What is your favorite aircraft of all time?

[pascalf]

This is my all time favorite.
The spitfire.

 

[staggerwing]

For all you lovers of big seaplanes a few posts back...

While not as grand as the DC3 on floats, check out the Aztec Nomad www.aztecnomad.com - a Piper Aztec on amphibious floats. While only a six seater, the Aztec is a fairly large aircraft for it's type (compared to a Beech Baron or a Cessna 310). The best part is, unlike the DC3, you don't have to be a zillionaire to afford to fly the thing. So, I've been thinking about taking the plunge (I hope not literally). Only problem is, wife isn't too keen on it. She's got no problem with my buying airplanes, as long as they're fast. The Aztec is, because of it's size, the slowest in it's class, and when you add two cabin cruiser-sized floats, it tops out at around 135 knots. Still, not bad for a machine that can go anywhere, carry anything you can close the doors on (or tie between the floats), and has that aura of class that few modern aircraft can boast. By the way, while the Aztec is not really a golden age airplane having first folwn in the late 50s, it has its roots in the "Twin Stinson," so it's lines are classic in certain respects.

 

[Decodence]

While not as grand as the DC3 on floats, check out the Aztec Nomad www.aztecnomad.com - a Piper Aztec on amphibious floats. While only a six seater, the Aztec is a fairly large aircraft for it's type (compared to a Beech Baron or a Cessna 310). The best part is, unlike the DC3, you don't have to be a zillionaire to afford to fly the thing. So, I've been thinking about taking the plunge (I hope not literally). Only problem is, wife isn't too keen on it. She's got no problem with my buying airplanes, as long as they're fast. The Aztec is, because of it's size, the slowest in it's class, and when you add two cabin cruiser-sized floats, it tops out at around 135 knots. Still, not bad for a machine that can go anywhere, carry anything you can close the doors on (or tie between the floats), and has that aura of class that few modern aircraft can boast. By the way, while the Aztec is not really a golden age airplane having first folwn in the late 50s, it has its roots in the "Twin Stinson," so it's lines are classic in certain respects.

Cessna 210 caravans are more my speed...(and Mr. Buffet's.)

 

[staggerwing]

Hey, if you've got the bucks, go for it! Too rich for my blood though. Aztec Nomad = similar performance for, oh, $2,000,000 less! And, alot more options when one engine quits.

 

[Decodence]

Hey, if you've got the bucks, go for it! Too rich for my blood though. Aztec Nomad = similar performance for, oh, $2,000,000 less! And, alot more options when one engine quits.

Its a buyer's market

http://www.transglobalaviation.net/aircraft/3/269/Turbo_Props/1993_Cessna_208_Caravan_Amphibian/

 

[Fletch]

Big Delta

For weight comparison, we're talking about four loaded Space Shuttles, basically, or a small World War II destroyer. And if I have my way, the darn thing will never be built--quite frankly, I'm scared of what I've created!

I like it. It's way too aerodynamic, no glassed-in galleries or bathtubs or engines on stalks or pantsed landing gear taller than a man. But I like it.

I see it outfitted like the Pan Am spaceliner in 2001 on the inside, but without the stupid bee hive helmets.

Bento Box, sir? Ma'am?

 

[dhermann1]

Okay, if we're going BIG... not a favorite, just something I designed.

FYI, the sections shown in white are engineering changes since the last revision. First image is in perspective, other four are parallel-projection (more like 3-view drawings)
Design power 16 hybrid 125K-uprated GE90/ramjet/linear-aerospike rocket hybrid engines, gross weight 2 million pounds, optimal weight 1 mil. Final revision will also be able to "mothership" 16-18 X-47 UCAVs... and "Col. Norm", my old fighter-pilot prof, thinks this monster could deliver an entire war's worth of firepower on one pass.

Dime and Back, you're crazy in a really fun way.

 

[Diamondback]

I like it. It's way too aerodynamic, no glassed-in galleries or bathtubs or engines on stalks or pantsed landing gear taller than a man. But I like it.

Fletch, interesting that a 1st-gen stealth-tech (IE, F-117-style faceting) design would be considered "aerodynamic"--as for glass, bear in mind that this thing was quite literally conceived as a "Doomsday Plane", a superweapon. Fully blacked out, this thing would also have a lighting system designed to simulate the starfield above it as a kind of "active camouflage", so once the sun set you'd never even know it was there until all of Delta Force had parachuted in around you or the Daisy Cutters landed...

Gear haven't been rendered yet, I figured this beast would need two sets: one in the bottom of the lower nacelles (reduced lift-distance for cargo loading), and a second set to buy the 20-25' clearance required to rotate the lower afterburners down for vertical lift.

OTOH, I suppose it'd be a simple matter, once I resume design of the "command ship" variant, to reduce the weapons-bay height and place the briefing-room and ops-center up topside, even though logic says bury them as close to the center of the hull as possible...

Dan, I told you I had things that'd make Dr. Strangelove jealous on the drawing boards...lol OTOH, the saying is "go big, or go home"...

 

[dhermann1]

Tom Swift and his Flying Lab

Of course, this has all been done before:
http://www.tomswift.info/homepage/flylab.html
I read this book as a 10 year old in 1957. Loved it!

 

[3Horn]

The last of the prop bombers.

I think the P-3 is as close as you can get to the old bomber days as far as crew coordination and mission work. Lots and lots of fun.

 

[Jerekson]

DiamondBack, that design of yours is incredible. I'm a bit of a nut on the subject myself, but unlike you I never have the technical readouts to back it up!

The sheer size of the thing brings the Star Destroyers to mind.

But even more so, it looks a hell of alot like something I found in Flight Simulator X:

 

[Retro Rob]

My favorite aircraft is the one I depart from after a safe landing.

 

[Diamondback]

Jerekson, was your FS-X mission doing one of the "Janet" personnel-shuttle flights into the Ranch?

An old college buddy modeled it in X-Plane, and the thing took all of LAX to lift (he also overweighted, oversized and underpowered it, though), and he couldn't get it past ground-effect to land!

Re Star Destroyer comparison, the concept's similar but size is not--a standard Episode 4-6 Imperial Star Destroyer was 5280', Vader's Executor was around 12-13 times that, and the Episode 3 Venators were a bit smaller than the Imperials. In SW terms, this thing might be a very large gunboat... actually part of the "mission creep" that drove its growth to present specs was the ability to clamp onto any smaller aircraft's belly and bring it down to the ground by brute force of engine power alone if necessary, or being able to dead-lift a stripped hulk of its own type--something this big breaks, you need one heck of a tow-truck, y'know?lol

Dan, the problem with existing nuclear like Tom Swift's Lab is it takes a hit, you got nasty crap scattered all over--this big beast is entirely petroleum and hydrogen-fueled. Besides, those X-47s aren't "scouts", they're an entire attached fighter squadron, either self-controlled or managed by the host's battle-management computers.

 

[Jerekson]

Yep, a standard morning run to bring in the ole' Area 51 day shifters. Caught this thing sitting there on my way in, and another similar one took off into the sky about a minute later. Fast buggers - it was gone over the horizon (literally) within 30 seconds. Little black speck becomes nothingness.

Well, the SD comparison was hardly accurate; moreso I just saw the little figure standing next to the enormous arrowhead and I guessed. But obviously the Star Destroyers are much larger.
And although planetary landings are not unheard of, especially during the Clone Wars era (Annihilator-class did most of the invasions, right?) obviously the craft weren't designed with atmospheric aerodynamics in mind. The main bridge tower would just be a major drag-fest for the rest of the body.
A repulsorlift unit able to support a ship of that size would have to be radically powerful. Even so, a Super-class wouldn't even stand a chance of breaking an atmosphere.

 

[Diamondback]

fftopic:

Well, the SD comparison was hardly accurate; moreso I just saw the little figure standing next to the enormous arrowhead and I guessed. But obviously the Star Destroyers are much larger.
And although planetary landings are not unheard of, especially during the Clone Wars era (Annihilator-class did most of the invasions, right?) obviously the craft weren't designed with atmospheric aerodynamics in mind. The main bridge tower would just be a major drag-fest for the rest of the body.
A repulsorlift unit able to support a ship of that size would have to be radically powerful. Even so, a Super-class wouldn't even stand a chance of breaking an atmosphere.

