Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 9 (1 members and 8 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Andraxxus
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Sep 2012
    • 954

    Originally posted by TR1 View Post
    Not sure if this has been posted, but first time view for me. Really stunning 4K Su-30SM flight vid:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOQNKfCaUCM

    Here's the original one from the Konstanting Khmelik. With sound

    Comment

    • KGB
      KGB
      Senior Member
      • Mar 2016
      • 1426

      Originally posted by JSR View Post
      Jack Ma does not know economics. it benefit his firm but it does not mean US. DT will need crash course in economics from Putin otherwise
      US already has world most expensive police force/teachers/healthcare/prison industry. reducing spending on weopons and wars will not make products competitve or decrease the need of foreign labor but create far more inflation.
      on Other hand Russia can increase both domestic spending and on foreign wars and it will greatly benefit it.
      DT should make Russia's central bank chief an hostile offer to run the Fed. The Banker is a British banking magazine. It awarded Russia's central bank head as central banker of the year in 2017. Somehow I doubt that the Russian economy is in as dire straights as the western media says when Russia's central bank head is winning awards.

      Last edited by KGB; 5th February 2017, 23:12.

      Comment

      • TR1
        TR1
        http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
        • Oct 2010
        • 9821

        I was supposed to have a productive day, and here I am watching Khmelik vids.

        Mi-28N simulator:







        sigpic

        Comment

        • Austin
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Oct 2003
          • 6480

          Came Across this PAK-DA design from UAC 2015 Annual Report

          Full Report here http://uacrussia.ru/uac_ar_2015_en

          "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

          Comment

          • Scar
            Senior Member
            • Nov 2015
            • 682

            Originally posted by Austin View Post
            Came Across this PAK-DA design from UAC 2015 Annual Report
            It's not PAK DA: http://testpilot.ru/russia/sukhoi/t/4/ms/t4ms_e.htm

            Comment

            • Austin
              Rank 5 Registered User
              • Oct 2003
              • 6480

              Perhaps PAK-DA is an improvised T-4MS design , UAC is calling it PAK-DA but the sharp planform indicates its supersonic not a subsonic design , Could well be subsonic too as F-117 had similar planform but was subsonic

              The planform shows its a Lifting Body/Flying Wing design.

              Can such design afford a broad design approach that can deal with cm to Meter wave band radar ? Similar to what B-2 does
              Last edited by Austin; 6th February 2017, 06:04.
              "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

              Comment

              • Scar
                Senior Member
                • Nov 2015
                • 682

                This is simple - lazy designer of UAC used T-4MS as a "cool looking" placeholder.

                Comment

                • Austin
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Oct 2003
                  • 6480

                  Originally posted by Scar View Post
                  This is simple - lazy designer of UAC used T-4MS as a "cool looking" placeholder.
                  If they arnt as lazy about the other aircarft there including PAK-FA why would they be lazy about PAK-DA.

                  Its probably a calculated leak shows nothing more than a planform top view , I recollect Sukhoi site having a rear pic of PAK-FA for a long time showing just its planform
                  "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                  Comment

                  • JSR
                    JSR
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Aug 2011
                    • 4976

                    Originally posted by Austin View Post
                    If they arnt as lazy about the other aircarft there including PAK-FA why would they be lazy about PAK-DA.

                    Its probably a calculated leak shows nothing more than a planform top view , I recollect Sukhoi site having a rear pic of PAK-FA for a long time showing just its planform
                    what is this 4.5ton with MIG-29K?. MIG29K with just just 3ET and 2 Ashm exceed that load.

                    Comment

                    • Austin
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Oct 2003
                      • 6480

                      Originally posted by JSR View Post
                      what is this 4.5ton with MIG-29K?. MIG29K with just just 3ET and 2 Ashm exceed that load.
                      The specs are fine , Need not be ball park , At 6.5 T load no one will ever take off with that kind of load any ways in real combat.

                      What I am trying to say is they might just be showing the planform of PAK-DA without showing any more details
                      "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                      Comment

                      • Berkut
                        Senior Member
                        • Nov 2011
                        • 2216

                        Well, hopefully Borisov sticks to his statement and PAK-DA will indeed be shown next year. I am not holding my breath for T-4MS style design at all.

                        Meanwhile, here is Tu-170;


                        Comment

                        • haavarla
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Dec 2008
                          • 6699

                          I good looking jet. But a flawed looking jet..

                          The air vortices coming of those huge LERX would be sucked right into those air-inlet and casue some seriously problem for engines..
                          Seriously, this is why we always se air-intakes under the airframe.
                          Last edited by haavarla; 6th February 2017, 16:48.
                          Thanks

                          Comment

                          • Austin
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Oct 2003
                            • 6480

                            I think it is about the Planform in the end , They would want to design a planform that can take care of radar from cm X band to Meter Band like B-2 Planform ...That is only possible with flying wing design planform , The Design shown on UAC would qualify as flying design
                            "A map does you no good if you don't know where you are"

                            Comment

                            • JangBoGo
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Jan 2011
                              • 1509

                              Originally posted by JSR View Post
                              what is this 4.5ton with MIG-29K?. MIG29K with just just 3ET and 2 Ashm exceed that load.
                              Lazy morons who cant even do their work properly. Why the Russians pay and keep such lazy clueless people in their PR department is beyond my understanding.

