DID fly, but was not selected for production, either.
More info on the Arie (including the only image of it I have ever seen --- which I used as my reference) can be found here; http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weap...../arie/Arie.htm
The design of the FFR-31MRD Super Sylph from the sci-fi series "Yukikaze" seems to have been influenced by the Arie; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentou.....ousei_Yukikaze
Our very own falcon01 has designed a very similar fighter; http://www.furaffinity.net/view/610619/
I also have a aquaintance named Arie. :)
Through designing and manufacturing the earlier Kfir (the "Lion Cub", which was essentially a reverse-engineered Dassault Mirage 3), IAI had gained warplane-bulding experience that would prove invaluble in creating a fully-indigenous fighter.
Though the design phase was complete (IAI had even selected 2 F100 turbofans as the powerplant), two incidents occured that hindered it's development; the Yom Kippur war in 1973, and the availability of the F-15 Eagle for export in 1976. The War slowed the Arie's development long enough for the F-15 to overtake it, and the availability of ready-made F-15 effectively killed the Arie, which hadn't yet been built, flown, or tested as a prototype (which all would have been very expensive, and before any production would have commenced, either).
Without an Air Superiority role to fulfill, IAI decided to "minaturise" the Arie into a Tactical Fighter, as the IAF still needed a new one --- this resulted in the Lavi ("Young Lion"), which ulimately DID fly, but was not selected for production, either.
More info on the Arie (including the only image of it I have ever seen --- which I used as my reference) can be found here; http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weap...../arie/Arie.htm
The design of the FFR-31MRD Super Sylph from the sci-fi series "Yukikaze" seems to have been influenced by the Arie; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentou.....ousei_Yukikaze
Our very own falcon01 has designed a very similar fighter; http://www.furaffinity.net/view/610619/
I also have a aquaintance named Arie. :)
Category Designs / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 576 x 720px
File Size 35 kB
Try telling that to Diefenbacher.
In his mind an obsolete SAM with subsonic speed, a nuclear warhead (guaranteeing that it would never, EVER be fired in war), a short range, no lookdown, and a CD $10 million-a-pop pricetag was the ONLY credible means of defending Canadian interests.
Typical "point-and-click" polichicken.
In his mind an obsolete SAM with subsonic speed, a nuclear warhead (guaranteeing that it would never, EVER be fired in war), a short range, no lookdown, and a CD $10 million-a-pop pricetag was the ONLY credible means of defending Canadian interests.
Typical "point-and-click" polichicken.
Yeah. They're going to replace an Attacker with an exremely powerful gun, 2 simple, quiet, economical, near-indestructable, engines, thick armor, high payload, long range and loiter time, lots of weapon stations, a crash-survivable airframe, STOL ability, and landing gear that can endure on rough runways --- all features that are in dangerously low supply, even WITH the A-10 in service --- with a cheap, shoddy, Tactical Fighter that has NONE of these attributes (nor could ever possibly be adapted to accomadate any of them), but maybe, just MAYBE, might be a little stealthy.
Yeah, could you see the JSF with a GAU-8 stickin' out?
I mean, the '32 has a single 20mm rotary gun, and can't carry more'n, what, 700 rounds? I'm not too up on the tech specs of that boondoggle...
Plus, if you give 'er any external stores, that vaunted 'Stealthiness' is gone!
Ain't a replacement, it's a friggin' downgrade.
I mean, the '32 has a single 20mm rotary gun, and can't carry more'n, what, 700 rounds? I'm not too up on the tech specs of that boondoggle...
Plus, if you give 'er any external stores, that vaunted 'Stealthiness' is gone!
Ain't a replacement, it's a friggin' downgrade.
They'll probably do about about as well as Eastern-Block "export" warplanes, which are notorious for thier high maintnance and short service lives --- but even the old Soviet "Monkey Models" (as the Russians called them) were made of tough metal... not carbon-based "peanut brittle".
Yeah, all that laminate/composite stuff looks great in the lab, and it has worked-so far.
'Cept for the stuff they built the B-2 out of. I laughed 'til I couldn't breathe when I heard about that.
It's hilarious in a sad way..."We have a radar-invisible airplane with a great load, excellent avionics, and superb crews. But we can only use it at night, 'cause if it gets wet, and then the sun shines on it, it starts to fall apart."
You can't make up stuff like that...
As for the ex-Sov warbirds, I loved it when the Albanians sold all of their MIG-23's, because they had killed around 20 of their pilots in crashes, and never fired a shot in anger.
'Cept for the stuff they built the B-2 out of. I laughed 'til I couldn't breathe when I heard about that.
It's hilarious in a sad way..."We have a radar-invisible airplane with a great load, excellent avionics, and superb crews. But we can only use it at night, 'cause if it gets wet, and then the sun shines on it, it starts to fall apart."
You can't make up stuff like that...
