martinezThe Mig-35 will be shown at Aero India, Bangalore in February 2007. It`s basically a demostrator of the Mig-29KUB. First production carrier-based Migs are flying already, so India is about to get some examples very soon. 😉
Martinez
martinezWell, Russian aircraft have recently been mostly covered by Alexander Mladenov, but they have also published for example beautiful articles on the Tu-16 (Maid of All Work) and Tu-142 by Lt Col (Retired) Anatoliy Artemyev, which are very well written, he’s very technically literate but also knows operational details and doesn’t shy away from telling you when things didn’t work.
OK, maybe I will get one for testing to see whether it meet my requirements.:)
martinezGuys, I really think you missed something since, in my humble opinion, its the best quaterly high quality military aviation “magazine” (more like a book) around. Here is its publishers website: http://www.airtimepublishing.com/. And here are also some scans of its newest article on the Oregon Defenders F-15 and KC-135 ANG (volume 20). Enjoy !!!!
Thank you, I appreciate that. Could you please also tell me who(the editorial team) write articles for them?
martinezMy suggestion: Is someone here who can make a short comparison table (performance speed,ceiling,range,climb,TWR and armament guns-ammo, missiles, bomb load) of aircrafts discussed in this thread? I think it would help more instead of endless typing what was better or not. For a start take only these subsonic types the F-86E, Canadair Sabre MK5,Mig 17,Folland Gnat,Hawker Hunter,Dassault Mystere, then who wishes to add also supersonic aircrafts e.g. early Mig-21f, feel free.
M
martinez“MiG-21” (early version) and “avionic” doesn’t really go together, does it?
The word “Avionics” stands for electronic and electrical systems on an aircraft. How does early Mig-21 differ from later Mig-21MF in avionics? thanks
martinezThe cockpit layout looks pretty solid when you ask me, better than the cockpit of F-22 I have seen recently. I like the idea of placing the middle HDD into the extended frame with a magnifying glass what helps pilot to read out data when seat inclined back to 32deg.
French Rafales in Hungary 2006….tons of pictures.
http://superfighter.freeweb.hu/RAFALE_2006KE/RAFALEINHUNGARY2006MENUPAGE/index.html
Does someone speak hungarian here? This language is mission impossible for me. Please translate the text below, thanks.
martinezThat is most likely compressor secondary air – i.e. air that escapes through the small gaps between the various stator and rotor stages and enters in the central part of the compressor (between the rotor disks). That air is better to be evacuated.
The air appears white because is already compressed, and when escapes in the atmosphere through the ventral pipe it expands and forms condensation.
I bet my five bucks that it is the oil vapour coming from the oil drainage system.;)
martinezA plane can hold together above it’s rating, but the longer, the more frequent and the more intense the more likely the failure. (In other words the more you push it, the more likely failure is) Often there will be damage before there is catastrophic failure. There is no exact G loading an aircraft will breakup at, it depends on a lot of factors like if it was lightly loaded, like on this training mission. This is real life, not Hollyweird.
.
Well, I think I should explain better to you what I meant. The additional safety factor(k=1,5) is applied to design the aircraft structure operating g-load. Above this limit you get a plastic deformation(cracks) in the structure and something may or not break instantly. Within the safety limit(9×1,5=13.5G) you get elastic deformation, so when g-forces disappear the aircraft wing structure returns to its original state so to speak. But as you`ve said “This is real life, not Hollyweird”. The loading forces(when interfering) may suddenly peak outside the g-load “envelope” even if they all are within normal design and if repeated enough time, the metalic structure will fatigue(plastic deformation). The thruth is, the plastic deformation occurs within the operating g-load “envelope” as well. The claimed 20 – 40G forces are far, far above the F-15 was designed for, therefore I believe the F-15 had a “God given right” to break apart if it ever happened at all.
I think the pilot might have been experiencing max. 15G for a split of second, which is also well over 9Gs. You do not need to assure me anyway, but keep looking for evidence.
I think he got away with it as a matter of luck. The airframe likely had low hours, and since it was only momentary he got away with it, kind of, hehe..
Definitely, he only got away through sheer luck. Structural failures occur in new aircraft as well. There are many factors besides age of an aircraft that might contribute. Anyway, pulling Gs is influenced by speed, altitude and aircraft weight, do you have any info regarding this case? We would be able to check out whether the F-15 is able to pull such “monstrous” Gs at given speeds and altitudes. What about the date when it happened?
One of the reasons US military pilots are discouraged from doing cobra like maneuvers is it can damage the airframe.
The cobra manueuver is the same as a rapid “pull-up” manuever. How often pilots are doing such kind of maneuver?
Listen to the pilots voice and breathing. It is unlikely all of that is from just pulling 9 Gs from a pilot that is trained for 9 or more Gs.
Yes, it sounds like it caught him unprepared,apparently because he was disoriented. I do not dare to estimate G-forces according to pilot breathing.
