Page 54 – Key Publishing

martinez

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 796 through 810 (of 1,048 total)

← 1 2 3 … 53 54 55 … 68 69 70 →

Author

Posts
July 11, 2007 at 2:07 pm in reply to: Reliable Information of AL-31FM/U/P #2532366

martinez
Participant

BTW. The F-18HARV thrust vector control can hardly be called as a good one. Its goal has been High Alpha Research(therefore HARV), so they used simple, totaly amateur and half way solution with three vanes. Immense thrust loses during vectoring(also seen on your photo), thus low vectoring efficiency, literally unusable on a real combat aircraft.

M

July 11, 2007 at 1:52 pm in reply to: Reliable Information of AL-31FM/U/P #2532370

martinez
Participant

Also, did the Su-37 have 3D TVC? What about the Su-30MKI? globaldefence says that the Su-37 has 2D TVC and the 30MKI has 3D TVC… is this correct?

I know that you probably know this crobato. Please post here…. I am trying to e-mail and PM you, but you chose to block e-mails and PMs? I understand the differences between the Su-30 variants, I read your post on ubi forums from a long time ago.

someone please help me! :confused: 🙁 sorry for the multiple posts…

EDIT: okay, I think I understand now, after some research. The Su-37 had no 3D TVC. Its engines only moved in the vertical plane. The Su-30MKI (and Su-30MK prototype #6) used two 2D nozzles mounted perpendicular to each other, to give a pseudo-3D effect. As in, (looking from the back) the right nozzle only moves from top-right to bottom-left, and the left nozzle only moves from top-left to bottom right.

For example, if the left nozzle moved to top-left, and the right nozzle moved to bottom-left, it would give it a yaw motion to the left.

So technically, the first “true” 3D TVC nozzle (as in, one that matched the nozzle on the F-16 MATV and F-15 ACTIVE), didn’t arrive until the MiG-29 OVT. Is this correct?

I still have no idea when russia first flight-tested any sort of TVC. And when was the first flight of the MiG-29 OVT?

As you can see, I am having difficulty here with questionable sources…

buddy, download some books from this website Su-27 related, recommended is the Su-27 Flanker story from Mr. Andrei Fomin, there you`ll find a lot about the Al-31, covering development, explaining TVC, etc

Rgds
M
http://www.farposst.ru/

July 11, 2007 at 1:38 pm in reply to: Su-30 construction numbers #2537393

martinez
Participant

All over the world Migs and Sukhois

you are a bit overestimating me buddy….;) I`ve been interested in planes flown in former Czechoslovakia only.:o What line produced Su-35 are you talking about anyway?

Rgds
M

July 11, 2007 at 12:47 pm in reply to: After Ethiopian Mig-23ML pic/Info #2537412

martinez
Participant

Does anyone knows that guy? I`m interested in cockpit pictures of that Mig-23ML. Why is he smiling anyway? then I`d be also …:D

June 27, 2007 at 7:14 pm in reply to: RWR Sounds #2539424

martinez
Participant

ZARE is right. In case of NIke Hercules, the SPO-15 will know when the SAM is on the way bcs of “specific” firing radar guidance signals homing the missile towards the aircraft. Having these guidance signals stored the SPO is then showing bearing and dynamics of closure with the missile. Check manuals again, particularly what it means when you hear 800Hz sound beeping in earphones.

June 19, 2007 at 7:07 pm in reply to: New Slovak Air Force markings #2544590

martinez
Participant

It seems that after electing our new labour government, the socialism is sublimating to the surface in every possible place 😀 :diablo: 😀

The original “soviet” camo is a very good quality paint on the polyurethane matrix impregnated with carbon particles. Why should they get rid of it?:D A lot better than the paint on last three Migs overhauled.

June 19, 2007 at 6:47 pm in reply to: New Slovak Air Force markings #2544608

martinez
Participant

Let’s wait a little and see if a blue cross with a red dot comes up!

hmm, a part of our history that I`m proud of, important time period for the nation, a thousand year long fight for national independence, but I do not expect you will understand that.:rolleyes:

June 12, 2007 at 2:19 pm in reply to: Flanker and training missiles #2506957

martinez
Participant

Russian Flankers?

Finally, nice pictures of russian Flankers with UZRs, you have my appreciation and personal thanks…;)

June 11, 2007 at 9:49 pm in reply to: Flanker and training missiles #2507222

martinez
Participant

Wow, an AAM question. I’ve had ABMs on the brain for the past weekend due to writing a piece for my blog, but as far as I can recall, there is an R-27 captive carry round. It’s white, with black stripes, and unlike some of the WVR AAM rounds is fitted with a full set of control fins, with the exception of the trapezoidal fins right behind the radome. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an R-27T captive round, interestingly, and I can’t recall seeing a white R-27ER captive round anywhere either. Anytime I’ve seen a FLANKER carrying URZ-73s, URZ-27s, and long-burn ALAMOs, the long-burn rounds have been red painted, or they’ve been white-painted live rounds.

Or, maybe we have it all wrong. Maybe the Russians don’t need to use the URZ-27 nearly as much is because they’re far more competent FLANKER pilots? Let’s see someone disprove that one based on that logic 😀

Thanks SOC, you’ve been partly wrong and partly right, but what you`ve identified as the R-27R captive carry round is in real the Izd-470-UTM which means “Uchebno Trenirovochnij Maket”, a mock-up of the R-27R missile with all control fins, the same weight and aerodynamics properties as the real one, but without any electronics, SAHR seeker or warhead. The purpose of this “Uchebno-training Maket” missile is to teach weapon technicians how to attach (hand-work of six men 🙂 ) the R-27R to the APU-470 pylon correctly. Usually, the Izd-470-UTM is black striped and exists in two versions, for the R-27R and the R-27T respectively.
The truth is that there is no captive carry round for the R-27R in such form as the captive missiles UZR-60/73. In fact, there exists a device called the ZI-470 which means “Zaglushka-Imitator” a small “plug” you can install into the APU-470 pylon. It contains some electronics to imitate the real R-27 for the PRNK-27/29 weapon control systems. It is used to check the missile system inside the aircraft and for example to simulate launch of the R-27R on the doubleseater Mig-29UB. So, when you`ve accidentally seen a photo of Mig-29UB with APU-470 pylons attached, it means that pilots were training BVR engagements.;)

BTW. The captive carry round for the R-27T does really exist.

Chinese Su-27 with bunch of izd.470UTM.

June 10, 2007 at 5:15 pm in reply to: Flanker and training missiles #2507966

martinez
Participant

Well they do exist, they’ve been seen on the MiG-23 (UZR-60) and MiG-29 (both), which in itself might be enough to disprove the theory that they weren’t used at all.

Here’s an Su-27K using R-27 and R-73 simulators.

No doubt pictures exist, the problem is I can`t find them.:D
Anyway, SOC you as a skilled expert on soviet missiles, tell me please whether the captive training unit UZR-27 exists or not. Thanks

June 10, 2007 at 4:30 pm in reply to: Flanker and training missiles #2507983

martinez
Participant

Strictly Flankers Only! :p 😀

Well, the PLAAF is opposite to RUAF, they are making propaganda like hell!!:D 😀 A like those pictures anyway.

June 10, 2007 at 4:25 pm in reply to: Flanker and training missiles #2507985

martinez
Participant

Hi

Just curious…

West fighters jets usually flies with training AAMs. Why does the Russian Su-27 trains without carry missiles like the west fighters? Is it economical related problem?

Thanks in advance

Well, yesterday I`ve been looking for pictures of Russian Flankers with the UZR-60/73. I`ve got tons of Flankers with real missiles but have found only one with UZRs.:o Hmm….that`s a bit weird. 😀

June 10, 2007 at 4:12 pm in reply to: Su-30MKM antenna depiction images #2507991

martinez
Participant

I`ve been thinking about redesign of the Su-30 wing tip launch rails as seen on the Gripen. Two MAW sensors(front/back) installed in each wing tip and two in the airframe pointing up and down.:cool:

June 10, 2007 at 3:55 pm in reply to: Su-30MKM antenna depiction images #2507999

martinez
Participant

Yes, it is. The question is, is this zone important.

In my humble opinion any hole in the detection zone may play a role at the end, so they`ve installed six instead of four sensors each about 120 degrees from the others dividing the upper/lower hemisphere into three sectors. Looking at the MAW housing placed at the Flanker spine behind the air-brake, each MAW sensor`s field of view is shielded by parts of the aircraft. The front sensor is shielded by the spine, the other ones are pointed directly to vertical tails. Probably that is the quickest and cheapest possible installation of the SAAB MAW system, I bet that Sukhoi offered more sophisticated solution, maybe Malaysians were scared about the price….;)
Also I doubt the IRST oLS-30 could supply the MAW sensors or whether the IRST is tied with the RWR system in any way.
The problem with those MAWS UV systems (MAW-300, AN/AAR-60) is that they`ve been developed primary for wide body aircrafts(helos, cargo and passenger jets) where boxy shape and big size doesnt matter. They are easy to install into NH-90 or C-130, but need a special aerodynamics covers/housings when fitting to fighter airframes.

Pic. The MAK IR sensor installed on the SU-35.
Pic. Su-30MKM MAW-300 upper installation
Pic. Zone coverage of 5x AN/AAR-60 sensors installed on the C-130.

June 9, 2007 at 7:15 pm in reply to: Su-30MKM antenna depiction images #2508303

martinez
Participant

Moreover, the same antenna is being fitted to Su-27SM (not export SKM), so it has to be Russian system.

yes, but it seems that the RWS-50 features the same kind(shape) of antennas as the Pastel RWR. That`s a bit confusing for me. Check the pics I posted above.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 796 through 810 (of 1,048 total)

← 1 2 3 … 53 54 55 … 68 69 70 →