As for the ex-Sov warbirds, I loved it when the Albanians sold all of their MIG-23's, because they had killed around 20 of their pilots in crashes, and never fired a shot in anger.
I remember way back during the Kosovo Debacle, how the Air Force was preparing B-2 Spirits for bombing raids on Milosovich's forces, and was making a big PR deal out of it... until some "higher-up" in the pentagon canceled thier deployment because, in his own words, "I'm not prepared to lose a one-billion-dollar bomber to a single rifle bullet."
I swear it's true!
And then there were Kosovo's 20-or-so Mig-29s --- those that DID get into the air proved just as helpless as the ones abandoned on the tarmac. The Kosovar Fulcrums were "Monkey Models" too, and just because they skimped a little here and there on thier maintnance, the whole fleet broke down.
Even more pathetic is the US military's assumption that the Kosovar Air Force was defeated through superior tactics, training, and technology --- sure, go take a shot at Russian Fulcrums next... and see how long you last!
I swear it's true!
And then there were Kosovo's 20-or-so Mig-29s --- those that DID get into the air proved just as helpless as the ones abandoned on the tarmac. The Kosovar Fulcrums were "Monkey Models" too, and just because they skimped a little here and there on thier maintnance, the whole fleet broke down.
Even more pathetic is the US military's assumption that the Kosovar Air Force was defeated through superior tactics, training, and technology --- sure, go take a shot at Russian Fulcrums next... and see how long you last!
Oh, yeah- With the monocle heat sensor sight, like the AH-64 has?
Man, they can shoot over-the-shoulder with those things. I wouldn't wanna take on a '29, or an SU-37 with the JSF, they'd eat yer lunch for sure.
Why not just keep the '15s, we ain't lost one yet, and neither have the Isrealis.
Man, they can shoot over-the-shoulder with those things. I wouldn't wanna take on a '29, or an SU-37 with the JSF, they'd eat yer lunch for sure.
Why not just keep the '15s, we ain't lost one yet, and neither have the Isrealis.
First off, don't get me started on Mig-29 hardware --- we'll be blogging for the rest of our natural lives on that!
The JSF is designed to make jobs in areas that put Congessmen in office, preserve "good relations" with our "allies", allow the DoD to look like they're busy, and give the pilots and officers a pacifier to occupied.
It wasn't created with any practical purpose in mind, the JSF is all "what if", as opposed to "what IS".
It can't even stand up to it's predecessor in battle, let alone the latest warplanes designed with hunting down F-16s in mind.
As for the apparent "invulnerability" of the F-15, look at the kind of fighters it's taken on so far --- all antiques and Soviet "Export" models, with the expetion of Iraqi Miarge F1s, which can't fight at BVR.
As for what REAL warplanes can do to F-15s; the Indo-American wargames in 2004 saw a 9:1 kill ratio AGAINST F-15s by Su-30MKs. The Su-30MK is inferior to the Su-30MKIs India now uses, and the MKI is over 10 years out of date.
T-50s and Su-37s could cut F-15s to ribbons with impunity, and by the time F-15Es finally see combat agains a COPETENT opponent, these will be antiques compared to what the enemy uses.
The JSF is designed to make jobs in areas that put Congessmen in office, preserve "good relations" with our "allies", allow the DoD to look like they're busy, and give the pilots and officers a pacifier to occupied.
It wasn't created with any practical purpose in mind, the JSF is all "what if", as opposed to "what IS".
It can't even stand up to it's predecessor in battle, let alone the latest warplanes designed with hunting down F-16s in mind.
As for the apparent "invulnerability" of the F-15, look at the kind of fighters it's taken on so far --- all antiques and Soviet "Export" models, with the expetion of Iraqi Miarge F1s, which can't fight at BVR.
As for what REAL warplanes can do to F-15s; the Indo-American wargames in 2004 saw a 9:1 kill ratio AGAINST F-15s by Su-30MKs. The Su-30MK is inferior to the Su-30MKIs India now uses, and the MKI is over 10 years out of date.
T-50s and Su-37s could cut F-15s to ribbons with impunity, and by the time F-15Es finally see combat agains a COPETENT opponent, these will be antiques compared to what the enemy uses.
It's like that guy in the Mikoyan bureau once said, "Simialar performane requirements result in similar designs".
The YF-17 Cobra (which was later transformed into the F/A-18 Hornet) and Mig-29 Fulcrum look very much alike, neither is a "copy" of another. The Meteor ang Me-262 are similar as well, but it is well documented that neither the Allies nor Axis had enough detailed intelligence on each other's jetfighter programs to have possibly copied one another.
When you designed the Falcon Intruder, you created an airframe capable of Ca. Mach 3 speeds, long range, high maneuverability, and a high service cieling.
The resulting design was similar to the Arie, because IAI had similar objectives back in the early '70's.