(John Stapp holds the sled record at 46.2 Gs; he busted the myth some of you still believe).
Why bothering with this? We are talking vertical g-loads, this case shouldn`t be mentioned here. The human body can withstand more G`s when longitudinal.
M
martinez
The fact the F-15 held together and was able to land safely is a testament of its durability. I can’t remember exactly but it sustained like 15-20 Gs for about 2-3 seconds. For a fraction of a second it pulled something like 30-40 Gs. It held together but the wing skin had crinkled (technical term j/k) because the airframe was bent so badly. Unfortunately I have no external views. It pulled so many Gs that the tape pulled off the recorder head and lost sync for a bit, so the tape misses the highest G.
.
Generally, military aircraft structures are known to have safety factor 1.5, what means by pulling 9G the airframe will hold up to 13.5G before dissintegration. There were many cases where pilots exceeded 9G, for instance 11-14G permanently damaging wing spars and ribs and after a lucky landing aicrafts were written-off, unreparable.
The F-15C aircraft was strenght limited to 7.3G and the HUD tape recorder might be out of sync by reaching 9G already. Who cares about the HUD camera anyway, the aircraft landed safely so what happened to the on-board flight-data recorder? It`s a hoax if you ask me.:rolleyes:
The fact that F-16 survived is a testament to General Dynamics. Since this is only a single-engine fighter fact the engine was able to run and run long enough after ingesting parts of the tree to get the plane back safely is a credit to the engine manufacturer. I am not sure which engine this aircraft had at the time, General Electric or Pratt & Whitney. They are all excellent manufacturers.
One lucky day for the F-16 pilot, fortunately the engine survived because not ingesting much of that tree at all.
martinezMartinez, can you explain me why at some maneuvers our Flankers expelled a short smoke trail?, I know this is a pretty common phenomena on RD-33 due to not so good combustion chamber, but never saw it on Flankers till they come to Venezuela in last July!…it was only during some extreme maneuvers…I’m not specialist on engines, can you help me?…
I think the smoke “phenomena” obviously lies in the fuel injector system of the combustion chamber and the hydromechanically driven fuel pump NR-31 of the Al-31F. When throttling down/up the fuel pump controls the amount of fuel delivered to nozzles in the combustion chamber to keep the engine runing under a different conditions(engine-operating envelope). This is controlled by a pre-defined program with engine parameters such as fuel consumption, critical engine nozzle section, inlet temperatures,…etc. The injector system(nozzles) ensures a good spray pattern what means maximal atomization of fuel injected in the chamber and smooth, consistent engine operation. When changing the engine regime (throttle settings) the fuel pump is adjusting fuel flow parameters(fuel amount, pressure) which may lead to disturbances of the optimal spray pattern. A small drops of fuel form or so called pattern banding occurs in the spray cone causing imperfect burning inside the chamber. This process generates the smoke trails sometimes seen when the pilot augments/reduce thrust settings.
The electronic driven fuel pumps of FADEC controled jet-engines may have a finer and more precise fuel regulation, thus better adjusting abilities throughout the engine-operating envelope.
Try to find out the Al-31 production serie with appropriate TBO and lifetime.
M
martinezIt’s easy – 0+4+6+0 = 10. Then 1+0 = 1 – aircraft number one.
12 from 59 is 47. 4 from 7 is 3 – aircraft number three.
You just need to know the logic……:D
Ken
Hat off Ken, you figured it out.:D
P.S. might be also the last four digits of the c/n. Mr. Pit should know about it already.;)
martinezI have seen splendid pictures of Slovak AF Fencers applied with Angolan markings from some guy at LOT Trencin. Unfortunately, I was never given any scans. A damn pity, it was wonderful material.
Maybe because they were finding you untrustworthy.;) Yes, yes I have seen them too. I`ve found these two, photos taken at LOT.
martinezAh! Yes, I remember the google Earth photo, despite i have some doubts about the plane in question. Thanks.
By the way, where are located the “others 11”?;)
I start a search;)
Regards from Spain.
Geez finally! I found the place where Malacky AFB has been transfered. 😀 😀 All Slovakian Fitters, some repainted in the LOT, other ones with worn-out camouflage colours. Those L-29 are comming from us too, repainted with the well-known “Egypt” camo. Anyway, I`ve seen some detailed photos of the Su-24 located near by. The aircraft seemed to be in airworthy condition. No other Fencers in sight though.:o
M
martinezAnyone out there got images or pics of Angolan Air Force MiG-15UTI, MiG-19, MiG-21F-13, MiG-21U/US, SA-342M Gazelle, BN-2 Islander or AN-2… ?
My weekend would be difficult to bear if not 😀
What about the Angolan Su-22 photos, have you seen any? 😉
martinezWhat i do not understand is why we need to argue senseless aspects of aircraft design of course Russia and the Former USSR were influenced by the West and viceversa, the US also copied the MiG-25 in the F-15.
At least one reasonable argument, you earned my respect.
Sign In
