Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 9 of 20 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 270 of 585

Thread: RuAF aviation, news and development thread

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823
    Ka-52s @# Torzhok:



    http://lenta.ru/news/2012/04/27/zelin/

    Glavkom of the VVS fired!
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by observe View Post
    Only if you want to send it to a small war.
    It's almost like the old Ka-50/52 fixed gun vs Mi-28 turret debates.

    Tiger .de was sold as a Kiowa-on-steroids.
    In a real war, why would you want to send your precious few recon/tank hunter helicopters (be it a Ka-50 or the Tiger.de or Kiowa or MD-500 Defender) on a gun CAS mission? You want them sniping tanks, not getting shot up by flak.
    So you'd be happy sending in NH-90s, CH-47s, UH-60 etc loaded with troops and equipment unescorted so they can be "shot up"?

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    917
    Ooops... http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/a...ed/457747.html

    Maybe all things in the FuAF aret exactely that merry and jolly we have heard they are afterall?
    Could the sudden and unpredicted problems with the PAK-FA programme have something to do with this as well?
    Never new he was unpoppular with the pilots either.. Well well, some fresh new blood wont probbably do any harm to FuAF.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Its media spin more than anything.

    Zelin has nothing to do with Pak-Fa program.
    That is the Sukhoi and Mr Pogosyan who makes the call.

    Zelin has done his service, now its time for someone younger to step in.

    Edit:
    This source gives a slightly better understanding why Zelin was desmissed.

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120427/173099987.html
    Last edited by haavarla; 28th April 2012 at 18:10.
    Thanks

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Does these Su-27PD and Su-30 dump fuel in this display Vid

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9Z9u...eature=related
    Thanks

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    937
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Glavkom of the VVS fired!
    Good , I'll be glad to see the back of him!! He was totally out of touch with industry/R&D timelines, procurement and the reality on the ground with the RuAF e.g. PAK-FA, PAK-DA etc. His statements to the press were often eye wateringly inaccurate and cringingly embarrassing to the extent that no-one took him seriously anymore.

    PAK-FA has run into problems, it is understandable given the nature and ambitions of the project, and the demands on human, technological and infrastructure resources.
    Imho, these problems are not of the same magnitude some here have speculated on, such as those that necessitated the major re-design of the T-10 to produce the T-10S. Structural integrity issues are not the same as fundamental aerodynamic flaws. Remember, the F-22 also suffered from excessive cracking of the titanium forward boom frame (a series of load bearing structures within the aircraft's fuselage, located between the engine and the wing) and also buffeting and separation of materials on the vertical and horizontal tail fins.

    Hence, the current structural modifications of T-50-4 do not concur with Zelin's outlandish statements of pre-production T-50s entering state trials next year @ Lipetsk and IOC in 2015. Imho, T-50 should be looking at IOC ~2019/20 with the definitive stage 2 engine and all the other bells and whistles currently in development. Now I ask you, is that such a bad thing?

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Not at all.

    About T-50 IOC.. In VVS we have to remember that they do things a little differently vs USAF.

    All those statments about 6-10 T-50 at Lipetsk at 2016 might not be that far off..
    But that is not any IOC, it is the start of VVS State Trials - followed by a later Weapons trials etc etc. These trials take quite some time to finnish.
    Look at the Su-35S state trials!

    After this we can talk about IOC.
    My point is the 6-10 T-50 at Lipetsk 2016 are not so unrealistic anyway..
    Thanks

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by Tribes View Post
    So you'd be happy sending in NH-90s, CH-47s, UH-60 etc loaded with troops and equipment unescorted so they can be "shot up"?
    The point was the Ka-50 and German Tigers were bought for recon and tank hunting. The Russians have plenty other turreted choppers to escort their transport helos into hot areas... why use your Ka-50 for CAS when you can use it for its intended role?

    The (West)Germans had to worry about digging in and defending against thousands of tanks, not sending helicopter raids through flak in something like Vietnam or South Ossetia.
    Last edited by observe; 28th April 2012 at 17:28.

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Russian aircraft to be shown at Kazakhstan's defense expo
    Perhaps buys a few Hokums in an attempt to re-build the Golden Horde.

    http://www.defpro.com/news/details/3...de7fc1b50b4518

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    300
    Quote Originally Posted by observe View Post
    The point was the Ka-50 and German Tigers were bought for recon and tank hunting. The Russians have plenty other turreted choppers to escort their transport helos into hot areas... why use your Ka-50 for CAS when you can use it for its intended role?

    The (West)Germans had to worry about digging in and defending against thousands of tanks, not sending helicopter raids through flak in something like Vietnam or South Ossetia.
    Isn't that the issue? The scenario that the German army Tigers were designed for hasn't been a likely one for 20 years, and most probably won't be a likely one during the entire lifespan of the UHTs. Meanwhile for the same cost, the ARH and HAD variants combine both battlefield support and anti tank/hard target capabilities..

  11. #251
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    At last some official news about the long awaited AL-31FM2 engine performance.

