No EFing way, thank you - no.

No pilot with any sense of self preservation would get into one of those. If something like that ever goes mainstream it will have to have some sort of ballistic recovery system (parachute) in the event of a power failure. For certification the FAA takes into consideration not only the flight crew but the public on the ground.

Autonomous air taxis are still a long way off...

The nose is everywhere, I don't know how the instructor stays so calm. Caution, language if you are at work.

<iframe width="663" height="440" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JQORXWmGMGk" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Had they proceeded with upgrading the Tomcat instead of the superbug we would have had this.

https://the-drive.imgix.net/https%3A...xlib=js-1.4.1&

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29653/this-is-what-grummans-proposed-f-14-super-tomcat-21-would-have-actually-looked-like

(Odd the linked pic does not show up)

My local GA airport:

I'm no pilot, but I gotta believe this guy survived by the grace of God and some well learned skills. And he walked away from it - kinda...

(Ps - he lost his prop, and his canopy was covered in oil)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WX2H3H8w--s" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Proven 4th gen US fighters might be getting a slight upgrade:

https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/usaf-boeing-f-15ex-f-35/
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1593649258.jpg

Maybe the F-18 as well.
(I'm hearing Kenny somewhere)
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1593816059.jpg

The F-35 Lightning II Can't Fly Near...Lightning

+ A key F-35 safety system is sustaining damage in Air Force service, forcing the office that overseas the F-35 program to recommend flight restrictions.
+ Under the new guidelines, F-35 jets should socially distance from lightning, maintaining a distance of least 25 miles.
+ The faulty systems could cause a F-35 hit by lightning to literally explode in midair.

The F-35 Lightning II strike fighter is temporarily barred from flying near actual lightning. More than a dozen Air Force F-35s were discovered with damage to a system designed to prevent catastrophic damage from lightning strikes. The damaged systems place the aircraft in danger of exploding if the airplane were hit by lightning in mid-flight.

The problem is with the Onboard Inert Gas Generation System (OBIGGS) is a safety subsystem common in modern airplanes. A typical OBIGGS system diverts air from the aircraft engine and separates the nitrogen, injecting it into the jet’s fuel tanks. The more inflammable nitrogen present the less flammable oxygen, helping reduce the possibility of fuel tank explosions. Wartime damage aside, one way a fuel tank explosion might take place is as a result of a lightning strike.

Inspectors at the Air Force’s Ogden Logistics Complex discovered damage to the tubes that funnel nitrogen into the fuel tanks in 14 out of 24 out of F-35As inspected. The problem appears limited to the Air Force’s F-35A model. The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, which operate the -C and -B versions of the F-35, have not seen similar problems.

More: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a32971900/f-35-lightning-safety/

Chrysler, back in the day, proposed this shuttle in the RFP that got us the recently retired shuttle.

<iframe width="663" height="440" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/___JNGJog0A" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

https://www.thedrive.com/news/33905/chryslers-radical-space-shuttle-design-was-50-years-ahead-of-its-time

John, if that is a copy paste they need new writers. Nitrogen is NOT inflammable and you would not want anything that is in your fuel tank.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iyb214nfND...nflammable.gif

While poorly written, the idea of using nitrogen to displace used fuel seems well considered. I was unaware of that feature and wonder if it is a standard technology of military and commercial aircraft. Not sure what device accomplishes concentrating N2 though.



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1593701673.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1593701700.jpg

I have done a few aircraft accident review boards and the physics of who dies and who walks away is really fascinating.

Just before I got to the Sikorsky factory, the Chief Sikorsky pilot was flat hatting in a brand new SH-60F ans buried the tail of the F in a stand of trees attempting a high speed, max deceleration maneuver in front of his buddies at his gun club.

The top of the F ended up under the fuselage and the F came to rest right side up. All three crew members were still in their seats only there was no structure around them - it was all under them. They were in essence sitting upright outside!

They all walked away uninjured.

I wish I had the pictures.

WH4 Harpoon...a Beech Barron piston twin converted to turbine single.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1593702517.jpg

They pull nitrogen out for the tanks and oxygen out for the pilots.

Here is one method and seems to have been driven by a big problem ID'd in the 90's.

https://www.generon.com/aircraft-nitrogen-generating-systems-ags-for-fuel-tank-inerting-system/

At first I thought why would one go to the trouble? But it makes sense getting the larger Baron tail structure to aid with the increased torque of the turbine engine.

Kinda off topic, but... Nitrogen vs oxygen. Neither will burn. It is misunderstood that oxygen burns. Oxygen by itself will not burn, it will however provide the catalyst for other items to burn.

Take your oxy/acetylene torch. Turn on the O2 by itself and use the striker to see if you can get a flame. The striker sparks will be very bright and burn, but no flame from the torch tip.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/n_t7CIf0Svs" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And from a previous post, nitrogen is used to "purge" any flammable gases from a fuel tank. Like the fuel tanks of an F-15. They would purge the tanks with nitrogen for hours before any maintenance was performed. Been there and seen that.

Nope, O2 is an oxidizer and you still need fuel. Liquid O2 on charcoal light a grill very quickly though.

The on board O2 generator was an issue on the F22 for a while.

Both 737 (some aircraft at least) and 787 have Nitrogen Generating Systems, which generates nitrogen to use it to displace oxygen in the tanks. After several accidents (TWA 800) with exploding fuel vapor in center tanks, they also modified the fuel pumps to stop potential sparking when they ran dry.

All the more necessary with running a Walter turbine rated at a few hundred HP more than turbine Bonanza's 450HP (RR/Allison) or 500 (P&W). Turbines are amazing power sources.

LOL!! The instructor's demeanor was hilarious! Thank you for posting that. Made my day.

...and the beefier landing gear is a plus, too.