                              Comment

                              • JangBoGo
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2011
                                • 1509



                                Useless morons! If they are copying the western way of unvieling a new product, copy it fully or just don't bother.

                                Have you guys ever seen in recent (or not too distant) time any western fighter being unvielied with just air-to-air armaments?? ...its an eye sore looking at those very "light" and "negligible" payload on a new frontline fighter.

                                The dumbos should have gone with a mix of air-air/strike weapons package. They could have also installed (or showcased) the proposed Zhuk-AhE for the demo. But the stupids never learn.

                                Consider the case of Isreali's, they showcased a "brick" ELT-2052 AESA @ AeroIndia and the clueless fanboys (the usual anti-Russian teams in Indian fora) were having orgasm just seeing/hearing it, which at that time probably was not even in its real physical form and also started testing probably around/only after Zhuk-AE was already airborne. The stupid Russians only displayed their first AESA only much later after 10s of real flight test has been completed even though NIIR Phazotron was working on their AESA in 2004-2005 period.
                                Last edited by JangBoGo; 6th February 2017, 17:36.

                                Comment

                                • haavarla
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Dec 2008
                                  • 6699

                                  Originally posted by JangBoGo View Post
                                  Useless morons! If they are copying the western way of unvieling a new product, copy it fully or just don't bother.

                                  Have you guys ever seen in recent (or not too distant) time any western fighter being unvielied with just air-to-air armaments?? ...its an eye sore looking at those very "light" and "negligible" payload on a new frontline fighter.

                                  The dumbos should have gone with a mix of air-air/strike weapons package. They could have also installed (or showcased) the proposed Zhuk-AhE for the demo. But the stupids never learn.

                                  Consider the case of Isreali's, they showcased a "brick" ELT-2052 AESA @ AeroIndia and the clueless fanboys (the usual anti-Russian teams in Indian fora) were having orgasm just seeing/hearing it, which at that time probably was not even in its real physical form and also started testing probably around/only after Zhuk-AE was already airborne. The stupid Russians only displayed their first AESA only much later after 10s of real flight test has been completed even though NIIR Phazotron was working on their AESA in 2004-2005 period.
                                  There is little point in showcasing a radarsystem that are not yet cleard for domestical or export operation.
                                  If its on a R&D lvl, demonstration or prototype testing, then let it stay there.


                                  And b.t.W. Who cares about screaming fanboys eighter way. We are talking about costly complex weapon system.
                                  Thanks

                                  Comment

                                  • Scar
                                    Senior Member
                                    • Nov 2015
                                    • 682

                                    Originally posted by Austin View Post
                                    If they arnt as lazy about the other aircarft there including PAK-FA why would they be lazy about PAK-DA.
                                    Because the exterior of PAK FA is pretty well known, while it's much easier to redraw the 40-years ola T-4MS, than make your own fictional PAK DA placeholder.

                                    Comment

                                    • Berkut
                                      Senior Member
                                      • Nov 2011
                                      • 2216

                                      Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                      I good looking jet. But a flawed looking jet..

                                      The air vortices coming of those huge LERX would be sucked right into those air-inlet and casue some seriously problem for engines..
                                      Seriously, this is why we always se air-intakes under the airframe.
                                      It is a shame that the Tupolev and Northrop Grumman idiots didnt have haavarla at the helm of Tu-170 and B-2/B-21, would have told those idiots that the intakes are;

                                      Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                      always ... under the airframe.
                                      Oh well, what could they possibly know. Never on the sides either, like on Tu-22M/M2/M3. Always underside.

                                      Comment

                                      • KGB
                                        KGB
                                        Senior Member
                                        • Mar 2016
                                        • 1426

                                        Originally posted by haavarla View Post
                                        I good looking jet. But a flawed looking jet..

                                        The air vortices coming of those huge LERX would be sucked right into those air-inlet and casue some seriously problem for engines..
                                        Seriously, this is why we always se air-intakes under the airframe.
                                        They can make it work and its been done before.

                                        The thing is stunning.

                                        Comment

                                        • KGB
                                          KGB
                                          Senior Member
                                          • Mar 2016
                                          • 1426

                                          Originally posted by JangBoGo View Post
                                          Useless morons! If they are copying the western way of unvieling a new product, copy it fully or just don't bother.

                                          Have you guys ever seen in recent (or not too distant) time any western fighter being unvielied with just air-to-air armaments?? ...its an eye sore looking at those very "light" and "negligible" payload on a new frontline fighter.

                                          The dumbos should have gone with a mix of air-air/strike weapons package. They could have also installed (or showcased) the proposed Zhuk-AhE for the demo. But the stupids never learn.

                                          Consider the case of Isreali's, they showcased a "brick" ELT-2052 AESA @ AeroIndia and the clueless fanboys (the usual anti-Russian teams in Indian fora) were having orgasm just seeing/hearing it, which at that time probably was not even in its real physical form and also started testing probably around/only after Zhuk-AE was already airborne. The stupid Russians only displayed their first AESA only much later after 10s of real flight test has been completed even though NIIR Phazotron was working on their AESA in 2004-2005 period.
                                          Now Russia is copying aircraft unveils ? Ha.

                                          It is the US that is way far behind in the PR department. Where is the 360 panoramic video of the US side of the Intl space station ? Where is the HD on-board video of an F 15 flying on the edge of space ?

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X