    FEDERAL STATE UNITARY ENTERPRISE «GAS-TURBINE ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND PRODUCTION CENTER «SALUT» | NEWS | NEWS | AL-31F M2 engine contemplated by OKB Sukhogo (Sukhoi Design Bureau)

    Now the neath thing about this engine if we compair it with Saturns 117S engine is that it require no internal or external rework of the airframe to install the FM2 engine.
    This is not the case with the 117S engine which have a larger forward comp fan diameter(Su-35S airframe).

    Also they state that it will improve in fuel consumption and TBO.

    It is unclear if the max nominall thrust is 14.000kgf with a special setting for 14.500kgf, which can be engaged on the pilot command, or if max power setting is indeed 14.500kgf.

    And also the increased tear & wear on the airframe itself due to more thrust. It should be some increase strenght on internal structure if you ask me.. if not the engine TBO may increase but the airframe total life may decrease..
    Thanks

  12. #252
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Jō Asakura View Post
    Good , I'll be glad to see the back of him!! He was totally out of touch with industry/R&D timelines, procurement and the reality on the ground with the RuAF e.g. PAK-FA, PAK-DA etc. His statements to the press were often eye wateringly inaccurate and cringingly embarrassing to the extent that no-one took him seriously anymore.

    PAK-FA has run into problems, it is understandable given the nature and ambitions of the project, and the demands on human, technological and infrastructure resources.
    Imho, these problems are not of the same magnitude some here have speculated on, such as those that necessitated the major re-design of the T-10 to produce the T-10S. Structural integrity issues are not the same as fundamental aerodynamic flaws. Remember, the F-22 also suffered from excessive cracking of the titanium forward boom frame (a series of load bearing structures within the aircraft's fuselage, located between the engine and the wing) and also buffeting and separation of materials on the vertical and horizontal tail fins.

    Hence, the current structural modifications of T-50-4 do not concur with Zelin's outlandish statements of pre-production T-50s entering state trials next year @ Lipetsk and IOC in 2015. Imho, T-50 should be looking at IOC ~2019/20 with the definitive stage 2 engine and all the other bells and whistles currently in development. Now I ask you, is that such a bad thing?
    Zelin has been incharge for 5 years. among longest in world. and any time longer than create personality cult within an organization. so all you have done is baseless speculation.

  13. #253
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823
    Actually Jo is very on point with Zelin's public and press announcements, they are often cringe worthy.



    Hell of a photo. All 3 new types of attack helos, in the air, in the new camo.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  14. #254
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    At last some official news about the long awaited AL-31FM2 engine performance.

    FEDERAL STATE UNITARY ENTERPRISE «GAS-TURBINE ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND PRODUCTION CENTER «SALUT» | NEWS | NEWS | AL-31F M2 engine contemplated by OKB Sukhogo (Sukhoi Design Bureau)

    Now the neath thing about this engine if we compair it with Saturns 117S engine is that it require no internal or external rework of the airframe to install the FM2 engine.
    This is not the case with the 117S engine which have a larger forward comp fan diameter(Su-35S airframe).

    Also they state that it will improve in fuel consumption and TBO.

    It is unclear if the max nominall thrust is 14.000kgf with a special setting for 14.500kgf, which can be engaged on the pilot command, or if max power setting is indeed 14.500kgf.

    And also the increased tear & wear on the airframe itself due to more thrust. It should be some increase strenght on internal structure if you ask me.. if not the engine TBO may increase but the airframe total life may decrease..
    wonder why they dont put 31FM/FM1/FM2 as standard engine... if they do export customers will be most happy one as 31fm/1/2 have much longer TBO compared to standard Al-31F.

  15. #255
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Its not that easy..
    But in time it will, just as you say.

    Remember that there are cost issues as well.

    Take a look at the export AL-31FN.(J-10)
    They can upgrade it to AL-31FM1 standard upon the customer wish, but they have to pay for it too.

    There are physical difference as well, both the FM1 and FM2 has larger diameter on the forward compressor fan.
    Perhaps it does not fit without major redesign on the airframes.
    Last edited by haavarla; 30th April 2012 at 15:04.
    Thanks

  16. #256
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823

  17. #257
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823
    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6108/...8a50e5d_XL.jpg

    Interesting close up- Ka-52 launch warning sensor.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  18. #258
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Interesting. That eye sensor.. there's a white sealment around the housing.

    Is it there just for rain, snow and moist/particle protection or is it more for keepeing the sensors vibration free as helos tend to shake and vibrate quite a bit..?
    Thanks

  19. #259
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Absurdistan
    Posts
    1,122
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Interesting. That eye sensor.. there's a white sealment around the housing.

    Is it there just for rain, snow and moist/particle protection or is it more for keepeing the sensors vibration free as helos tend to shake and vibrate quite a bit..?
    ....hermetically closed and filled with a dried nitrogen gas to prevent atmospheric humidity to build up inside. what is even more interesting why is the sealing design element not coaxial?
    <Find a job you like doing, and you'll never have to work a day in your life>

  20. #260
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    Yo grab your chips and beer folks!

    BAe Test pilot John Farley flying and view on the Mig-29UB.

    I found these pdf files on Flight Archive:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203116.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203117.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203118.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203119.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203120.html

    Now is this readup awsome or awsome!?
    Thanks

  21. #261
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,182
    Good read, thanks for posting.

  22. #262
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Yo grab your chips and beer folks!

    BAe Test pilot John Farley flying and view on the Mig-29UB.

    I found these pdf files on Flight Archive:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203116.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203117.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203118.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203119.html

    http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%203120.html

    Now is this readup awsome or awsome!?
    Interesting bit about the flexible boundaries for the MiG 29 g limits. It would be interesting to know also about a similar test flight by the same pilot but for an FBW Su 27.
    The pilot seems to have a favorable view of the Aircraft's ruggedness and simplicity.

    TsAGI is a top dog in aerodynamics

  23. #263
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    John Farley did become a good friend with several on the Russian Display teams. He meet them on many occations, both in France, England, Cannada.

    But sadly John never got the chance to ride with the Su-27.
    Such a shame..
    I would have loved the read-up though.
    Thanks

  24. #264
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823

  25. #265
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glarus/ Switzerland
    Posts
    236
    Russian Commander Explains Air Force Acquisition Plan

    Russian Air Force commander Gen. Alexander Zelin has elaborated further about aircraft acquisition plans under the country’s Weapons Program 2011-2020. His comments addressed the Sukhoi series of combat aircraft, as well as airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft, airlifters and the Yak-130 jet trainer.
    Zelin said that the air force will acquire about 60 Sukhoi PAKFA (T-50) fifth-generation fighters by 2020. “The T-50 is intended for air-superiority missions...and will be flown by first-class pilots only,” he said.

    Zelin also said that the grand total of Sukhoi Su-30SM two-seat and Su-35 single-seat fighters to be acquired would be about 100. On March 22, Russian defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov and Irkut president Alexey Fedorov signed a contact for 30 Sukhoi Su-30SMs for delivery in 2013-2015. This is the domestic version of the Su-30MK already exported to Algeria, India and Malaysia. State acceptance trials are slated for next year. As for the Su-35, a total of 48 have been ordered so far.

    Zelin said that the Russian air force will acquire a total of 140 Su-34s. To date, 124 have been placed under contract. The Su-34s will allow for a substantial increase in the national nuclear deterrent force, and also be used for launching long-range missiles at maritime, land and aerial targets, he added.

    The commander also called for additional Yakovlev Yak-130 advanced jet trainers to be used for preparation of Su-34 and Su-35 fighter pilots. The airplane was also selected as a platform for development of a light strike aircraft.

    The A-100 AWACS aircraft that was announced last year will include additional functions such as maritime target identification and the control of UAVs, Zelin said.

    The Russian air force wants “not less than 300 airlifters in different payload capabilities,” Zelin said. The restart of Ruslan heavylifter production is still being pursued, specifically the more advanced An-124-300 version. In parallel, the air force will be getting the re-engined Il-76MD-90A, which will also be used for special missions and aerial refueling.

    Regarding the long-delayed Antonov An-70 joint project with Ukraine, Zelin said, “We have eliminated the discrepancies taking place before.” Antonov will deliver to the Russian air force for evaluation an improved prototype now being assembled. If ever approved for production, Russian An-70s will be assembled in Voronezh, from kits produced at the Antonov plants in Kiev and Kharkov.

    Zelin said the service has selected the An-140-100 as a temporary solution for a light tactical transport. The commander also confirmed plans to acquire 100 Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTAs), being jointly developed by Russia and India.

    By Vladimir Karnozov - March 30, 2012 (ainonline.com)
    XairForces News.

  26. #266
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,823
    Zelin is no longer the commander.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  27. #267
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Zelin is no longer the commander.
    FYI, raptor's time zone has always been different. GMT -3600

  28. #268
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    374

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    FYI, raptor's time zone has always been different. GMT -3600

  29. #269
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by raptor2019 View Post
    Russian Commander Explains Air Force Acquisition Plan

    By Vladimir Karnozov - March 30, 2012 (ainonline.com)
    XairForces News.
    Check the date - old article; Zelin was still commander then

  30. #270
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,870
    In this vid(sorry for bad qyality), we can see the Su-33 Launch from both the forward launch pad, and the one way back on the aft deck..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arXLl...eature=related

    Question:
    Why do they have the forward Launch pad
    I mean, it would seriously compromise the take-off weight right?
    They cant launch and land at the same time eighter..
    The launch pad on aft deck have more than twice the distance to the ski jump vs the forward one.

    Yet, We see Su-33 regulary use it.. why?
    I can understand it as a reserve launch pad, but all the same..why use it?
    Last edited by haavarla; 4th May 2012 at 13:07.
    Thanks

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES