Military Review

In the US, for the first time, the experimental aircraft Model 401

41
The American company Scaled Composites has announced the first flight of the experimental manned jet aircraft Model 401 it has built. Previously, the development of this aircraft was not known, writes bmpd.


In the US, for the first time, the experimental aircraft Model 401


The appointment and customer of the aircraft are not disclosed. The press release merely states that "the company worked with the customer on the construction of two aircraft to demonstrate advanced and low-cost production technologies and provide aircraft for research flights to industrial partners and the United States government."

It is also reported that 2 copies of this single-seater aircraft were built, the first of which flew on October 11.

The design of the aircraft, as you can understand, is one-piece and clearly made with the requirements of stealth, the material says.

Согласно данным разработчика, «вес пустого самолета 4000 фунтов (1814 кг), максимальный взлетный вес 8000 фунтов (3629 кг). Размах крыла 38 футов (11,6 м), длина самолета тоже 38 футов; машина оснащена одним двухконтурным турбореактивным двигателем Pratt & Whitney JTD-15D-5D максимальной тягой 3045 фунтов (1381 кг)». Максимальная скорость полета до 0,6М, практический потолок 30000 футов (9,1 км), продолжительность полета до 3-х часов.



Experts unanimously noted that the Model 401 is aerodynamically very close to the unmanned aerial vehicle Avenger (Predator C) of General Atomics Corporation.
Photos used:
Scaled Composites
41 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. NEXUS
    NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 46 New
    13
    Experts unanimously noted that the Model 401 is aerodynamically very close to the unmanned aerial vehicle Avenger (Predator C) of General Atomics Corporation.

    It looks like a new strike UAV is being lined up with a reactive one and, apparently, cheap and massive.
    1. Max otto
      Max otto 13 October 2017 18: 49 New
      +3
      Exactly. I immediately thought about this. The glider is being tested.
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 13 October 2017 14: 49 New
    +1
    Our CP-10 will be more sympathetic. And double ... wassat
    1. Scoun
      Scoun 13 October 2017 16: 16 New
      12
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Our CP-10 will be more sympathetic. And double ... wassat

      Only our CP-10 as a training desk and then the development of the latest technologies in the field of aviation and most likely there will be a subtle, excellent strike drone based on it.
      In general, a little disappointing, they took and flew on an airplane from the "composite" ...
  3. ProkletyiPirat
    ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 15: 00 New
    +6
    total: we have an aircraft
    1) not intended for supersonic flights - the wing structure and engine location will not allow.
    2) not intended for extra long flights - the size of the wing will not allow
    3) not intended for the transport of weapons - the dimensions are small and invisible bomb bombs or mounts for suspension
    In general, the device is not interesting in any way, the production of aircraft itself is interesting, for example, could they reduce the cost of the production of composites? or did they use some kind of new composition?
    1. FID
      FID 13 October 2017 15: 09 New
      16
      Sorry, but you described the An-2 exactly (except for clause 3)!
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 17: 12 New
        0
        Quote: SSI
        Sorry, but you described the An-2 exactly (except for clause 3)!

        well then still point 4
        4) not intended for transportation of goods - again, the size and there is no cargo compartment
        anyway, the conclusion is the same "In general, the device is not interesting in any way, the production of aircraft is interesting,"
    2. Professor
      Professor 13 October 2017 15: 12 New
      10
      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
      In general, the device is not interesting,

      I am interested in the location of the air intake.
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 13 October 2017 15: 25 New
        11
        The large positive angle of the transverse V swept wing and the shape of the air intake suggests that the aircraft will be stable as a tank and subsonic. It means that there is no question of any training and other aircraft. Moreover, comparing it with the SR-10 is simply inappropriate. Unambiguously, the aircraft was built to test the elements and layout solutions of the new non-strategic drone.
        1. NordUral
          NordUral 13 October 2017 16: 05 New
          +2
          It seems about the drone.
        2. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 17: 17 New
          +1
          Quote: Engineer
          Unambiguously, the aircraft was built to test the elements and layout solutions of the new non-strategic drone.

