Just look at the 35, it will be years before our internet experts understand the basis of its formula… Or probably the web will be devoid of any Porn before Sweetman admits his lack of common sense.

There is no formula. Its sustained turning performance is crap.

But, due to fairly large elevators located very far aft, its instantaneous pitch rate will be decent. Its roll rate and roll acceleration will also be good due to a short wingspan and single engine.

Aside from that…

I just wanted to debate whether the party in power actual makes any difference to the overall economy of the country

IMO the economy won’t vary much over the short term as a result of any changes. But given a 4 year term, the consequences of changes made in year 1 will be taking real effect (to allow for proper long term projection) by year 4.

Anyhoo – I think the point your really driving at is – labour and tory are roughly two sides of the same turd. Both look out for themselves first, their crony millionaire mates second, and distant third is virtually irrelevant to them.

A few changes I would make

Political system
1. It should be illegal to go back or act contrary to anything you listed in your manifesto.
2. Any politician can be removed from office with signed petitions by >50% of constituents or a local re-election forced with signed petitions by 30% of constituents.

General governance
1. Multinational companies moving money accrued in any UK business or UK business arm to an offshore location/account are subject to 20% tax on the total amount of monies moved. That will in an instant stop the tax avoidance of multinationals.
2. Top band income tax is reduced to 40% and there are no credits, loopholes or exemptions. Any monies moved offshore is subject to 40% tax.
3. A complete overhaul of the government infrastructure services (i.e. roads) is needed. It is currently far too admin-heavy and end-worker lite.
4. Public sectors can carry over budget from one year to the next, removing the stupid policies that result in “spend it or lose it” === “waste it or lose it” mindsets and the resulting near eradication of strategic projects.

It is clear that during testing phase aircraft are being tracked by radar for various reasons, safety as well as data gathering. Hence the deduction can only be that the aircraft is currently trackable by radar.

what do you guys think?

What’s to stop them just using a transponder like every civilian aircraft in the world?

Heresay – All is not well with PAK-FA.

NEW DELHI — The programme for India and Russia to jointly develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), long touted as the flagship of a time-tested defence relationship, has run into a stone wall.

Documents available with Business Standard indicate India’s defence ministry is cold-shouldering Russian requests to continue the negotiations on a “R&D Draft Contract”, which will govern the partnership to develop a futuristic, fifth-generation fighter.

Business Standard reported that air marshals at a high-level defence ministry meeting claimed the FGFA has “shortfalls… in terms of performance and other technical features.”

The IAF claimed the FGFA’s current AL-41F1 engines were underpowered; the Russians were reluctant to share critical design information; and the fighter would eventually cost too much.

On January 15, 2014, at a MoD meeting to review progress on the FGFA, the deputy chief of air staff (DCAS), the IAF’s top procurement official, said the FGFA’s engine was unreliable, its radar inadequate, its stealth features badly engineered, India’s work share too low, and the fighter’s price would be exorbitant by the time it enters service.

However, rumblings within the Russian defence industry suggest that all might not be well with the PAK-FA. On January 17, the influential Mikhail Pogosyan was relieved as United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) – an umbrella body that oversees Russia’s aerospace establishment, including giants like Sukhoi, Irkut, RSC MIG, Ilyushin, Sokol Plant, Tupolev, UAC-Transport Aircraft, Aviastar-JV and VASO.

The Russian media has linked his departure with problems in developing the Sukhoi-35, a programme that is reportedly being scaled back. However, there is no word on cutting back the PAK-FA, a project personally backed by Putin.

In the case of the German A320, if the co-pilot once left alone in the cockpit felt unconscious (incapacitated)

So how did the door override lock get engaged?

But something seems out of place, no Mayday or radio comms. Had there been an oxygen loss it would have continued on auto-pilot. Major structural failure and it would have dropped like a brick.

Yes, its strange.

Most logical for me would be the pilots were hands on (for whatever reason), then O2 loss and an uncontrolled (albeit somewhat stable from the radar trace) continuous dive into the ground.

Anything else requires multiple modes of failure and/or very irrational behaviour in the cockpit.

Regardless, its 150 people gone – my heart goes out to the families/friends of those involved.

AirInsight

Another opinion piece from a reputed source more or less reflecting what I queried above.

Bombardier and Embraer may shortly essentially uncontested in the <150 seat market.

Of the two, Embraer are in the healthier position right now, but Bombardier are in the potentially healthier position in 5-10 years time.

The CSeries will stretch beyond the 300, possibly even a double or treble stretch.

Wing Areas:
CSeries:112 m2
A320: 123 m2
B737:125 m2

So with equivalent wing loading your looking at 91% of MTOW, which would give 85 tonnes or so (using A321 as baseline) – thats enough to go up to 200 seats in a single class.

EPNdB would be just as important for many city airports.