you know something I don’t?
I actually had the G.222 in mind – Slight mix-up.
Where are Libya’s G.222s nowadays?
I admire some aircraft for their combat record – I’m pretty fond of the F-105.

Here are photos of recently reported recent SF Libya Libyans kept for 20 years in sheds.Six radar-equipped SA-321GM helicopters and eight SA321M SAR/transports were delivered to Libya in 1980-81
Would these Frelons be as under-utilised and low-houred as Libyan Mirage IIIs and C160 Transalls? I wonder how easy and cheaply it would be to get them up to flying standard again?
Series production does not mean much. It is just a “froze” of the basic design.
Indeed, “series production” can mean a lot of different things in as many different countries. The F-35 is also in series production, is it not?
I doubt this very much. Series production is 2 years away.
With only 4 prototypes testing and not much more than 200 hours of the flight testing completed – I would doubt that very much.
The same measures were performed on the B-1B (especially intakes)..
The intake on the B-1B (fixed) are very different to those on the Tu-160 (variable).
The B-2A has been used in the same role – a standoff missile carrier.. It is obviously deemed too expensive and too sensitive to be used in the role it was originally meant for..
What, flying into and bombing Russia? I should think so…:rolleyes:
Like I said, I thought you were mentioning a particular LO aircraft.
What they’ve done to the Kirov class is again more lipstick on a pig – but I suppose every little bit helps. And the Kh-101 is post-soviet.
So, by that logic the B-2 is not stealth.
I’m not sure what the RCS of the Blackjack is, and I doubt there is an open source for it.
Still, aerospace proffessionals thought it worthwhile, so I’ll leave it at that.
The B-2 is a lot smaller than the Tu-160, it is also a very different shape if you haven’t noticed, which by all accounts helps reduce RCS somewhat…
Unlike the B-2 the Tu-160 was never designed to penetrate the enemy’s air defences, it’s a stand-off launcher of cruise missiles if I recall – so why would the Soviet AF have been concerned about its RCS anyway?:confused:
Anechoic tiles on submarines starting 40 years ago, a decade and a half before the USN started fitting them to the Los Angeles Class for the first time.
There was a picture years ago with the Tu-160 fitted with RAM in the engine intakes.
RAM material or coatings were fitted to examples of the Su-25 and Mig-29 years ago.
Those just off the top of my head from memory, but I’m sure there may be other examples.
I thought he was talking about entire stealth aircraft?
Anechoic tiles and RAM were pioneered on German submarines in the 1940s, they are are hardly a recent technology. As for applying RAM onto a Tu-160 – it’s a bit like putting lipstick on a pig, is it not? That plane is huge…
That said, may I remind you Soviets knew how to design and manufacture low observable “things” all along?
Did they? What low observable “things” did the Soviets design and manufacture?:confused:
They could call it “Fantom”?;)
Using 2yo information and only fightery types and not taking into account combat:
Mig-15 (1947)
CubaMig-17 (1952)
Cuba, Guinea, Guinea Bissau,
North Korea (J-5)
https://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=AFB,+North+Korea&hl=en&ll=38.900464,125.23372&spn=0.001785,0.004128&sll=40.369583,127.266532&sspn=0.001747,0.004128&t=h&hq=AFB,+North+Korea&z=19Su-7 (1955)
North KoreaHawker Hunter (1950)
Lebanon, Zimbabwe
When was the last time anyone actually witnessed all those MiGs and Su flying?
AFAIK, neither the F-4 nor the F-5 have seen combat in decades (unless… Kosovo?)
Didn’t a Turkish F-4 get shot down by the Syrians a few months ago while carrying out a recon mission?
The problem perhaps is that they have plenty of airframes, such as over 100 Il-76’s.
There is not a purpose designed jet airlifter that comes close to the numbers of around 1000 Il-76’s built. It has been operated by about 40 countries globally, in civil and military guise.
The oldest is under 40 years old, with most probably about 30 years old and younger. This is not old for a transporter.
Which begs the question, why do they need to build more of them, instead of upgrading the airframes they all ready have?
Знание языка не требуется. Google – переводчик, чтобы помочь вам 😉
http://translate.google.ru/
Have you ever tried loading a ‘gif’ file into google translate?:confused: