Wonderful work, Mike! I remember seeing the original painting in your office at Long Beach. I was working in the DC-10 aerodynamics group and tasked with shepherding a DC-10 Super 10 brochure for which you were doing the artwork. You were very kind to show me some of your artwork and chat about about airplanes with me. Many thanks!
I really appreciate the work you put into describing the how's and why's of the paintings. The artists choices on telling a story often result in a work of art that exceeds anything a photograph can do, even a really good photograph. It's the attention to detail and the subtle shifting/juxtapositioning of elements that turns a competent technical piece of work into a true piece of art. You are conveying not just a visual record of an event but a sense of feeling, an emotional/visceral element that often makes the event more real than any photograph. Thank you so much. Chuck
I was 9 years old and head over heels with the space program. The X15 to me was just a part of that. I must have built 4 or 5 of those kits. They just kept getting broken because I couldn't stop playing with them.
(This statement is wrong and corected by Mike and others, the reentry did not affect visibility, the high speed runs did) another reason on the 104 being there was that the re-entry ruined the cockpit windshields and dramatically decreased visibility, there was an "eyelid" on the left side (missing here I think) that was kept closed until after the re-entry, the the pilot opened it to land, the right side being useless at this point. The second pair of eyes from the 104 driver came in handy. Check this pics... www.americanspacecraft.com/pages/x15/x-15-2a.html
Thanks, and the eyelid was only used on the modified X-15A-2 because the white ablative coating melted at hypersonic speed and covered the right-hand oval windshield pane. Col. Pete Knight landed looking through the left one.
On early flights, the lower ventral fin was jettisoned and recoverd by parachute just before landing. Later high-speed flights like this one were flown without the lower fin.
The original painting was purchased by a private collector in Los Angeles, but is currently for sale through an dealer in Seattle, WA: www.ebay.com/itm/First-Re-Entry-Original-Oil-on-Canvas-by-Mike-Machat-X-15-Joe-Engle/222609149020
@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 royalties and a homage to all the Air Force Pilots who did it on military pay …I am trying to figure out what that Regime of flight is called ?
Thought Joe Walker technically had the honor of flying a reused spaceship, in the way of the X-15 with flight 91 in 1963, making it past the Karman line for a second time, following his prior Flight 90 a month before? ...
This is a very interesting point, and X-15 flights have been compared to the Shuttle before, as both were considered "space planes" when flown at high-Mach within the Earth's atmosphere. However, I make the point that the Shuttle returned from Earth orbit, re-entering at Mach 25. Pete Knight's Mach 6.7 flight on October 3, 1967 is sometimes derided as not being the fastest manned flight of a winged aircraft because the Shuttle was at Mach 8 at that same point in its re-entry. Being a die-hard X-15 fan, I argued "the X-15 was the fastest manned, winged aircraft ever flown in the Earth's atmosphere that was launched in a horizontal attitude!" Great comment, thanks!
Mike, thank you for your presentation. I'm a digital artist that likes to dabble in the tangible arts occasionally. However, I came to your channel because I am fascinated by aviation engineering. I was not expecting to learn just as much about artistic techniques. I appreciate your tips for my toolbox!
Very interesting! I had the pleasure of hearing Gen. Engle talk at Oshkosh in 2017. What a career! Also, the comments on composition were helpful for those of us photographing aircraft and tweaking the images afterwards.
Okay, dumb question: I'm no graphic artist but it seems to me that the slight curvature of the exhaust out the back of the F-104 presents deceleration. I'm wondering if a bit of artistic poetic-license might be allowed by making that exhaust absolutely straight? This might heighten my sense of acceleration/speed. Comments?
Good observation and great question, thanks! The F-104 is in 'high-drag' configuration for final approach at 300 knots: landing gear and flaps down, speed brakes out, and engine at nearly full power to stay with the X-15, but the jet is flying at a high angle-of-attack (three degrees nose-up). The F-104's General Electric J79 turbojet produced a lot of smoke at full power, hence the rather pronounced exhaust seen here. Smoke from the tail of the airplane shows the nose-up angle, while the trailing exhaust shows the line of flight. This is why the smoke 'bends' as you've noted, which was observed in the video of the actual landing used as reference. Appreciate your watching!
@@celebratingaviationwithmik9782 thanks for the explanation. Now I understand your reasoning. The X-15 was the stuff of fantasy for me when I was a boy and it was the ultimate platform for '"way out there" speed and altitude.
