The problem with the design is in waves the payload can easily get damage, also the engine layout being set back beyond the fuselage can lead to easy failure of the extended area
Let me correct you on a simple obvious grammatical mistake. I posted "top view from the wing leading edge aft looks like a close copy to a Northrop YF-23...". That means that I was talking about the front edge of the wing (where it meets the fuselage) toward the aft end of the aircraft (the tail). The nose of the aircraft is highly reminiscent of the Rutan Space Ship One with the circular windows. I did not make mention of the YF-22. Do YOU get it?
If you look at the design it uses planform alignment in the wing and pelikan tail. The top view from the wing leading edge aft looks like a close copy to a Northrop YF-23 which was designed to be stealthier than the YF-22 which also used planform alignment to improve it's stealth characteristics. Those shapes are optimized for stealth not aerodynamics.
Yesh. That thing looks like a cross between a Rutan Space Ship One and a Northrop YF-23 Black Widow. I am highly dubious about launching a high performance aircraft off of a water surface. The Convair tried that with the SeaDart in the 50's and couldn't get past the vibration and pounding that the airframe would have to endure on takeoff and landing. The vibration was so bad that the test pilots reported that they couldn't read their instruments.
First look: Boeing/Rockwell YF-23 wing structure and tail section, front section cabin: American Rutan Company, the same that made the starship. Looking good.
Looking at more closely it looks exactly like they took the Starship One lifter nose and glued it on to a YF-23 fuselage. Then digitized the model and created this cgi.
This seems like a very good idea, especially considering Romania geography and demography. As for previous comments - there are no air intakes, there are lift-skis for "hydroplanisation" of vessel, rocket engine seems like very logical solution, and this is excellent example of third-generation space launch vessel! (1st - ordinary chemical rocket, 2nd - first-stage-rocket powered shuttle-like returnable vessel, 3rd - first-stage-returnable vessel like this and Virgin1). Greetings from Serbia!!!
Были в 50-х 60-х и у русских такие разработки. Неперспективно, потому что такой штиь на море нереален. А на скорости взлета воткнутся в волну - очень даже реально.
@dragosmur even at at take off speed of 120-140kts all seas are rough. So they are going to need a way to get the body of the aircraft out off the water, faster if possible. Designing in, a hull similar to flying boats or having some sort of retractable hydroplanes. The Navy experimented with this idea back in the 50s. It was supposed to be a way to launch fighter squadrons quickly without a carrier. The aircraft shook so violently while on the water that the pilot could not read any gauges.
I don't see the air intake surface on the fuselage. Also a single engine seems a bit underpowered to be able to take off from water/sea. Hopefully they know what they're doing.
Where is the intake? How the fuck is it practical OR possible if it's so close to the water a fucking pebble can splash water into the cockpit, how does a pilot get in it without having to either get inside a boat or swim to the cockpit?
+Maquina Caos . Does the Space Shuttle with rocket engines needs any intake?. Does an unmanned craft ( cos it is not stated in the vid ) needs an entrance or an exit or even a cockpit that fits a pilot?.
a yf-22 with SpaceShipTwo's cabin? Not sure that little engine would be powerful enough for supersonic flight, and it wouldnt be stealthy. Plus oceans tend to have large waves, which makes this form of takeoff and landing impossible.
It looks like a YF-23 , that was one of the contenders for the US stealth-fighter program. Don't show that to Northrop they would be very much puzzled to see their design used for for orbital rocketry.
@Chris58851 And why not use the descendant to GLONASS? Any disadvantages to that? The system has a huge capacity for monitoring. (Just try to understand - no pun intented.)
@XSAlexio The plane has a rocket engine. It has no intakes. Initial design had a delta wing, it was dropped because the structure was becoming too heavy and reduced aircraft performances. The plane has an extremely high climb rate comparable to Su-27 and Mig-29, it will get really fast through the thickest part of the atmosphere so wing drag is not a priority. Overall the plane has low drag and high lift. It is needed because it will glide on the way back.
felicitari ARCA! sper sa fiti o firma romaneasca cu care sa ne mandrim...sper sa va sprijine statul mai mult chiar daca sunt sigur ca nu vor fi lasati sa va sprijine...si daca merge treaba bine sa va extindeti domeniile si sa fiti Lockheed Martin a Romaniei!
Видел как в Одессе взлетал и садился самолёт на воду без проблем. Со стороны показалось чудом ! Подумал вот самолёт который нужен,а не те,что есть ! Я понимал,что существует такой момент "прилипания" планера к воде,но у его этого небыло !? Он взлетал и садилса без каких либо проблем + !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ему не нужны аэродромы и площадки ему нужна вода 100метром,а может и того меньше !!!!
Sorry but that thing look way way more like the YF-23, it look so much like it, that I would bet that in fact it’s a mods YF-23, or at least they steal the designs of it.
@scasey1960 The safeety factor of having no land mass nearby to accidentally kill anyone if something goes wrong, and the fact that at the equator, the launch angles are better for space access. The only way to get to the equator for the USA would be by sea.
@kickniko If you don't want to touch unwanted target while able to monitor for hours before strike from the sky, UAV is the companion for this mission.
Damn people! Could we tone down the competitiveness a bit? We both have plenty of firepower. We are just inventing cool stuff to kill the fuck out of each other. I'd much rather have some beers and shots in a bar with you all than be shot at or blown up or stabbed or fried or whatever.
Pretty, but not feasible. Taking off from water is problematic - you need a calm surface. The angular wings are copies of wings designed for stealth, not lift. The launcher seems to be manned, which is a waste of weight. The airframe can't fit the large tanks I would expect for a subirbital plane that launches the rocket. You could take off with an air-breathing engine and fire the rocket from a high altitude just the same, taking off from an ordinary airport. SpaceX's approach of using the same engines for take off and landing is probably very cost-effective. The F-14 (or was it the F-15?) had the capability of launching a subirbital anti-satellite missile.
+Ricardo Bánffy The "angular wings" are not a stealth design there are an efficient supersonic design. The airframe doesn't need large integrated tanks because as a mothership it isn't meant to exceed 18,000m. To attain suborbital altitudes for space tourism payload is to be replaced with an external tank. SpaceX are developing commercial launch systems not that are space tourism capable vehicles. Virgin Galactic is the closest analogy. Modern air launched conventional anti-satellite missiles are a poor analogy as they are designed to be launched by existing multi-role aircraft not dedicated launch vehicles and are also don't carry a payload that would even remotely equate to the size and weight of a satellite.
+Vaul the Creator the trapezoidal wings you are using are a lot like the F-22 and F-35, which were designed for stealth (not efficiency). I agree SpaceX is not a direct analog because they are aiming much higher, but the same technique is used by Blue Origin and theirs is a space tourism vehicle that launches and lands vertically. The ASM-135 (the one tested on F-15's) had a small warhead that's still large enough for a small payload (think a couple cubesats) but it was never designed to LEO. The Pegasus is a better launcher and can be deployed from different aircraft for up to 450 Kg in LEO. Why launch from water?
Ricardo Bánffy Yes, the F-22 and F-35 use a trapezoidal wing configuration but the design's stealth characteristics are incidental not deliberate. A high aspect ratio, low span trapezoidal is a thin, high speed, minimal drag design and therefore highly suited to supersonic flight and has been around far longer than any stealth consideration Have you ever seen a Lockheed F-104 Starfighter? Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer? How about the North American X-15 hypersonic rocket-powered research aircraft?
0:15 The pilot asks permission to take-off. And he's granted permission to take-off. 1:05 The pilot asks permission to launch the rocket. 1:10 He's granted permission to launch the rocket. 1:25 Pilot tells mission control that the rocket launch was successful. 1:14 Rocket launch count down. 1:33 Mission control tells the pilot that they have both objects on radar.
got lots of airstrips here borat, but honesttly we could start it underwater and pop it out the sea for your delight, anyways friction exists here only that hydro-foil profiles kinda make it usefull for some...
@XSAlexio It isn't stealth. Why would it be? It will be launched from the sea because Romania is a highly populated country, and there is no safe area to test it on the mainland. Also eliminates the need for a landing gear that would add to the overall weight.
