the name that airplane thread

Duke

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#4
Christ, i dunno it's name, but it was a Cold War designed Soviet aircraft. Meant to skim over the water surface at some 300/400 miles an hour, it could carry over a 1000 soldiers. Only 1 built (i think), kinda flopped.


EDIT: i think i remember, wasnt it the Ekranoplan? :confused:

Ill try to google the thing to see if i can find its name

here's mine, should be easy:

 

Mase

New Member
#7
Duke said:
Christ, i dunno it's name, but it was a Cold War designed Soviet aircraft. Meant to skim over the water surface at some 300/400 miles an hour, it could carry over a 1000 soldiers.
If that plane hit the top of a wave while in action, wouldn't it blow up on impact?
 

Duke

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#8
Mase said:
If that plane hit the top of a wave while in action, wouldn't it blow up on impact?
obviously, it wasnt meant to be used at rough seas. It would skim across at about 3 meters of the surface.
 

PuffnScruff

Well-Known Member
#9
Duke said:
Christ, i dunno it's name, but it was a Cold War designed Soviet aircraft. Meant to skim over the water surface at some 300/400 miles an hour, it could carry over a 1000 soldiers. Only 1 built (i think), kinda flopped.


EDIT: i think i remember, wasnt it the Ekranoplan? :confused:

Ill try to google the thing to see if i can find its name

here's mine, should be easy:


it's a Stuka

german ww2 plane

here is mine. very easy, i flew on one of these a couple of times when i was about 6 months old coming from turkey to the states and back again.

 

Duke

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#10
Wrong, Puff. It's a Focke Wulf 190. Stukas look very different.

Is that an Orion? Or a Hercules?

edit: hercules, has to be with all the lil windows up front


edit2: stukas:



Notice the tilt far wing halves, 2 man cockpit with rear gunner, fixed undercarriage and general ungainlier look
 

Dante

Meyer & Dante Best Friends4eva
#11
PuffnScruff said:
it's a Stuka

german ww2 plane

here is mine. very easy, i flew on one of these a couple of times when i was about 6 months old coming from turkey to the states and back again.

your picture is a c-130, which is rescue and refuel, whereas a similar kc-135 is more combat oriented. here's my fav plane of all time. was a pleasure to see:
 

Duke

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#13
Dante said:
your picture is a c-130, which is rescue and refuel, whereas a similar kc-135 is more combat oriented. here's my fav plane of all time. was a pleasure to see:
KC's are refuelers. You're referring to the Spectre gunship i think.

Is that an X-plane?
 
#14
Bell X-1 is what dante posted, ive seen the X-1 at the smithsonian.

and the C-130 hercules is a cargo plane
C-130H-spectre is a gunship plane, still a C-130 just has a howitzer and a vulcan and some other guns.
The KC-135 is a tanker plane used to refuel.

and the X-1 was the first X-plane, flown by chuck yaeger(sp?) first plane to ever break the sound barrier.
and toopackshaker your post makes no sense, if i said name that plane then it would but i didnt.
 
#15
this one is easy, but im sure it might be a bit difficult for the people on this site considering most dont know much about planes.

notice how it does not have propellors in the rear like the early models. so there was a prototype for this prototype. this plane failed because its wing geometry rendered it unflyable without the help of a computer, which has now been developed. this plane crashed in california because of not having fly by wire and the pilot lost control. i bought pieces of this airplane. i also own pieces of the SR-71, XB-70 valkyrie honeycomb, and the X-15.
 
#16
This I believe is the Northrop YB-49. It’s cool to see some people on this board into planes. I have this old collection of photo cards with info about the planes on the back. I got it when I was ten I think lol.


GhostOfRazgriz said:
this one is easy, but im sure it might be a bit difficult for the people on this site considering most dont know much about planes.

notice how it does not have propellors in the rear like the early models. so there was a prototype for this prototype. this plane failed because its wing geometry rendered it unflyable without the help of a computer, which has now been developed. this plane crashed in california because of not having fly by wire and the pilot lost control. i bought pieces of this airplane. i also own pieces of the SR-71, XB-70 valkyrie honeycomb, and the X-15.



Guess this one.

I witnessed one of these some time ago. Whilst smoking a cigarette in my back yard. It paused as i glanced up and then whoosh. Some red star trek shit comes out the back and it was gone. Who knows what kind of technology the American governments has. I don’t care whether or not you believe me I know what i sore.
 
#17
what you saw was not the aurora, my dad tested the aurora, it wasnt a replacement for the SR-71 though, well atleast not when he tested it but i hear that may be its original useage. anyways i used to be obsessed with the aurora until i found documents and patents on it.i once scanned the documents but i wound up in a bit of trouble with the goverment.
 
#19
How are you sure it was not what I witnessed? Your dad tested the Aurora daymn. What ranking is your father? And that ''bloop'' plane does look new era. I’m surprised they were making planes like that back then.
 
#20
its not called bloop i jsut retitled it so people couldnt cheat so i just made up the word bloop and used it, my father is no longer ranked he quit due to certain reasons, and i know its not what you witnessed because you said it hovered over you, sounds to me like you witnessed a helicopter.
 

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top