What kind of jet plane is this?How do jet fighters get to war?What aircraft is this?How does a fighter jet perform good and quick maneuvers with such small wings?What kind of WWII aircaft is this?What is this plane?What aircraft did this canopy come from?What is this airplane used for?What kind of jet fighter is this?Can you identify this unusual plane by its description?What is the definining line between a helicopter and a drone a person can ride in?
Is の方 necessary here?
Was I wrongfully denied boarding for having a Schengen visa issued from the second country on my itinerary?
Is there a way to change the aspect ratio of a DNG file?
How serious is plagiarism in a master’s thesis?
How can I create a dashed line that slowly changes into a solid line in Illustrator?
How can select a specific triangle in my Delaunay mesh?
A positive integer functional equation
Has there ever been a cold war other than between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.?
What is it called when the tritone is added to a minor scale?
Middle/Vertical alignment doesn't work with table of images
How would a sea turtle end up on its back?
Do Goblin tokens count as Goblins?
Does 5e have an equivalent of the Psychic Paper from Doctor Who?
Should I warn my boss I might take sick leave?
What can a novel do that film and TV cannot?
Was the 45.9°C temperature in France in June 2019 the highest ever recorded in France?
How important is it for multiple POVs to run chronologically?
What does "in the course of" mean?
Is it acceptable that I plot a time-series figure with years increasing from right to left?
How to play a D major chord lower than the open E major chord on guitar?
What is the maximum amount of diamond in one Minecraft game?
Will Jimmy fall off his platform?
2000s (or earlier) cyberpunk novel: dystopia, mega storm, omnipresent noise
Should I increase my 401(k) contributions, or increase my mortgage payments
What kind of jet plane is this?
How do jet fighters get to war?What aircraft is this?How does a fighter jet perform good and quick maneuvers with such small wings?What kind of WWII aircaft is this?What is this plane?What aircraft did this canopy come from?What is this airplane used for?What kind of jet fighter is this?Can you identify this unusual plane by its description?What is the definining line between a helicopter and a drone a person can ride in?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
The cockpit can hold one person, is smaller than a compact car and as narrow as a motorcycle. What kind of plane is this and how hard would it be to fly?
aircraft-identification jet
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The cockpit can hold one person, is smaller than a compact car and as narrow as a motorcycle. What kind of plane is this and how hard would it be to fly?
aircraft-identification jet
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
3
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The cockpit can hold one person, is smaller than a compact car and as narrow as a motorcycle. What kind of plane is this and how hard would it be to fly?
aircraft-identification jet
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
$endgroup$
The cockpit can hold one person, is smaller than a compact car and as narrow as a motorcycle. What kind of plane is this and how hard would it be to fly?
aircraft-identification jet
aircraft-identification jet
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
edited Jun 28 at 9:38
Jamiec♦
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
15.5k4 gold badges64 silver badges93 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
asked Jun 26 at 2:31
MuzeMuze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
7
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
3
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10
add a comment |
7
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
3
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10
7
7
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
3
3
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Go to Oshkosh (Air-Venture). You'll see several of these in flying condition. There's also one in Udvar-Hazy (the OTHER Smithsonian Air and Space museum south of the Dulles airport in DC).
The original BD-5 was a kit-built, pusher-prop (wooden, fixed pitch), single-seater, retractable tricycle landing gear, aircraft. More recently, others have bought licenses to the design and adapted them to jet engines. It's a high performance, tiny aircraft. You can buy one:
https://bd-micro.com
The problem of the original BD-5 was that it was designed around a collection of engine specs that didn't belong to any existing engine. The builders have had to find an appropriate engine and adapt it to the airframe. Jim Bede, the designer, tried a lot of different engines and never found one to include in the kit.
The one in the Smithsonian (Udvar-Hazy):
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bede-bd-5b
It took over 5,000 hours for two guys to build. They flew it for nine hours and then gave it to the museum, likely because it scared them too much to fly it, and as builders, they would be liable for any crashes if they sold it.
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. Fighter pilots loved it because the controls are familiar to them in that small movements of the stick result in large changes in the aircraft's attitude. The controls are extremely sensitive.
