Modelling > Engineering Dept.

SEPECAT Jaguar

<< < (4/4)

kitnut617:
Less chance of twisting an axle I'd think when slamming onto the deck, I've got the same idea for my naval Dominie builds that are in the works.

Rickshaw:

--- Quote from: kengeorge on May 18, 2022, 07:31:44 PM ---Rickshaw, I like that model. I know I'm in danger of slightly drifting off thread here, but why do nearly all the marineized Jags both drawings and modelsą have single main wheels instead of the twin wheels? Also what would be the advantage of swapping the Jag wing for the T2/F1 wing?

--- End quote ---

Twin wheels spread the load which is useful when operating from rough airfields.  Naval aircraft are deemed to find that unnecessary when operating from a ship's deck.   The main criticism of the original Jaguar wing was that it was a "bit small" in the proposed naval version, so the substitution of the Mitsubishi T2 wing which was approximately 15% larger.   This has all been thought of in the back story for the original model... 

M.A.D:

--- Quote from: kengeorge on May 18, 2022, 07:31:44 PM ---Rickshaw, I like that model. I know I'm in danger of slightly drifting off thread here, but why do nearly all the marineized Jags both drawings and modelsą have single main wheels instead of the twin wheels? Also what would be the advantage of swapping the Jag wing for the T2/F1 wing?

--- End quote ---

The Mitsubishi F-1 also had wingtip missile rails for SRAAM's, which the Jaguar didn't.

MAD

M.A.D:

--- Quote from: kengeorge on May 18, 2022, 07:31:44 PM ---Rickshaw, I like that model. I know I'm in danger of slightly drifting off thread here, but why do nearly all the marineized Jags both drawings and modelsą have single main wheels instead of the twin wheels? Also what would be the advantage of swapping the Jag wing for the T2/F1 wing?

--- End quote ---

As did the actual Jaguar M prototype kengeorge

MAD

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page