Simviation Forums

(This Is What Happens When I have To Much Time On My Hands)

I think weight would actually be a better indicator. While the U2 may take a larger hanger to fit in, could you really say it was "bigger" than a, say, MiG 25.

I think weight would actually be a better indicator. While the U2 may take a larger hanger to fit in, could you really say it was "bigger" than a, say, MiG 25.

Yeah thats what im trying to get at, its a bit grey.
There is like no method of deciding what is larger

I think the ATA in the UK performed single pilot (and no one else) ops in some quite large aeroplanes during the war.

I think weight would actually be a better indicator. While the U2 may take a larger hanger to fit in, could you really say it was "bigger" than a, say, MiG 25.

Yeah thats what im trying to get at, its a bit grey.
There is like no method of deciding what is larger

I think your volume idea would work, but you need to get more specific with it.

Don't use a single big box for figuring the total volume, break each plane into components (fuselage, wings, elevators, tail).

Find the volume of each component, and then add them together, that way you wind up with a much more accurate number that includes no empty space, thus allowing you to compare the volume of each plane to see which is larger.

I think your volume idea would work, but you need to get more specific with it.

Don't use a single big box for figuring the total volume, break each plane into components (fuselage, wings, elevators, tail).

Find the volume of each component, and then add them together, that way you wind up with a much more accurate number that includes no empty space, thus allowing you to compare the volume of each plane to see which is larger.

Yeah I was thinking of trying to do that but it became difficult to acquire that data etc...

But from these figures I think you can tell that the F-105 is not the largest single seat aircraft.

I think the ATA in the UK performed single pilot (and no one else) ops in some quite large aeroplanes during the war. Smiley

I wouldn't call a Lancaster or any other ww2 multi engine bomber a single seat aircaft but it is a fair point

I've been next to all of these planes with the exception of the Su-27, and I can say that the 105 is a monster in person. Much larger than a U-2 as far as overall mass, the U-2 is flat and spread out, giving it such a large number in your chart.

I've heard that the Su-27(and relatives) is the largest single seat fighter ever made.  ;)

[quote]I've been next to all of these planes with the exception of the Su-27, and I can say that the 105 is a monster in person. Much larger than a U-2 as far as overall mass, the U-2 is flat and spread out, giving it such a large number in your chart.

I've heard that the Su-27(and relatives) is the largest single seat fighter ever made.

I think that talking about mass with this subject is missing the point. When the vast majority of people talk about "the largest" they are talking about physical size. The way this thread is going is along the lines of what is bigger a football or a golf ball made of lead. The golf ball is bigger on the grounds it weighs more.

Matt

Oh Yeah Su-27 for got about that  :-[ how could I  :(

I think the Su-35 is a bit longer with the radar, but after considering all this I dont think there is away to decide  :(

But IMO Mig-25 and Su-35  8-)