dark light

TR1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 7,246 through 7,260 (of 9,195 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • TR1
    Participant

    48 Su-27SM in units, another 5 @ Lipetsk. 53 units total upgraded.
    2 lost in service.

    28 Su-30SMs for AF, 12 for VMF.

    in reply to: Russian Civil Aviation #561590
    TR1
    Participant

    A-380 users are already selling off their aircraft?

    in reply to: Mig29s… in limbo somewhere?? #2373856
    TR1
    Participant

    Not somewhere, in Moscow. You can see the Indian MiG-29UPGs being worked on.

    It is curious what those seemingly conserved MiG-29 airframes are from, since all of the unfinished airframes were supposedly completed.

    The other plane is a Mig-AT, program is dead, hence no work on them.

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread #2030630
    TR1
    Participant

    http://www.armstrade.org/includes/periodics/news/2011/1101/125010199/detail.shtml

    Sevmash will begin constructing two diesel boats for the VMF in March 2012.

    in reply to: revival of Yak-141? #2373921
    TR1
    Participant

    Zero.

    in reply to: MiG-29KUB vs Su-33/J-15 #2373927
    TR1
    Participant

    The overhaul is going to take 5 years, so you can bet on heavy internal reconstruction. The Granit tubes will be removed, 100%. Right decision, but I always fancied VLS buried under a carriers deck.

    I hope the mighty defensive armament is not castrated though.

    in reply to: Nice MMRCA News and Discussion 9 #2373928
    TR1
    Participant


    Given the fact that the use of ballistic missiles by nuclear opponents is highly destabilizing its highly probable that such missiles would not be used. “

    x2.

    Speaking of cruise missiles, does India have a long range terrain following unit?

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread #2030671
    TR1
    Participant

    Those graphs were made before the boats were even at sea, and are from the US. Take that as you will!

    in reply to: Hot Dog Indian AF News and Discussion Part 17 #2373979
    TR1
    Participant

    nice.. a LEGAL flanker copy!

    Licensed production is not a copy. That is like saying Irkut made legal copies of Knaapo’s Flanker. :p

    in reply to: Nice MMRCA News and Discussion 9 #2373988
    TR1
    Participant

    What even the GoI’s press release states clearly is that the PAK-FA as it stands doesn’t meet the IAF’s requirements of a 5th gen fighter and hence it is being modified (what modifications, not clear) to meet those more stringent requirements.

    Given that the RuAF’s definitive PAK-FA standards have not been yet met, what basis is there to say the IAF’s requirements are more stringent? None. Who seriously believes PAK-FA as it is today is the final product the RuAF wants?

    India may (I think very likely) be contributing funding towards system developments that are currently happening in Russia for both the RuAF and IAF definitive planes, but the fact is, the PAK-FA as of today, is a 100% Russian product. When I see actual numbers as to what system Indian money went into, then I will be happy to change that assertion.

    The fact is that “5th gen” without Indian money claim is stupid and inaccurate. What futures does the IAF want, exactly, that make the plane 5th gen, and that the RuAF itself did not desire when Sukhoi won the tender back in the early 2000s?

    These feel-good Indian media reports are hard to credit with much, to be frank.

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2373996
    TR1
    Participant

    It doesn’t have to be slide back anymore
    http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/2/4/821be56f-f1ea-4416-940d-2c546d570434.Large.jpg

    Right, but since the PAK-FA’s is slide back from the start, gotta redesign that, is it worth the expense? I dont know.

    EDIT: I had no idea F-35 has different canopies untill now.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2374034
    TR1
    Participant
    in reply to: Nice MMRCA News and Discussion 9 #2374040
    TR1
    Participant

    Correction- India has already paid $295 million towards the PAK-FA contract. So 100% of the funding for the PAK-FA is not Russian.

    link to article

    That article seems to imply that money is towards the joint project based on the PAK-FA. Doesn’t disprove that PAK-FA has been funded 100% out of Russia so far.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation thread, part V #2374089
    TR1
    Participant

    Now this is cool, new Mi-28s in the new camo apparently adopted as the standard for the helicopter force:

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4420/81237179.95/0_68070_720253a_XL.jpg

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4523/81237179.95/0_68071_46f427e4_XL.jpg

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5412/81237179.95/0_68073_b4300102_XL.jpg

    and the new Mi-26s:

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4420/81237179.95/0_68074_de244c6c_XL.jpg

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/5821/81237179.95/0_68076_9b905efd_XL.jpg

    And is that one of the Mi-35Ms destined for the RuAF I see?

    http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4613/81237179.95/0_68075_734d4baf_XL.jpg

    in reply to: PAK FA episodeⅩⅧ #2374110
    TR1
    Participant

    Not sure how much visibility would be gained from that one bar dissapearing.. Plus it makes the whole canopy slide back construction more complicated.

Viewing 15 posts - 7,246 through 7,260 (of 9,195 total)