dark light

Sammie

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 93 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: MiG 1.44 really is back from the "dead" #2683111
    Sammie
    Participant

    Maybe they are just going to use the MiG-1.44 prototype to test certain technology or avionics later to be used on the PAK-FA. There are plenty of reports that the total burden of the PAK-Fa would be shared between the three main fighter design bureaux (Sukhoi, Yakovlev and MiG).

    This could be just MiG’s addition to the PAK FA, and offcourse its a good reason for RSK MiG to boost their ability to produce and fly a very advanced aircraft like the MiG-1.44 I would love to see it fly with actual Al-41 instead of the D-30s

    in reply to: Small Airforces Pics Request #2683142
    Sammie
    Participant

    Only 2 MiG-23’s were ever delivered, nobody knows if they ever flew (lack of technicians and pilots) I believe Bulgaria was the source IIRC

    in reply to: Caspian sea monster #2684101
    Sammie
    Participant

    Art: please correct me if I’m wrong (which I probably am) but the WIGE craft can also fly across land as well can’t they? Much the same as a very high floating hovercraft or a very low flying plane!

    Yes given that the land should be flat, the dynamic air cusion should not be disrupted. The C class WIGs can fly outside the groundeffect, 14M1P should be such a WIG. The KM, Orlyonk and Lun could fly over less flat terrains, like snow.

    in reply to: IAI MiG-21-2000 #2685024
    Sammie
    Participant

    So all we need in someone to go down to Uganda, take a picture of one of the 5 or 6 left MiG-21Bis still in service, it should be the ex-polish airframes by the way, which should have been bought in 2001, and they succesfull wrote off one in 2003

    If this dude is down there, it would be great to find out the nationality of the pilot that was killed in the crash and the nationality of the current pilots. My best bet is Bellarussian, but Tom from ACIG doesn’t seem to agree 😀 .

    in reply to: Caspian sea monster #2685991
    Sammie
    Participant

    THat the funny part,

    fuel economics during cruise flight are way lower then for the avarge aircraft of its size, and do keep in mind that the KM was the largest and heaviest thing that ever flew of its time, with a MTOW of around 540 tonnes. It was kept flying with only two engines, while the 8 engines up front where only used as take off boosters

    in reply to: Caspian sea monster #2686438
    Sammie
    Participant

    Information on the really materialized Ekranoplanes is really poor, at least, in my humble opinion. I mean, most of the book is filled with could have beens but never will be build vessels. While the actual vessels that have flown are covered with much less extent then could have been. Too much info on proposed vessel that have only appeared in model form.

    For example the later SM vessels like the SM-8 and SM-6 I find extremly intresting but it doesn’t even state what engines they use. The pieces of information about the KM, Orlyonok and Hun are almost the same and as in-depth as articles which appeared in AirInternational or a different british magazine. Why isn’t there additional info on the KM modifications and effect on them on its operations

    I just wasn’t that charmed with the book I guess.

    in reply to: Caspian sea monster #2686487
    Sammie
    Participant

    But don’t buy the Red Star series book on Ekranoplanes, not worth it. (IMHO).

    KM Chrashed, due to pilot error.
    Hun is somewhere rusting away.

    Anyway, the Not Invented Here syndrome is not the only factor that is compromising its development. The Navy doesn’t catogorises it as aircraft and the Air Force says its a boat. This there is lots and lots of political fighting on whos budget the crafts should be build. In the end of it all the Navy preferred large missle cruisers and that aircraft carrier to be the future of the Soviet Navy. The Airforce never wanted them in the first place.

    in reply to: IAI MiG-21-2000 #2686488
    Sammie
    Participant

    About those Uganda MiG’s

    There is a picture in the small airforces request thread of an fairly new MiG-21UM with new roundel etc, this picture is supposed to be taken in 2004. So I guess this is an ex-polish airframe, of which 6 have been bought in yet another very dodgy weapon deal with Uganda. One airframe already chrashed by the way, this was a single seater. Pilot remains unknown, and it isn’t even certain if these airframes really received the -2000 upgrade.

    Excellent picture though

    Sammie
    Participant

    Ka-32’s in Korea are quite a normal thing, so don’t belong in this thread. Up to 32 have been delivered, with an additional contract signed some time ago IIRC/

    in reply to: New Iraqi AF Buy First Aircraft #2689576
    Sammie
    Participant

    The plane looks a lot like the venerable SeaBee.

    But other then that, nice looking aircraft. Wonder what roundels it will wear.

    in reply to: First real foreign order of FC-1 #2691098
    Sammie
    Participant

    smells like opposition trying to bring Bob even further in discredit, I wholehartly support that cause. But I doubt that there has been an actual order.

    in reply to: Red Hot Chili Peppers at last! #1979949
    Sammie
    Participant

    Gonna see them wednesday this in Amsterdam, can;t wait, should be a great show, better then 2 years ago I hope, this is supposed to a concert instead of an act at a festival

    in reply to: MIG aircrafts Voronin production centre #2692230
    Sammie
    Participant

    sharp eyes everyone. But might I suggest the MiG-29UBT is most likely to be upgraded in Nizhy Novograd plant, because I do seem to recall that they were the largest contractor in that deal. So that would leave the MiG-29M2 as most likely candidate.

    in reply to: The F-16 picture thread #2693195
    Sammie
    Participant

    waiting for Arthur…………………

    in reply to: European Elections #1981100
    Sammie
    Participant

    ghe ghe

    I voted for Transparant Europe

    It is a new party lead by a guy who was responsible (at least for a rather large part of it) for the downfall of the previous european commision.

    But for the record, voting for Europe is like begging for water in the a deserted place in the desert, doesn’t influence shít. Its not like the parlement has real power to do something. Also for the record, I do like the idea of a more unified Europe, because I do think its needed in a more globalised world, but I wish all those bureaucrats who make up silly rules would dissapear. Why can’t you vote for european parties in the european elections?

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 93 total)