The safe alternative for a builder is to contribute it to a museum under the strict condition that it never be flown again, get a tax break for your contribution, and let thousands of people a day admire your pretty little airplane.
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly.This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.
$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Thats a Bede BD-5 a microjet famously flown by James Bond. Based on the tail that may be the propeller variant.
(source)
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That is a very poorly-built example of a Bede BD-5B. I can tell by simply looking at the placement of the rivets. To me that is the #1 indicator of low build quality on a BD-5. The low quality of the build is probably why it's sitting on a pole instead of flying. The lack of a thrust attenuator makes it a prop version.
To fly the prop version you only need a private pilot's license. To fly the jet version you need an experimental type rating, which you won't get without convincing the examiner that you have enough experience to rate the privilege.
The prop version is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. The jet version is expensive to operate and maintain, mostly because of the cost of maintaining the jet engine and paying for fuel, insurance, etc.
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f65960%2fwhat-kind-of-jet-plane-is-this%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Go to Oshkosh (Air-Venture). You'll see several of these in flying condition. There's also one in Udvar-Hazy (the OTHER Smithsonian Air and Space museum south of the Dulles airport in DC).
The original BD-5 was a kit-built, pusher-prop (wooden, fixed pitch), single-seater, retractable tricycle landing gear, aircraft. More recently, others have bought licenses to the design and adapted them to jet engines. It's a high performance, tiny aircraft. You can buy one:
https://bd-micro.com
The problem of the original BD-5 was that it was designed around a collection of engine specs that didn't belong to any existing engine. The builders have had to find an appropriate engine and adapt it to the airframe. Jim Bede, the designer, tried a lot of different engines and never found one to include in the kit.
The one in the Smithsonian (Udvar-Hazy):
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bede-bd-5b
It took over 5,000 hours for two guys to build. They flew it for nine hours and then gave it to the museum, likely because it scared them too much to fly it, and as builders, they would be liable for any crashes if they sold it.
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. Fighter pilots loved it because the controls are familiar to them in that small movements of the stick result in large changes in the aircraft's attitude. The controls are extremely sensitive.
The safe alternative for a builder is to contribute it to a museum under the strict condition that it never be flown again, get a tax break for your contribution, and let thousands of people a day admire your pretty little airplane.
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly.This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.
$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Go to Oshkosh (Air-Venture). You'll see several of these in flying condition. There's also one in Udvar-Hazy (the OTHER Smithsonian Air and Space museum south of the Dulles airport in DC).
The original BD-5 was a kit-built, pusher-prop (wooden, fixed pitch), single-seater, retractable tricycle landing gear, aircraft. More recently, others have bought licenses to the design and adapted them to jet engines. It's a high performance, tiny aircraft. You can buy one:
https://bd-micro.com
The problem of the original BD-5 was that it was designed around a collection of engine specs that didn't belong to any existing engine. The builders have had to find an appropriate engine and adapt it to the airframe. Jim Bede, the designer, tried a lot of different engines and never found one to include in the kit.
The one in the Smithsonian (Udvar-Hazy):
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bede-bd-5b
It took over 5,000 hours for two guys to build. They flew it for nine hours and then gave it to the museum, likely because it scared them too much to fly it, and as builders, they would be liable for any crashes if they sold it.
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. Fighter pilots loved it because the controls are familiar to them in that small movements of the stick result in large changes in the aircraft's attitude. The controls are extremely sensitive.
The safe alternative for a builder is to contribute it to a museum under the strict condition that it never be flown again, get a tax break for your contribution, and let thousands of people a day admire your pretty little airplane.
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly.This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.
$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Go to Oshkosh (Air-Venture). You'll see several of these in flying condition. There's also one in Udvar-Hazy (the OTHER Smithsonian Air and Space museum south of the Dulles airport in DC).