          Paragraph 1 limits the speed of flight, therefore, as an impact UAV, it is useless
          Clause 2 limits the time spent in the air, therefore, as a reconnaissance-strike UAV, it is useless.
          1. Topgun
            Topgun 13 October 2017 19: 27 New
            0
            What advantage gives an extra sound if opponents fly to meet each other and launch rockets? ...
            But this wing allows you to load on it a lot of cargo in the form of "gifts" ...
            A “stuck” mind is not buzzing (supposedly a drummer should be supersonic and period), different concepts, different applications, we don’t even know how it will look in the end, but then we were diagnosed with a bad one ...
          2. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 13 October 2017 19: 32 New
            10
            0.6 MAX - convenient speed for hitting the ground. Until they notice (stealth) it will be too late. In the drone version, the cabin will not be needed. Instead of it (and under the belly) there will be a weapon (in the internal compartments).
            1. Topgun
              Topgun 13 October 2017 22: 08 New
              0
              plus
              drone - attack aircraft, can be very interesting
              1. Mih1974
                Mih1974 14 October 2017 03: 13 New
                0
                Dog crap and not a ground attack aircraft. Where it was easier for them to remake under the UAV tested by the A-10 for years. Moreover, attack aircraft fly only there - where ALREADY there is no anti-aircraft defense (more serious than MANPADS), otherwise they will "burn out in weeds."
      2. NordUral
        NordUral 13 October 2017 16: 05 New
        +1
        A clear decision.
      3. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 17: 29 New
        +4
        Quote: Professor
        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
        In general, the device is not interesting,

        I am interested in the location of the air intake.

        Nothing interesting, such an arrangement worsens the maneuverability and maximum speed of the aircraft, and also reduces the efficiency of the engine, but in exchange for significantly reduced radio visibility (due to overhead positioning). But again, if they really wanted to ensure low visibility, they could place the air intakes on the sides above the wing and / or fuselage, while the radio visibility would remain the same, but the engine efficiency would increase relative to the current model.
        1. Dead duck
          Dead duck 13 October 2017 18: 56 New
          +8
          Tell the Americans (that he is complete garbage), otherwise they are poor for wasting time and money yes
          1. ProkletyiPirat
            ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 19: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Deadush
            Tell the Americans (that he is complete garbage), otherwise they are poor for wasting time and money yes

            they should know it even without me, but if they don’t know, I don’t see any reason to fight the American budget cuts hi
            1. Professor
              Professor 14 October 2017 08: 27 New
              +5
              Quote: ProkletyiPirat
              I see the point in fighting American budget cuts

              How I am touched by the bleating of the cut ALIEN the budget. Scaled Composites is a Burt Rutan company. Yes, that very Burt. The genius of aeronautics. The company is now owned by Northrop Grumman. So whose budget they saw creating LA their money?
              1. St Petrov
                St Petrov 14 October 2017 12: 10 New
                0
                As I am touched by bleating about cutting someone else's budget.


                that wow lol laughing
              2. ProkletyiPirat
                ProkletyiPirat 14 October 2017 13: 45 New
                0
                Quote: Professor
                As I am touched by bleating about cutting someone else's budget.

                As I am touched by phrases about "my" budgets, the fact that money went through third hands does not change the essence. And again, even the super-duper revolutionary composite production technology does not justify the cost of creating a NEW aircraft. Since the implementation of the airframe for the existing aircraft would make it possible to compare the performance characteristics, and it would be cheaper to make it corny. But, instead of lowering the cost and gaining the possibility of comparative tests, the company chooses to spend extra money on the implementation of its aircraft. It seems to me strange and illogical, that's why I'm talking about cutting a certain part of the money.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 14 October 2017 14: 09 New
                  +4
                  Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                  As I am touched by phrases about "my" budgets, the fact that money went through third hands does not change the essence

                  It changes. Money of your own, not official. Spend on what they want. In our company, this is called Golden Arrow. I am allocated a budget that I can spend not on specific projects, but on all sorts of interesting directions from which a new product can come out (although not a fact). If the product does not work, then no one screams about the "cut" of the budget. The knowledge and experience gained are invaluable.

                  Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                  And again, even the super-duper revolutionary composite production technology does not justify the cost of creating a NEW aircraft. T

                  Have you read their SOW and know what goals were set?

                  Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                  Since the implementation of an airframe for an existing aircraft would make it possible to compare the performance characteristics, and it would be trite would be cheaper. But, instead of lowering the cost and gaining the possibility of comparative tests, the company chooses to spend extra money on the implementation of its aircraft. It seems to me strange and illogical, that's why I'm talking about cutting a certain part of the money.

