I saw that aircraft in 1983. It was parked in a hanger at the Langley Research center located next to Langley AFB, Va. I was at Langley on temporary duty and went next door on a day off. Interesting airchene.
In contrast to what the narrator says, Chuck Sewell never requested permission to do the roll that is mentioned in the video. It came as a complete surprise to those of us in the flight tests center. Because of that, he was not allowed to fly the fourth test flight. That flight was given to backup pilot Kurt Schroeder. Chuck just said that the controls felt so good that he couldn't resist the temptation.
The X-29 was never intended to be a fighter. It was a technology and research aircraft with no provisions for warfighting. Thus 'X-29', not 'F-29' or "XF-29'.
The title says "The Fighter Jet with Backward Wings". More click bait. It was never produced as a "Jet Fighter", and the only reason I watched this was to see if it ever was an actual jet fighter. NO IT WASN'T!!! This type of post is a waste of time and should not be posted.
![Top Gun Fighter Jet [F/A-18 Super Hornet] Impressive Cockpit View](/img/n.gif)
I saw that aircraft in 1983. It was parked in a hanger at the Langley Research center located next to Langley AFB, Va. I was at Langley on temporary duty and went next door on a day off. Interesting airchene.
In contrast to what the narrator says, Chuck Sewell never requested permission to do the roll that is mentioned in the video. It came as a complete surprise to those of us in the flight tests center. Because of that, he was not allowed to fly the fourth test flight. That flight was given to backup pilot Kurt Schroeder. Chuck just said that the controls felt so good that he couldn't resist the temptation.
While the concept has some merit, ultimately engineers had to have known what the wings will do. Wingtip oscillation was a given.
'The Plane that Brutally Broke the Laws of Physics'.
Except it didn't.
The Hansa Jet had forward swept wings and was on the civilian market.
The X-29 was never intended to be a fighter. It was a technology and research aircraft with no provisions for warfighting. Thus 'X-29', not 'F-29' or "XF-29'.
Got no notice on this one.
This happens a lot everywhere
The title says "The Fighter Jet with Backward Wings". More click bait. It was never produced as a "Jet Fighter", and the only reason I watched this was to see if it ever was an actual jet fighter. NO IT WASN'T!!! This type of post is a waste of time and should not be posted.
Had a (hot wheels?) version of this and the 747 with the shuttle on it.