dark light

paralay

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,325 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Mig 1.41 / 1.43 contest #2410873
    paralay
    Participant

    🙂

    in reply to: Mig 1.41 / 1.43 contest #2411010
    paralay
    Participant

    MiG 1.44, MAKS-2009

    in reply to: PAK-FA Saga Episode 14 #2411016
    paralay
    Participant

    @haavarla,
    are you sure about the T-50-0? I have seen a few sources indicating that the aircraft was moved to Zhukowski on 29 October 2009.

    T-50-0 😎

    in reply to: Mig 1.41 / 1.43 contest #2411479
    paralay
    Participant

    The “product 41”, easy fighter, looks as JF-17 or JAS-39. Photos and drawings are not present

    1981 (on other data 1984-85) – the one-impellent easy fighter designated by the code number «41». It was supposed, that at the first stage the plane will be equipped with engine R-33 with draught 8300 кгс, and at the second stage – the modified engine with draught 10000 кгс. The fighter was originally projected under the normal aerodynamic scheme, it had a wing with flow and lateral air inlets. The take-off weight with two rockets Р-73 made 9,5 т. At the first stage it should be established radar type “Mosquito” with the usual parabolic aerial, at the second stage – station with the phased antenna lattice. Speed was limited to number М=1,7, launch and planting from a ground were provided range of flight reached 2000 km, with additional fuel tanks – 3000 km. On a fighter rockets of near fight Р-60 or Р-73Э could be suspended, the shooting arms consisted of gun ГШ-301, the weight of bombing loading made to 3,5 т.
    In the second variant of aerodynamic configuration the fighter had no horizontal tail plumage, and before a wing the small forward horizontal plumage settled down. This variant on letno-technical characteristics and take-off weight practically did not differ from the first. More careful study of an air inlet has shown possibility of increase in number of M to 1,84.
    … Normal take-off weight – 9800 kg, weight of fuel 2900 – 3000 kg, engine RD-33K, the onboard equipment are similar МиГ-29М (it is cut down in a mode “air-surface”), lost МиГ-29 on the established maneuver, won on not established maneuver (loading on a wing), confidently left on the big corners of attack, big altitude and subsonic range.
    There it was possible to depart “slightly” from the scheme in which it is executed “JAS-39” that has given a number of advantages, and in unevidently connected directions. For example, on stability on the big corners + reduction of weight of a glider + serious decrease in labour input of operation.
    The “classical” configuration was simultaneously drawn also, but she seriously lost – in so small dimension “classic” difficultly to extend on good level.

    MiG 1.44 pre-production model of a fighter of the fifth generation. MiG 1.42 – the serial sample of a fighter. MiG 1.43 and MiG 1.46 – the further development of the project.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Part Deux #2375671
    paralay
    Participant

    Exactly how does one tell the difference between a MiG-31 and a MiG-31BM?

    😎

    http://paralay.com/mig31m.html

    in reply to: underestimating U.S. air power. #2384157
    paralay
    Participant

    No lets go with that since he wants to keep throwing out Russia. So now Russia has to fight the entire USAF and the entire NATO command on and Alaskan and a European front? you said earlier Russia has 50 bombers? do you think 50 is enough to keep France Germany the U.K. Poland etc etc off of there backs while still trying to hit U.S. bases.?

    Inscription on a wall of the Brest fortress:
    «I die, but I do not surrender. Farewell the Native land» on July, 20th, 1941.
    7000 Russian have held on longer, than 2862000 Frenchmen…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brest_Fortress

    in reply to: T-50 Question #2389119
    paralay
    Participant

    Fast bay :rolleyes:

    in reply to: ONLy 50-100 T-50s? #2393161
    paralay
    Participant

    Russia can buy 240 Su-50, it has for this purpose money.
    Pogosyan promised to construct 1000 Su-50 for 50 years.

    Look the history, the new century begins with the big war, I expect aggression of China in 2014.
    Chineses are very much frightened “a miracle – the weapon” when Russian use it, Chineses will run.

    in reply to: ONLy 50-100 T-50s? #2394204
    paralay
    Participant

    so if China is such a danger, why does Russia keep selling weapons to them. or at least engines :)…

    It is a political error.
    Recollect history. Russian were on friendly terms with nazis up to June, 22nd, 1941.

    Huh? Russia with thousands of nukes, hundreds of delivery systems (not to mention an active ABM), considers China a bigger problem than Europe and America combined?:eek::eek::eek:

    America does business on war. Russian will ruin the USA, there is no income – there is no war.
    Europe (Germany, France, Poland and others) interfered in Russia since the eleventh century to the twentieth century middle. And every time Russian «saw off aggressors to the house» 😉
    How many it is possible?

    In China it is a lot of men and few women. In Russia – on the contrary.
    In China the population overabundance, only war will solve a demographic problem.
    Siberia is necessary to China, there there are enough minerals.

    in reply to: ONLy 50-100 T-50s? #2394419
    paralay
    Participant

    Europe and America for Russian not a problem. War with Russia will not bring to you profit, war will not be 😉
    For Russian there is only one real danger – China.

    in reply to: Comparison F 15 E- SU 34 Fullback! #2396329
    paralay
    Participant

    🙂

    in reply to: Comparison F 15 E- SU 34 Fullback! #2398361
    paralay
    Participant

    Levsha, what you will sing, when itself it will appear in a bomber cabin over a battlefield? The armour is necessary or not? :p

    in reply to: Comparison F 15 E- SU 34 Fullback! #2398579
    paralay
    Participant

    Internal fuel load is 6105 kg – F-15C, F-15E – 5952 kg 😉

    …More important are the weapon options, sensors and avionics than the exact number of weapons or payload weight.

    Weight of onboard equipment Su-30MKI ~ 2500 kg, Su-34 – 4100 kg. The difference in their abilities is clear? 🙂

    in reply to: Comparison F 15 E- SU 34 Fullback! #2398590
    paralay
    Participant

    In this drawing 17 or 18 CBU-87, 431 kg, weight of loading 7327 – 7758 kg
    CFT 5952 kg + 4265 kg = 10217 kg, range of 2000 km, radius of action of 700 km.
    The maximum take-off weight: 16550 (weight empty) + 200 (pilots) + 10217 (fuel) + 7758 (bombs and rockets) = 34725 kg

    in reply to: Comparison F 15 E- SU 34 Fullback! #2398607
    paralay
    Participant

    Sferrin and Scorpion82, thanks. 🙂
    I have found such variant at other variants, fighting loading less.

    1x AN/AAQ-13 Navigation Pod, 211.5 kg
    4x AIM-9L/M Sidewinder, 91 kg
    12x CBU-87 Cluster Bombs, 431 kg
    2x 610gal Fuel Tank, ~ 2000 kg
    Total: 211,5+91*4+431*12+2000*2=211,5+364+5172+4000=9747,5 kg

    Weight of bombs and rockets of 4*91 kg + 12*431 kg = 5536 kg
    Weight of fuel CFT + 2 ПТБ = 5952 kg + 4265 kg + 3600 kg = 13817 kg, range of 3000 km, radius of action of 1000 km.

    The maximum take-off weight: 16550 (weight empty) + 200 (pilots) + 13817 (fuel) + 5536 (bombs and rockets) = 36103 kg

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,325 total)