Yeah, that’s clearly not a FLOGGER-series airframe.
It was a MiG-21M, these are in and around the C15xx serial block.
The Ethiopian machine is also a MiG-21, and by the looks of it also an -M or -MF (can’t tell from just the tail section).
Grmblmblmbl…. central fuselage π
Definately Belgium. That light Swiss poo-coloured dung from purple cows… yuk!
Marcus wasn’t the only one who had access to Soviet airbases in Europe, you know. Here’s me at Gross DΓΆlln.
It’s Marcus Fulber, and his Red Stars over Europe is a nice pictorial reference for modelers – hardly a technical piece of reference, and hardly anything more than you can find in the slideboxes of many dozens of planespotters. And while i think Overscan/Aerospacetech’s work is extremely valuable, i tend to give a whole lot more credibilty to Airsande when it comes to the MiG-23.
I would love to see a pilot’s eye view of watching with his HMS helmet through the radarscope-image projected on the HUD…
Latvia had a red, diagonal left-handed swastika as it’s roundel in the interbellum. Not that they were really consistant with it though: some Latvian aircraft had a cross-like marking instead. On some aircraft the swastika (or cross) was on a white disc, while on others it was simply painted over the normal paint the aircraft wore. The pic shows one of Latvia’s Gladiators.
Estionia did use the swastika (the same one as the Finnish, but darker blue) as a national symbol between 1921 and 1940, but never had it as a roundel on it’s aircraft.
I’m sure Airsande will be happy to hear you find it had interesting info… he’s the guy who wrote it π
Yeah, you’re right Alex. It’s just that i can’t stand it when someone is trying to be more stubborn than me π
Flogger,
are you always this thick?
From the Belyakov-book, the MiG-29 entry, pp431:
The SUV multiform fire control unit is one of the most interesting features of the MiG-29. For the first time anywhere, a fighter was equipped with a fire control unit that employed three different channels for target acquisition: pulse Doppler radar linked to a laser range finder, infrared search and tracking system (IRST) and helmet mounted target designator. All of these systems work together with the help of on-board computers…
(snip, we’re on pp432 now)…
The helmet mounted target designator is used for off-axis direction of air-to-air missiles.
Nothing as such about the MiG-23MLD, because the MiG-23MLD does not have a HMS. Period. If you prefer to form an opinion on false information, go ahead but don’t bother us with such nonsense.
Although Sweden and Poland have regular exercises from highwaystrips or other dispersed airfields, many more countries have got at least some experience. The RAF tested a Jaguar from a stretch of motorway, and repeatedly had their Harriers operate from forward locations. In the East, Bulgaria also had at least two highway strips, and in former East Germany there were a number of highwaystrips and reserve airbases which were used during exercises regularly.
Here are some pics of exercise ‘DOBAS 1984’, where several NATO aircraft operated from a stretch of the German A1 Autobahn near Ahlhorn in northern Germany. German Transalls, Phantoms and Alpha Jets, Dutch F-16s, USAF A-10s and C-130s definately did partake in the exercise.
The Su-34 has exactly the same fuselage as the Su-27. The difference in dimensions is purely because of the larger tail, wings, nose and (most importantly considering the visual aspect) landing gear.
…and as Sens said the original prototype J-8 shows many similarities to the Ye-152 at first glance and to me that is only explainable if we consider that the firsts J-8 followed more the original Ye-152 concept even if the Chinese modified the aerodynamic data and aerodynamic concept of the Ye-152 much later in the design once the J-8 final configuration was frozen.
Nice theory, but we’ve got two pics of J-8 prototypes in this thread proving you wrong: the shabby looking 052 in the shack, and 053 (which i’ve checked myself as being a prototype) which is preserved in the Beijing Military Museum. These prototypes are, at least structurally, identical with production J-8 and apart from the canopy framing also to the later series of J-8I (which you can see up close at the Changping museum north of Beijing, in case you’re interested). There is no ‘final configuration’ for the sucknose-Finbacks: they always had the slender fuselage and all the other properties identifying them as Finbacks rather than Ye-152As.
Well, pictures are of course easy to spread around, they don’t have to be translated. I’m still curious if they did a good job at http://www.redfox88.com/v208.htm
The more bumps, the more i like. Nimrod MRA4 i like!
Well, drones already were used extensively over Vietnam (AQM-34 anyone), were tested with guided munitions in the 1970s by the US (AQM-34 with AGM-65 Mavericks), and Iran already used drones with RPGs during the 1st Gulf War.
It’s only a revolution in marketingspeak and agitprop-pooha, technically it’s only evolutionary. And indeed, drones are boring. Even more tedious than F-16s, when an F-16 hits the lawn you can at least hope the pilot survived.