And what’s so difficult about cleaning runways?:confused:
Metal fatigue on a 35 year old aircraft?
I thought a board member had died there for a moment…
I thought a board member had died there for a moment…
Really, I couldn’t help notice “The Valley of the Fairy Chimneys” dead centre of the map – sounds like a name J.R Tolkien might have invented.
Have you been there too?
Hotdog, you’re a funny guy – you sure know how to push it, don’t you…:D
Anyway, most of these Baltic states have loads of ex-soviet equipment in their militaries already – Mi-8 helicopters come to mind.
Thinking back to 2003, I flew Kuban airlines from either Vnukovo or Bykovo to Krasnodar (Pashkovskii) when I lived in Krasnodar for 6 months or so. Yak-42.
I still remember the light blue vinyl passenger seats of the Yak…
In fact, reviewing Igor’s blog once more, certainly the first 2 photos are as you say, Panki. The next 5 photos are of Bykovo airport, what used to be one of the main Moscow passenger airports dealing with internal flights. According to the blogger it’s now closed. In fact, it seems to be used as some sort of car park?:eek:
In Panki?
More than likely, But the other photos are Zhukovsky (South east Moscow)
How many Let-410s are operated by small regional airlines in Europe anyway?
Although I suspect the Let-410 on the company’s website is only there because of “stock image” availability?
Just found these aerial photos of the Gromov flight test centre (Zhukovsky) at Igor113’s blog.
I think these are the first photos I’ve seen which just about give you an impression of the scale of Zhukovsky airfield – MASSIVE…:)
Is that a Let-410 I see on the top of their webpage? Is that the very type they intend to use?
Wouldn’t that be a somewhat unorthodox choice?:confused:
But Su-47 was later modified to aid in PAK-FA program. Surely it flew more than 150 hours in total.
I agree that aerodynamic research was primary purpose of Su-47, but nonetheless Sukhoi did show that it could make an aircraft with a flat belly and S-ducts without a problem. Hence, the lack of those in the PAK-FA is not indicative of anything.
The Su-47 is certainly still being used as a testbed – has flown 337 flights by the beginning of 2010.
Сколько всего на текущий день совершено полетов (хотя бы порядок?)
– Всего сделано 337 вылетов (начало 2010 года)
Trident, I can agree with that, the main focus of the Su-47 was to test forward swept wings – with the added bonus of learning more about S-ducts at high alphas. The thing is, the Su-47 only flew for 150 hours or so in its original flight test programme, barely enough to gain data on the basic aerodynamics. The Grumman X-29 flew 436 sorties in its programme.
I can’t help thinking that nothing was learnt from the Su-47 that wasn’t already learnt from the X-29?:confused:
2. The s-duct on the Su-47 worked very well, allowing an engine which was not designed for manoeuvring flight to operate safely even in difficult airflow conditions despite having no moving parts other than a dorsal auxiliary inlet.
3. So, in summary Sukhoi has demonstrated the ability to successfully design and build an s-duct – if they still don’t adopt it for production then logically they must have a different solution which suits their requirements even better.
Trident, how do you know this – have you actually read the flight test results document?
Just because the Su-47 flies very well at low speeds does not tell us a lot about its RCS figures or its high cruise performance?