IT doesn't look like the yf-23 at all... The big difference is that ours will be much better. This is not a normal aircraft. This is called a mother-ship.😅
@@frankburton7698 adfx-11 is just a fictional aircraft while ours is in process. We finished the front, the body is still in process. Our plane will turn into reality. And this is not an aircraft mixed with any of these mentioned by both of you. yf-23 might be a contender but it will have no chance in case of an air to air combat. Ours will also be equipped with stealth technology and many more.
Couple issues and questions. If the rocket uses cryogenic liquid fuels, the entire outside of the rocket would become one huge ice cube, and it would have a serious issue with the fuel boiling off. Where are the air intakes for the plane? Why does it look like an F-23?
WELL It probably looks the F-22 (wings) and YF-23 Blackwidow II Because they were Design that were rigorously tested as part of the design Competition, And thus was an easy look to copy and be pretty sure it was sound design...Since The YF-23 BW II; "lost the Design competition BUT Was STILL Made Ultra top Secret Anyway...(I'm SURE they are just going to Throw ALL that work away...Wouldn't you?) NO INTAKES it's a ROCKET PLANE! Do i need to say more? FUEL BOIL OFF: If you think that this was not a problem solve 50 years ago you Probably think , From under your Tin foil Helmet that the moon landing didn't happen. Dinitrogen Tertroxide is a gas at room temp but because a Liquid and around the 30 degrees Fer. That's only 2 degree below Freezing of water Hardly what I would call "cryogenic liquid fuels" and Hydrozine is not a Gas AT ALL I don't know what was used but those are common AND I thought I heard Solid fuel be I'm not sure if that's the p[lane or the "Missile type thing" or if I misunderstood what was said. Any more Questions?
It's just a juvenile design. The gap between the rocket and pontoons is likely aerodynamically horrible too. The large starship one cockpit is also folly. A drone spine with a U2 style skinny wing is probably the way to go. As for the air intake they might have thought it should be rocket powered. Which wouldn't be my choice.
It doesn't. It looks like a fighter jet because it's designed to achieve supersonic flight, but it's not a stealth plane. The "stealthiness" of an aircraft doesn't come from the design itself, but from the materials the hull is made of, designed to absorb radar signals.
Au mai facut cei de la ARCA lucruri pe care toti le credeau imposibile si le puneau in coada listei, in rubrica de "come on...", nu? Nu vad de ce nu ar reusi cu avionul. Si dupa ce reusesc ar avea perspective chiar si militare, dar pe care nu cred ca le vor valorifica. Inainte sa dam 0 sanse proiectului, sa nu uitam ca anul acesta ne'au aratat ca se poate totusi. Cel mai frumos cadou de Craciun pentru impatimitii de aeronautica din Romania.
this is romanian program. i quess they starting from water to safe on cost, like build airstrip. forgot to add: friction not exist in romania. best regards from borat
@ARCA: Buna dimineata, ARCA! :-D Suntem amici si pe Facebook, naturelment, dar vreau sa va transmit *si aici* toata sustinerea mea de *roman* cu picioarele pe pamant, da' cu capu'-n nori! :-D Ma rog, uneori si mintea o am tot in nori... :-P Bravo, ARCA!!!
Northrop YF-23 with a single jet engine, a huge bomb bay and a weird pair of floating bananas. Well... If it can get high enough to carry a space rocket, I guess it's fine... But it could load less fuel if launched from carrier boat or floating rail platform... Leave only the landing on the sea looks more wise.
Оппа! Молдаване рулят! Уж летать так сразу в космос!!! Графин вина с собой не забыть...
The problem with the design is in waves the payload can easily get damage, also the engine layout being set back beyond the fuselage can lead to easy failure of the extended area
Let me correct you on a simple obvious grammatical mistake. I posted "top view from the wing leading edge aft looks like a close copy to a Northrop YF-23...". That means that I was talking about the front edge of the wing (where it meets the fuselage) toward the aft end of the aircraft (the tail). The nose of the aircraft is highly reminiscent of the Rutan Space Ship One with the circular windows. I did not make mention of the YF-22. Do YOU get it?
That was a nice flat sea for your flying boat to take off from.
If you look at the design it uses planform alignment in the wing and pelikan tail. The top view from the wing leading edge aft looks like a close copy to a Northrop YF-23 which was designed to be stealthier than the YF-22 which also used planform alignment to improve it's stealth characteristics. Those shapes are optimized for stealth not aerodynamics.
F22 that lands on water.......very creative there guy.
I can't imagine a YF23 lookalike waterplane is a more cost effective way to launch stuff into space.
Yesh. That thing looks like a cross between a Rutan Space Ship One and a Northrop YF-23 Black Widow. I am highly dubious about launching a high performance aircraft off of a water surface. The Convair tried that with the SeaDart in the 50's and couldn't get past the vibration and pounding that the airframe would have to endure on takeoff and landing. The vibration was so bad that the test pilots reported that they couldn't read their instruments.
First look: Boeing/Rockwell YF-23 wing structure and tail section, front section cabin: American Rutan Company, the same that made the starship. Looking good.
One unexpected wave, and this whole thing breaks into a billion pieces. I hope they thought it through.
Программисты хорошо потрудились , отличная графика !
Умеют ребята малювать!
Looks like a mating of the YF-23 and the Starship 1
exactly my thought!!!
+bama Fan So true!!! lmao
I was about to say the same xD
Looking at more closely it looks exactly like they took the Starship One lifter nose and glued it on to a YF-23 fuselage. Then digitized the model and created this cgi.
You all beat me to it.
I love Saturday morning cartoons!
This seems like a very good idea, especially considering Romania geography and demography. As for previous comments - there are no air intakes, there are lift-skis for "hydroplanisation" of vessel, rocket engine seems like very logical solution, and this is excellent example of third-generation space launch vessel! (1st - ordinary chemical rocket, 2nd - first-stage-rocket powered shuttle-like returnable vessel, 3rd - first-stage-returnable vessel like this and Virgin1). Greetings from Serbia!!!
Very nice idea, great design and reuseable, i think this has a bright future!
If this had any future I wouldn't be watching this CGI in 2022
@Tycho343 the plane will have a rocket engine, so, no it doesn't need any intakes.
Были в 50-х 60-х и у русских такие разработки. Неперспективно, потому что такой штиь на море нереален. А на скорости взлета воткнутся в волну - очень даже реально.
this is very similar to the old Russian development
drobillka right!!!!
drobillka REDRUM !!!
No way, it could never carry enough fuel and look at all the drag inducing surfaces! But not bad work for a 13 year old and it shows creative thought.
@dragosmur even at at take off speed of 120-140kts all seas are rough. So they are going to need a way to get the body of the aircraft out off the water, faster if possible. Designing in, a hull similar to flying boats or having some sort of retractable hydroplanes. The Navy experimented with this idea back in the 50s. It was supposed to be a way to launch fighter squadrons quickly without a carrier. The aircraft shook so violently while on the water that the pilot could not read any gauges.
Genius graphics. Thumbs up.
I don't see the air intake surface on the fuselage. Also a single engine seems a bit underpowered to be able to take off from water/sea.
Hopefully they know what they're doing.
no air intake because it's a rocket powered plane
Good CGI clip. Interesting. Does look a heck of a lot like a YF-23 though (cool!).
Ce rai si invidiosi sint unii. Chiar nu au nimic mai bun de facut cu timpul lor decit sa incerce sa puna acesti baieti si munca lor jos?
it looks arguably like any aircraft capable of achieving supersonic speed out there.
One practical and possible concept of satellite payload launching.
Where is the intake? How the fuck is it practical OR possible if it's so close to the water a fucking pebble can splash water into the cockpit, how does a pilot get in it without having to either get inside a boat or swim to the cockpit?
+Maquina Caos . Does the Space Shuttle with rocket engines needs any intake?. Does an unmanned craft ( cos it is not stated in the vid ) needs an entrance or an exit or even a cockpit that fits a pilot?.
a yf-22 with SpaceShipTwo's cabin? Not sure that little engine would be powerful enough for supersonic flight, and it wouldnt be stealthy.
Plus oceans tend to have large waves, which makes this form of takeoff and landing impossible.
An unexpected revival of the seaplane. This time it's nearly a space-plane too.
Awesome stuff
Apparently they didn't think of the fact that the sea is normally a lot rougher than that...
That looks like a $500 million dollar launch vehicle for a 100kg payload to orbit....
It looks like a YF-23 , that was one of the contenders for the US stealth-fighter program.
Don't show that to Northrop they would be very much puzzled to see their design used for for orbital rocketry.
@Chris58851
And why not use the descendant to GLONASS? Any disadvantages to that? The system has a huge capacity for monitoring.
(Just try to understand - no pun intented.)
A amphibious single engine version of the YF-23... I love it!!!
with a head of a su-30
@XSAlexio
The plane has a rocket engine. It has no intakes. Initial design had a delta wing, it was dropped because the structure was becoming too heavy and reduced aircraft performances. The plane has an extremely high climb rate comparable to Su-27 and Mig-29, it will get really fast through the thickest part of the atmosphere so wing drag is not a priority. Overall the plane has low drag and high lift. It is needed because it will glide on the way back.
A question: How did the engine avoid sucking in water at the start? The craft looked half submerged at the beginning.
felicitari ARCA! sper sa fiti o firma romaneasca cu care sa ne mandrim...sper sa va sprijine statul mai mult chiar daca sunt sigur ca nu vor fi lasati sa va sprijine...si daca merge treaba bine sa va extindeti domeniile si sa fiti Lockheed Martin a Romaniei!
Unde ne este avionul asta ? Dacă îl aveam poate nu mai cumpărăm F16 cine știe
it's similar to Ecranoplane (Экраноплан) ground effect vehicle (GEV) project in the 1960's. But they were manned of course.
это типа на резине и шасси экономят... ?! - нормально :))
This looks like a cross between Burt Rutan's SpaceShipOne and the YF-23 Black Widow, but less practical than either.
Видел как в Одессе взлетал и садился самолёт на воду без проблем. Со стороны показалось чудом ! Подумал вот самолёт который нужен,а не те,что есть ! Я понимал,что существует такой момент "прилипания" планера к воде,но у его этого небыло !? Он взлетал и садилса без каких либо проблем + !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ему не нужны аэродромы и площадки ему нужна вода 100метром,а может и того меньше !!!!
As good as the new ASAT mission.
It looks a lot like the F22
Великолепен как новый самолет миссии ASAT
Он очень похож на F22
Sorry but that thing look way way more like the YF-23, it look so much like it, that I would bet that in fact it’s a mods YF-23, or at least they steal the designs of it.
Nice concept
@scasey1960 The safeety factor of having no land mass nearby to accidentally kill anyone if something goes wrong, and the fact that at the equator, the launch angles are better for space access. The only way to get to the equator for the USA would be by sea.
Mig-25, Sr-71, U2 all go that high that too without rockets.
@kickniko If you don't want to touch unwanted target while able to monitor for hours before strike from the sky, UAV is the companion for this mission.
This is what we get when a YF-23 Black Widow and a F-22 Raptor fuse together.
Damn people! Could we tone down the competitiveness a bit? We both have plenty of firepower. We are just inventing cool stuff to kill the fuck out of each other. I'd much rather have some beers and shots in a bar with you all than be shot at or blown up or stabbed or fried or whatever.
Thank you a fellow human being, how wants nothing more than pice in the world.
Why on earth do you only want a virtually worthless bronze coin, "pice" (1 / 64 of a rupee) in the world? I guess you have low expectations!
ace combat 3? holy fuck man i knew the planes in ace combat looked futuristic but i didnt know they were the future!
Pretty, but not feasible.
Taking off from water is problematic - you need a calm surface. The angular wings are copies of wings designed for stealth, not lift. The launcher seems to be manned, which is a waste of weight. The airframe can't fit the large tanks I would expect for a subirbital plane that launches the rocket. You could take off with an air-breathing engine and fire the rocket from a high altitude just the same, taking off from an ordinary airport. SpaceX's approach of using the same engines for take off and landing is probably very cost-effective. The F-14 (or was it the F-15?) had the capability of launching a subirbital anti-satellite missile.
You took the words right out of my mouth!
+Ricardo Bánffy
The "angular wings" are not a stealth design there are an efficient supersonic design.
The airframe doesn't need large integrated tanks because as a mothership it isn't meant to exceed 18,000m. To attain suborbital altitudes for space tourism payload is to be replaced with an external tank.
SpaceX are developing commercial launch systems not that are space tourism capable vehicles. Virgin Galactic is the closest analogy.
Modern air launched conventional anti-satellite missiles are a poor analogy as they are designed to be launched by existing multi-role aircraft not dedicated launch vehicles and are also don't carry a payload that would even remotely equate to the size and weight of a satellite.
+Vaul the Creator the trapezoidal wings you are using are a lot like the F-22 and F-35, which were designed for stealth (not efficiency). I agree SpaceX is not a direct analog because they are aiming much higher, but the same technique is used by Blue Origin and theirs is a space tourism vehicle that launches and lands vertically. The ASM-135 (the one tested on F-15's) had a small warhead that's still large enough for a small payload (think a couple cubesats) but it was never designed to LEO. The Pegasus is a better launcher and can be deployed from different aircraft for up to 450 Kg in LEO.
Why launch from water?
Ricardo Bánffy Yes, the F-22 and F-35 use a trapezoidal wing configuration but the design's stealth characteristics are incidental not deliberate.
A high aspect ratio, low span trapezoidal is a thin, high speed, minimal drag design and therefore highly suited to supersonic flight and has been around far longer than any stealth consideration
Have you ever seen a Lockheed F-104 Starfighter? Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer? How about the North American X-15 hypersonic rocket-powered research aircraft?
To be honest, at high velocity like that aircraft end up into peaces. I'm not a good on science and stuff but that can happend at high velocity
0:15 The pilot asks permission to take-off. And he's granted permission to take-off.
1:05 The pilot asks permission to launch the rocket.
1:10 He's granted permission to launch the rocket.
1:25 Pilot tells mission control that the rocket launch was successful.
1:14 Rocket launch count down.
1:33 Mission control tells the pilot that they have both objects on radar.
So jet blast is coming out the back. Where is the air sucking IN at? If underneath then the engine will flame out from the water being sucked into it.
Что нам стоит дом построить -нарисуем будем жить
got lots of airstrips here borat, but honesttly we could start it underwater and pop it out the sea for your delight, anyways friction exists here only that hydro-foil profiles kinda make it usefull for some...
Aren't the carrier's engines air-breating ? I don't see any intakes.
Where are the intakes on this?
Alan L rocket powered
Interesting concept but having the payload rocket submerged during sea launch phase may not be feasible at all.
Nice Animation
WoW!!looks like a Ekranoplan Stealth Fighter version of White Knight
commercial suborbital spaceflights? then why is it shaped so stealthily, like the YF-23? is there supposed to be a military application to it?
Nah..they'll never 'take off' from water like that,they do launch satellites from ships on the equator for the shortest route to space.
Very good
Hey, if it works Great! And it looks good too
@XSAlexio
It isn't stealth. Why would it be? It will be launched from the sea because Romania is a highly populated country, and there is no safe area to test it on the mainland. Also eliminates the need for a landing gear that would add to the overall weight.
*_Это, человекоуправляемая первая ступень ракеты?_* 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎
that looks like the yf-23
Mixed in with the adfx 11 from ace combat 7
IT doesn't look like the yf-23 at all... The big difference is that ours will be much better. This is not a normal aircraft. This is called a mother-ship.😅
@@frankburton7698 adfx-11 is just a fictional aircraft while ours is in process. We finished the front, the body is still in process. Our plane will turn into reality. And this is not an aircraft mixed with any of these mentioned by both of you. yf-23 might be a contender but it will have no chance in case of an air to air combat. Ours will also be equipped with stealth technology and many more.
Great idea .....
Looks like a Jet that could be in Ace Combat.
Looks nice in CGI, so.....how did it turn out?
fine animation..
Why do a water launch? Where is that 'value added'?
Its not stealthy its just an efficient air frame.
Nice concept but the rocket should sit on the top of the launch vehicle or the friction from the water is bound to cause an explosion.
كم تبلغ سرعتها ؟
ومن أي مواد صنعت ؟
وما مدى قدرتها في المناورة ؟
وهل بها نظام يحمي سائقها إن تعرضت لصاروخ فجرها ؟
وشكرا
Couple issues and questions. If the rocket uses cryogenic liquid fuels, the entire outside of the rocket would become one huge ice cube, and it would have a serious issue with the fuel boiling off. Where are the air intakes for the plane? Why does it look like an F-23?