The YF-17 Cobra (which was later transformed into the F/A-18 Hornet) and Mig-29 Fulcrum look very much alike, neither is a "copy" of another. The Meteor ang Me-262 are similar as well, but it is well documented that neither the Allies nor Axis had enough detailed intelligence on each other's jetfighter programs to have possibly copied one another.
When you designed the Falcon Intruder, you created an airframe capable of Ca. Mach 3 speeds, long range, high maneuverability, and a high service cieling.
The resulting design was similar to the Arie, because IAI had similar objectives back in the early '70's.
Very nice drawing, another technical one..... The Israelies keep designing good aircraft designs, or adapting other designs like the Mirage > Kifir, but when you look at the country's neighbours, all those countries air arms are very poor compared to their own, apart from Saudi Arabia, which will 'soon' have the EF2000
Egypt had a promising tactical fighter in the works in the early '70's, the Helwan HA300. It was originally a Spanish design, but when Spain gave up on it, Egypt acquired the project. However, it was decided that the Dassault Mirage 3 was cheaper, and had better performance, so the HA300 was canceled.
The Saudi's aren't the only nearby state with advanced warplanes, either; Mig-29s are used by Eritrea, Yemen, Syria, and Iran; F/A-18s are used by Kuwait; F-16s are used by Egypt, Jordan, Oman, Bahrain, and Turkey; Mirage 2000s are used by Egypt, Qatar, and The UAE; Saudi Arabia uses F-15s and Tornado ADVs; Ethiopia (and possibly Syria) uses Su-27s, and is currently negotiating to acquire EF-2 Typhoons; F-4 Phantons are used by Egypt and Iran; Iran also has F-14s, and an indigenous "JSF-style" fighter (the "Shafaq") in development.
The Saudi's aren't the only nearby state with advanced warplanes, either; Mig-29s are used by Eritrea, Yemen, Syria, and Iran; F/A-18s are used by Kuwait; F-16s are used by Egypt, Jordan, Oman, Bahrain, and Turkey; Mirage 2000s are used by Egypt, Qatar, and The UAE; Saudi Arabia uses F-15s and Tornado ADVs; Ethiopia (and possibly Syria) uses Su-27s, and is currently negotiating to acquire EF-2 Typhoons; F-4 Phantons are used by Egypt and Iran; Iran also has F-14s, and an indigenous "JSF-style" fighter (the "Shafaq") in development.
I'm not too sure about that. Saudi Arabia is ruled by a devout Sunni family --- while the majority of it's population are Shiites, most of whom HAAAATE the Saud's guts. A quick and successful "Iranian-style" revolution there, and radicals will be in control of 60+ F-15Cs, 24 Tornado ADVs, 72 EF-2 Typhoons, and whatever Coalition aircraft that aren't evacuated or scuttle in time. Oh yaeh, and then there's Iran, just over the gulf, who would bend over backwards to help out thier fellow Shiite fanatics. The Saudi armed forces aren't as feckless as Saddam's were, either, and will NOT make the same mistakes.
Then there's Iran, who will have the indigenously-built "Shafaq" stealth fighter in service by 2012 --- I doubt the Navy wants to play pong with Exocets pouring in from everywhere and nowhere.
Then there's Iran, who will have the indigenously-built "Shafaq" stealth fighter in service by 2012 --- I doubt the Navy wants to play pong with Exocets pouring in from everywhere and nowhere.
But their pilots are not well trained, in fact they rely on RAF personel to train them, and the EF2000 has not been delivered yest, they have only started construction. Our command reviews any country that buys our hardware to see if at anypoint if those weaponary would be used against us, a good example is of FAA Canberras in the Falklands, the EF2000's sold to Saudi Arabia will have a really downgraded avionics suite, its up to the Saudis to equip it with most of the important materials and avionics, to put it short the aircraft would be a downgraded version, just like what the US does when they sell aircraft... anyway, I think the big player in that area is Saudi arabia, not just because of its military hardware but of the black gold; oil. Their troops are very capable, a SAS report during the 1st gulf war showed that some of their fighters were 'fanatic' in the way they fought! Well, here hopes to a quiet Middle east,
The thing is that a whole new method of training is need for most of our troops, just like in Veitnam, they are against Guerilla warfare again, that sort of battle has different rules. The old 'lurnt the hard way' of combat flying and fighting has been forgotten as technology gets more advanced, all you have to do now is programe a missile...
Such wisdom isn't lost, it's just ignored in the future --- deliberately.
Instead of bursting out into one of my dreaded "lectures", I'll instead reccomend that you read THIS;
http://www.geocities.com/transformationunderfire/
The part about the "Racket Theory" is particularlt telling...
Instead of bursting out into one of my dreaded "lectures", I'll instead reccomend that you read THIS;
http://www.geocities.com/transformationunderfire/
The part about the "Racket Theory" is particularlt telling...
Comments