The original BD-5 was a kit-built, pusher-prop (wooden, fixed pitch), single-seater, retractable tricycle landing gear, aircraft. More recently, others have bought licenses to the design and adapted them to jet engines. It's a high performance, tiny aircraft. You can buy one:
https://bd-micro.com
The problem of the original BD-5 was that it was designed around a collection of engine specs that didn't belong to any existing engine. The builders have had to find an appropriate engine and adapt it to the airframe. Jim Bede, the designer, tried a lot of different engines and never found one to include in the kit.
The one in the Smithsonian (Udvar-Hazy):
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bede-bd-5b
It took over 5,000 hours for two guys to build. They flew it for nine hours and then gave it to the museum, likely because it scared them too much to fly it, and as builders, they would be liable for any crashes if they sold it.
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. Fighter pilots loved it because the controls are familiar to them in that small movements of the stick result in large changes in the aircraft's attitude. The controls are extremely sensitive.
The safe alternative for a builder is to contribute it to a museum under the strict condition that it never be flown again, get a tax break for your contribution, and let thousands of people a day admire your pretty little airplane.
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Go to Oshkosh (Air-Venture). You'll see several of these in flying condition. There's also one in Udvar-Hazy (the OTHER Smithsonian Air and Space museum south of the Dulles airport in DC).
The original BD-5 was a kit-built, pusher-prop (wooden, fixed pitch), single-seater, retractable tricycle landing gear, aircraft. More recently, others have bought licenses to the design and adapted them to jet engines. It's a high performance, tiny aircraft. You can buy one:
https://bd-micro.com
The problem of the original BD-5 was that it was designed around a collection of engine specs that didn't belong to any existing engine. The builders have had to find an appropriate engine and adapt it to the airframe. Jim Bede, the designer, tried a lot of different engines and never found one to include in the kit.
The one in the Smithsonian (Udvar-Hazy):
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bede-bd-5b
It took over 5,000 hours for two guys to build. They flew it for nine hours and then gave it to the museum, likely because it scared them too much to fly it, and as builders, they would be liable for any crashes if they sold it.
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. Fighter pilots loved it because the controls are familiar to them in that small movements of the stick result in large changes in the aircraft's attitude. The controls are extremely sensitive.
The safe alternative for a builder is to contribute it to a museum under the strict condition that it never be flown again, get a tax break for your contribution, and let thousands of people a day admire your pretty little airplane.
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 15:52
Will MartinWill Martin
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
2081 silver badge4 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly.This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.
$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly.This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.
$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
$begingroup$
Would it be cheap to maintain it because it is smaller?
$endgroup$
– Muze
Jun 27 at 4:40
1
1
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
$begingroup$
@Muze you'd need less paint, that'd help. And cheaper to construct because you need less materials. Probably cheap to run because it uses less fuel than a larger model too.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Jun 27 at 7:35
1
1
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
It was a dangerous aircraft to fly. This is the biggest understatement on the page. I think the BD-5J has a crash and pilot loss record that would probably rival some WWI fighters.$endgroup$
– J...
Jun 27 at 11:59
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
$begingroup$
BD Micro kits don't take nearly as long to build because they have been reengineered. BD-5's also get bought and sold all the time, same as any other experimental aircraft. It's called a liability release and no experimental is sold without one, regardless of how safe people think it is. BD-5's are not inherently dangerous. That's been proven by pilots who have collectively accumulated thousands of hours in the type. They are unforgiving of pilots who do not do the homework and prepare themselves to fly a high performance aircraft.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 8:02
1
1
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
$begingroup$
The only reason BD-5J's have a high accident record is because of pilots who are not qualified to fly it, and because only a handful have ever been built. The aircraft requires pilots with enough experience to stay ahead of the aircraft. There are BD-5J pilots who have been flying the aircraft continuously for more than 30 years, including the pilots who flew the jet in Octopussy.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
Jun 28 at 10:37
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Thats a Bede BD-5 a microjet famously flown by James Bond. Based on the tail that may be the propeller variant.
(source)
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thats a Bede BD-5 a microjet famously flown by James Bond. Based on the tail that may be the propeller variant.
(source)
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thats a Bede BD-5 a microjet famously flown by James Bond. Based on the tail that may be the propeller variant.
(source)
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Thats a Bede BD-5 a microjet famously flown by James Bond. Based on the tail that may be the propeller variant.
(source)
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
edited Jun 27 at 4:57
Muze
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
1,0081 gold badge9 silver badges32 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
answered Jun 26 at 2:35
DaveDave
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
72.9k4 gold badges146 silver badges263 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
1
1
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
$begingroup$
Anecdote: the aircraft can also be admired in the London Film Museum at their Bond In Motion exhibition. In Octopussy (1983) Bond flew such a thing.
$endgroup$
– PerlDuck
Jun 27 at 8:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That is a very poorly-built example of a Bede BD-5B. I can tell by simply looking at the placement of the rivets. To me that is the #1 indicator of low build quality on a BD-5. The low quality of the build is probably why it's sitting on a pole instead of flying. The lack of a thrust attenuator makes it a prop version.
To fly the prop version you only need a private pilot's license. To fly the jet version you need an experimental type rating, which you won't get without convincing the examiner that you have enough experience to rate the privilege.
The prop version is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. The jet version is expensive to operate and maintain, mostly because of the cost of maintaining the jet engine and paying for fuel, insurance, etc.
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That is a very poorly-built example of a Bede BD-5B. I can tell by simply looking at the placement of the rivets. To me that is the #1 indicator of low build quality on a BD-5. The low quality of the build is probably why it's sitting on a pole instead of flying. The lack of a thrust attenuator makes it a prop version.
To fly the prop version you only need a private pilot's license. To fly the jet version you need an experimental type rating, which you won't get without convincing the examiner that you have enough experience to rate the privilege.
The prop version is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. The jet version is expensive to operate and maintain, mostly because of the cost of maintaining the jet engine and paying for fuel, insurance, etc.
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That is a very poorly-built example of a Bede BD-5B. I can tell by simply looking at the placement of the rivets. To me that is the #1 indicator of low build quality on a BD-5. The low quality of the build is probably why it's sitting on a pole instead of flying. The lack of a thrust attenuator makes it a prop version.
To fly the prop version you only need a private pilot's license. To fly the jet version you need an experimental type rating, which you won't get without convincing the examiner that you have enough experience to rate the privilege.
The prop version is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. The jet version is expensive to operate and maintain, mostly because of the cost of maintaining the jet engine and paying for fuel, insurance, etc.
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
$endgroup$
That is a very poorly-built example of a Bede BD-5B. I can tell by simply looking at the placement of the rivets. To me that is the #1 indicator of low build quality on a BD-5. The low quality of the build is probably why it's sitting on a pole instead of flying. The lack of a thrust attenuator makes it a prop version.
To fly the prop version you only need a private pilot's license. To fly the jet version you need an experimental type rating, which you won't get without convincing the examiner that you have enough experience to rate the privilege.
The prop version is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain. The jet version is expensive to operate and maintain, mostly because of the cost of maintaining the jet engine and paying for fuel, insurance, etc.
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
edited Jun 29 at 11:38
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
answered Jun 28 at 8:05
Juan JimenezJuan Jimenez
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
7,9981 gold badge12 silver badges49 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This answer partially answers the original question, but includes now irrelevant information as the question was rolled back to the original. I advise you edit this answer to just contain the first part - the identification.
$endgroup$
– Jamiec♦
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
$begingroup$
If I were to chase down all edits users make to their questions so i can edit my answers I wouldn't get anything else done. The additional information adds value. I will leave it as it. Thanks.
$endgroup$
– Juan Jimenez
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f65960%2fwhat-kind-of-jet-plane-is-this%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
7
$begingroup$
In its current state, flying it would be extremely difficult! ;)
$endgroup$
– FreeMan
Jun 26 at 20:35
3
$begingroup$
On the contrary, that plane is VERY unlikely to crash any time soon.
$endgroup$
– Mike Brockington
Jun 27 at 11:22
$begingroup$
There is a retro simulation of it released by Microprose called AcroJet en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrojet
$endgroup$
– Immetiade
Jun 27 at 12:10