as well as a good pilot and a bit of luck. 😉
must have been doing some very intensive manovers to have something like that happen.
er, not what i was thinking.
i was refering to the problems with cracks in the engines of the Su30Ks which grounded the fleet and the indians were demanding that the russians replace the engines free of charge, but the russians were arguing that the IAF were over using their planes that that was what caused the cracks.
cool. there was a similar report in air international, and it said that the first 24 MKK3s ordered are expected to start deliveries next year with follow-on orders expected.
Soviet T-34s looked like crap. They did not work like crap. Their gun was still powerful and their armor still well designed and thick.
er, please tell me you dont seriously think that a tank like the T34 will need to have anywherelike the level of quality to function within specs as airplanes. even the soviet fighters of the day had much better finishing then the T34s.
also, many of the crappy T34s you were refering to were built in the middle of WWII when the germans were banging on moscow’s door, so the manufacturers had greater concerns then the build quality.
….
You are simply restating your original “toyota maxim” without logically demonstrating why it must be so. This is not an argument, just assertion.
Furthermore, you are exaggerating minor imperfections (that are barely visible upon inspection) with no effect on combat performance into “don’t pay attention to the outside”- that’s simply absurd.
Demonstrate the logical connection, with evidence, between “finish isn’t as smooth as x” and “must break down a lot”. It’s pure style over substance, nothing substantive there at all.
…Demonstrate the logical connection between “finish isn’t as smooth as x” and “must break down a lot” please.
IIRC, both the PLAAF and IAF had problems with their Su30s’ quality, especially with the engines.
pic of the FC1 prototype’s intake. there is a picture of the tail that is better at showing the finishing, but i dont have it on disk.
If you look at Russian and Chinese aircraft in detail they don’t look sleek and smooth, with rivets clearly visible e.g look closely at Mig29 and Su27 and compare them with F16.
Does this mean that Russian/Chinese manufacturing techniques are not up to western standards?
well it really depends on when the planes were made.
the old russian/soviet design philosophy was a natural extension of the strategy that served them so well during WWII, and that is to design their weapons so that they can be easily mass produced in enormous quantities. they didnt bother that much with the fine details. as long as it did what it was supposed to, it didnt matter if it didnt look pretty.
there was a shift from that philospohy in the late 80s, and was marked by the introduction of the flankers and fulcrums. however, at that stage, the russians had fallen significantly behind the west in terms of fine tooling, so the earler flankers and fulcrums were of modest build quality.
but that gradually changed as the russians either imported advanced western machine tools or developed ones of their own, and today, brand new russian built ac like the Mig29SMT and the Su30MKs are of the same fine quality as any wester ac with the exception of the stealth ac, which have a much greater degree of manufacturing precision.
china on the other hand didnt have much money to spend until recently, so state-of-the-art machine tools didnt have a high priority in terms of funding, and that resulted in the first locally manufactured J11s (Su27SK) having to be re-manufactured by the russians. since then, china has invested heavily in procuring the best machine tools the world has to offer (and most likely also invested heavily in developing indigous versons), the result of which is that the later batches of J11s are claimed to be off higher quality then russian made ac. rently released close ups of new chinese ac like the F7PG and FC1 have a remarkablily fine finishing and is certainly as good as i’ve seen on any western fighters currently in service.
pssst……you’re usually breaking the law if you do. 😎
usually but not always. 😉 you can go to sampling websites and download music files that are supposed to ‘self destruct’ or sth after a few days. strange but true.:p
Ah – yes I know 😀 But as I said, you can’t watch a video of Enrique Inglesias on an iPOD can you? I can with the video single I bought to play on my PC 😀
😀 you can always download a vid of Enrique if you wish. and dont tell me you carry your PC with you when you take the dog for a walk. 😮 😉
im getting the feeling of dejavu. 😉
cheers for the specs.
it seemed strange that the flightpath of the drone didnt change as in other vids planes and drones quickly spung out of control after being hit by even an IR AAM. yet in the vid, that drone just kept on going in the same direction even after taking two direct hits.
however, after seeing the specs, i now think that the reason the target kept on going in the same direction even after being hit was probably because the drone was going at supersonic speeds, so its momentum kept it in the same direction and the short intervals between missile strikes meant that it was hit again and again before the change in its flightpath could be visbily observed.
well didnt think a plane or drone would be that responsive after being hit by a big a$$ missile, twice.
very impressive vids! especially the second one, three hits like that, only beautiful because no-one was in that drone. 😮
however the second vid did raise some questions in my head. how powerful is the tor missiles? and how fast was that drone going at when hit?
seems strange that the drone’s flight path alsmot didnt change even after two direct hits.
also, if you look closly at the frame with the first strike on a target (at around 21 seconds), there appears to be a second explosion just after that hit, just as the camera cuts away. are all these different views of the same test firings?
psst, you can download mucis for free off the internet. 😉
i was also thinking. there might be another reason for nations to choose the FC1.
all AFs like to have highly capable, high end fighters that can do everything very well, but these fighters cost alot of money each. in order to adequitely protect a nation, often many fighters are needed. as a result, most countries are forced into taking their second choice as a result of costs. thats why the likes of the typhoon and rafale have been finding it so hard to find buyers, everyone want them, but few can afford them.
however, with the FC1 there is now another option. nations can get a small number of their first choice fighters proformance wise, and buy a large number of fairly capable FC1s to form a hi-low mix that would allow them to have the numbers to protect the nation, get their favourate plane and also stay within budget. 🙂
ipods? i think they are for people who either have no real opinion of their own (‘gee, im not sure what music i like so i’ll have it all’) or someone who is too greedy for their own good. 😀 (and no, thats not directed at you Grey 😉 )