WELL It probably looks the F-22 (wings) and YF-23 Blackwidow II Because they were Design that were rigorously tested as part of the design Competition, And thus was an easy look to copy and be pretty sure it was sound design...Since The YF-23 BW II; "lost the Design competition BUT Was STILL Made Ultra top Secret Anyway...(I'm SURE they are just going to Throw ALL that work away...Wouldn't you?)
NO INTAKES it's a ROCKET PLANE! Do i need to say more?
FUEL BOIL OFF: If you think that this was not a problem solve 50 years ago you Probably think , From under your Tin foil Helmet that the moon landing didn't happen. Dinitrogen Tertroxide is a gas at room temp but because a Liquid and around the 30 degrees Fer. That's only 2 degree below Freezing of water Hardly what I would call "cryogenic liquid fuels" and Hydrozine is not a Gas AT ALL I don't know what was used but those are common AND I thought I heard Solid fuel be I'm not sure if that's the p[lane or the "Missile type thing" or if I misunderstood what was said.
Any more Questions?
It's just a juvenile design. The gap between the rocket and pontoons is likely aerodynamically horrible too. The large starship one cockpit is also folly. A drone spine with a U2 style skinny wing is probably the way to go.
As for the air intake they might have thought it should be rocket powered. Which wouldn't be my choice.
Scram-jet launch via jet-plane(possible mod into ekranoplan) w/ aquatic take-off
This is a modern take on what the British and Americans did some years back with a jet aeroplane
It doesn't. It looks like a fighter jet because it's designed to achieve supersonic flight, but it's not a stealth plane. The "stealthiness" of an aircraft doesn't come from the design itself, but from the materials the hull is made of, designed to absorb radar signals.
The only thing in common with a f-22 is the trapezoidal wing configuration.
Yes but does it have Bluetooth connectivity? And steering wheel controls? how about a subwoooooooofer?
это ж насколько ракета прочная должна быть чтоб по разгон по воде выдржать и не взорватся
how is that supposed to land on the water?
Au mai facut cei de la ARCA lucruri pe care toti le credeau imposibile si le puneau in coada listei, in rubrica de "come on...", nu?
Nu vad de ce nu ar reusi cu avionul. Si dupa ce reusesc ar avea perspective chiar si militare, dar pe care nu cred ca le vor valorifica.
Inainte sa dam 0 sanse proiectului, sa nu uitam ca anul acesta ne'au aratat ca se poate totusi. Cel mai frumos cadou de Craciun pentru impatimitii de aeronautica din Romania.
How to land ? Its was missing ...
is it a drone?
that cockpit would kill me with claustrophobia before i even got to space
на крыле этого чуды вы можете разместить вашу рекламу)))))))))))))))))))))
@jeoverv I think they are rocket engines.. Like the space shuttle's engines...
Very nice Fighter ,
Very cool animation, and music!
Where is air intake for engine
wonderful
You only see this when you sleep and dream. when you wake up it is gone 4ever. stop dreaming please!.
this is romanian program. i quess they starting from water to safe on cost, like build airstrip.
forgot to add: friction not exist in romania. best regards from borat
Abia astept sa-l vad in realitate,macar sa ne mandrim si noi cu ceva in afara,ca am reusit sa facem si noi ceva,nu numai sa distrugem.
Bafta.
It looks like a YF-23
Did you use 3DS Max for this? I think its a really good concept. Nice work!
@ProsArt You mean YF-23?
@ARCA: Buna dimineata, ARCA! :-D Suntem amici si pe Facebook, naturelment, dar vreau sa va transmit *si aici* toata sustinerea mea de *roman* cu picioarele pe pamant, da' cu capu'-n nori! :-D Ma rog, uneori si mintea o am tot in nori... :-P Bravo, ARCA!!!
Northrop YF-23 with a single jet engine, a huge bomb bay and a weird pair of floating bananas.
Well... If it can get high enough to carry a space rocket, I guess it's fine... But it could load less fuel if launched from carrier boat or floating rail platform... Leave only the landing on the sea looks more wise.
i see a stealthy way for smaller icbm's to be launched...
Graphics good