                  They see better what to spend ITS money. Moreover, I take off my hat to the genius Burt Rutan. hi Once I wrote an article about him here and “threatened” to make a whole series of articles about him, but somehow it did not grow together.
      4. corporal
        corporal 13 October 2017 19: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        I am interested in the location of the air intake.

        Well, I don’t know, a large angle of attack is surging. To me, on the pilot’s place, it would be stingy.
        IMHO of course.
    3. MadCat
      MadCat 14 October 2017 00: 59 New
      +1
      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
      In general, the device is not interesting

      you forgot to ask, this plane is a breakthrough in the construction of the glider, precisely because of the materials. He is not interested in him laughing
      1. ProkletyiPirat
        ProkletyiPirat 14 October 2017 01: 07 New
        0
        Quote: MadCat
        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
        In general, the device is not interesting

        you forgot to ask, this plane is a breakthrough in the construction of the glider, precisely because of the materials. He is not interested in him laughing

        Very smart? Or don't you know how to read?
  4. unignm
    unignm 13 October 2017 15: 24 New
    0
    and what for it is needed? application?
  5. NordUral
    NordUral 13 October 2017 16: 04 New
    +2
    He has a good glider. When will we return to the aircraft industry for real?
  6. Aqr009
    Aqr009 13 October 2017 17: 15 New
    +6
    The concept of the airframe itself has already been used to occupy the niche of low-budget personal jets. It turned out a jet plane at the price of a sports car!
    Now they are looking at the military sphere.

  7. Manul
    Manul 13 October 2017 17: 46 New
    +1
    3-D printer?
    1. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 13 October 2017 19: 34 New
      +1
      it’s very possible, only the question arises why a new aircraft was made for this, and not the fuselage for the existing aircraft. But here you can take a break saying "who will give us the sources of the military fuselage" or "is not initially provided."
  8. Manul
    Manul 13 October 2017 17: 47 New
    0
    Cheaper production for printing on a 3-D printer?
    1. corporal
      corporal 13 October 2017 19: 39 New
      +1
      It is also possible if they achieve the same strength characteristics when printing, as when machining.
  9. pexotinec
    pexotinec 13 October 2017 20: 11 New
    0
    As they say only their radars do not see them laughing
  10. Prole
    Prole 13 October 2017 20: 57 New
    0
    Hundreds of them are riveted for radio interference, and no torimory 500 will not be scary. And after the air defense ammunition against them is used up, you can
    1. KCA
      KCA 14 October 2017 09: 04 New
      0
      The radar and the Pantsira-S1 OES “see” birds and balloons, the complex is capable of deafening them with cannons with a rate of 5000 rounds per minute, such a flying canoe is enough
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 14 October 2017 21: 22 New
        +3
        "Shell-C1" of these air defense systems for the whole of Russia 100 pieces - maximum.
      2. MadCat
        MadCat 15 October 2017 02: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: KCA
        The radar and the Pantsira-S1 OES “see” birds and balloons, the complex is capable of deafening them with cannons with a rate of 5000 rounds per minute, such a flying canoe is enough

        and of course, they modestly kept silent at what distance he could not only "See" but also work on purpose.
  11. Geisenberg
    Geisenberg 14 October 2017 11: 58 New
    0
    Plane from used pressed toilet paper. Breakthrough unconditionally.
  12. motorized rifle
    motorized rifle 14 October 2017 12: 50 New
    0
    Something similar already happened. People's fighter 3 Reich He-162. This one flew and this one did not have time.,
  13. motorized rifle
    motorized rifle 14 October 2017 13: 10 New
    +2
    I don’t know where they want to adapt this plane, therefore I will not be clever. But the machine is good, look at the ratio of take-off weight to empty weight, it's a fairy tale. Yes, and the full weight is comparable to the weight of WWII fighters, dimensions, too, is not very bad thrust-weight ratio. Maneuvering will not be bad (if the design can withstand) And surging at a speed of 0,6 Mach is not terrible, it often occurs at transonic speeds, and the aerodynamics of the input can be calculated for 0,6M.
    As for me, it should be very good in the fight against helicopters, for example.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 October 2017 21: 26 New
      +2
      The U.S. Air Force on a similar layout UAV Avenger made