Actually, the Acclamators (Episode 2) were the standard troopships, although Venators may have been capable of landing, and (as yet unseen) Victory-class ships (steppingstone from Venator to Imperial) were capable of limited high-level endoatmospheric flight. And there was a case of an SSD that pulled it off, in one of the X-Wing novels... I'd assume they'd use magnetic fields like the Death Star hangar's atmospheric containment to manage airflow if necessary, an SSD would probably take it better than an Imperial actually due to its smaller tower relative to overall size and proportionally stronger hull structure!

To be honest, aside from the weapons bay Project Infiltrator would actually be a fairly cramped airframe, between the fuel and the multiple 20 and 30mm Gatlings, the 120 and 155mm "main battery" and all the avionics... and we won't even put the possibility of 8", 12" or 16" "big-bores" on the table at this point!

You do raise a good point: except for the X-47s' inability to operate above a certain altitude and speed, have I possibly created a real-world "Star Destroyer"?

 

[Story]

Washington DNR retires WWII-era firefighting plane
By The Associated Press

DEER PARK — Washington state's Department of Natural Resources says it is looking for a replacement for a World War II era firefighting airplane that is too old to meet federal aviation standards.

State officials say the 1946 PBY is the last of its kind still fighting fires. It has been stationed at the Deer Park Airport during fire seasons. It could scoop up to 1,500-gallons of water from lakes and rivers to drop on Eastern Washington wildfires.

The federal government stopped using the PBY to fight fires in 2004.

The DNR did not renew a contract with the plane's owner and says it will try to find a more modern replacement.

 

[staggerwing]

Its a buyer's market

http://www.transglobalaviation.net/aircraft/3/269/Turbo_Props/1993_Cessna_208_Caravan_Amphibian/

Much as I'd love to have one, I can buy around 10 Aztec Nomads for the price! Also, From what some operators of Amphib Caravans have said, they're prone to cracking in the firewall area due to the stresses of water landings and T.Os. And, it's not really very vintage looking. Now, if you throw classic looks out the window, and money is no object, I once saw a Twin Ottor on Amphibs. Yea, I'd like to have one!

 

[Jerekson]

fftopic:
Actually, the Acclamators (Episode 2) were the standard troopships, although Venators may have been capable of landing, and (as yet unseen) Victory-class ships (steppingstone from Venator to Imperial) were capable of limited high-level endoatmospheric flight. And there was a case of an SSD that pulled it off, in one of the X-Wing novels... I'd assume they'd use magnetic fields like the Death Star hangar's atmospheric containment to manage airflow if necessary, an SSD would probably take it better than an Imperial actually due to its smaller tower relative to overall size and proportionally stronger hull structure!

To be honest, aside from the weapons bay Project Infiltrator would actually be a fairly cramped airframe, between the fuel and the multiple 20 and 30mm Gatlings, the 120 and 155mm "main battery" and all the avionics... and we won't even put the possibility of 8", 12" or 16" "big-bores" on the table at this point!

You do raise a good point: except for the X-47s' inability to operate above a certain altitude and speed, have I possibly created a real-world "Star Destroyer"?

I'd say you have.

I guess it's not all impossible, and the magno fields are a good point, but it's still not something that was typcially done I would imagine.

I would think it to be more typical for the Destroyer to hang in orbit and deploy dropships for an invasion. Although I suppose if there were say, heavy anti-aircraft fire, it would be necessary to actually pull the Destroyer itself into the scene. But being as they lack landing struts, the dropships would inevitably be used, only at a lower altitude for more cover.

 

[Randy]

There are a lot of great planes listed here, but the one closest to my heart will always be the old flying boats, particularly the M-130.

- R

 

[rachw182]

My all time favorite is the P-51 Mustang!

Here's some links to the pictures I took at the Gathering of Mustangs and Legends Airshow in Columbus:

http://picasaweb.google.com/rachelwilliard/RickenbackerAirShow

http://picasaweb.google.com/rachelwilliard/RickenbackerAirShow2