dark light

martinez

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,021 through 1,035 (of 1,048 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2565139
    martinez
    Participant

    They were so scared of the Fulcrums, that they had to send at least four aircrafts against each Mig-29. Cowards!!!!!! 😉 😀

    in reply to: Russian stunt pilots to fly through cave in China #2565155
    martinez
    Participant

    Vairy eeenteresting…………………..

    The first & second photos above are of an LII/Gromov Flight Research Centre Su-30..

    I wonder if it has TVC….??

    Ken

    you were at the MAKS05, has it been displayed there? IIRC the only one fitted with TVC was the no.595 , Su-27. But since 2003, things could change…. 😮
    595

    in reply to: Su33UB thrust vector engines #2600506
    martinez
    Participant

    copy&paste
    source: link

    За счёт внедрения ряда принципиальных усовершенствований аэродинамическое качество Су-27КУБ, по сравнению с Су-27, возросло более чем на 10%. Это обеспечено в первую очередь за счёт применения (впервые в мире на боевом самолете ) принципиально нового “интеллектуального” адаптивного крыла с “гибким” носком. Эластичная обшивка секций между носком и неподвижной частью крыла устраняет неизбежные ранее щели, обеспечивает плавность формы и позволяет, в сочетании с отклонением флаперонов, постоянно оптимизировать профиль крыла в соответствии с конкретным полетным режимом, а также полностью устранить перетекание воздуха с нижней поверхности на верхнюю.
    Как и на Су-33, крыло Су-27КУБ имеет аэродинамическую крутку. По сравнению с другими истребителями семейства Су-27 на Су-33УБ увеличен размах крыла и его удленение (составившие 3,54). Площадь крыла составила 71,38 кв.м.

    in reply to: Su33UB thrust vector engines #2600756
    martinez
    Participant

    >>>It was! Guys, what were you doing during MAKS-2005?

    No wonder why FLANKER_MAN did not notice the SU-33KUB on MAKS2005, because he was more impressed by Mikoyan`s engine nozzles. 😀 😀 😀
    engine nozzles
    P.S. great photo anyway, many thanks for it!!!

    in reply to: How Did the MiG29 Handle in the German Air Force? #2600764
    martinez
    Participant

    Regimes/Countries are just dumb and blame for that, which did not adjust its politics to their real military capabilities..

    Remember, those regimes/countries have been fighting different ways the arrogance of the power…..9/11

    in reply to: Su33UB thrust vector engines #2600929
    martinez
    Participant

    I know martinez but I need information about the purpose of TVC for Su-33UB from rational man not from silly,like you..

    But crobato already answered your question, it is for shortening takeoffs and to enhance control authority at high AOA/low speeds when landing on aircraft carriers. Do you remember The X-31 VECTOR?

    in reply to: Su33UB thrust vector engines #2601158
    martinez
    Participant

    Hi,this pic for Su-33UB(Su-27KUB) shown a new engines with thrust vector
    why?and why the Su-33 with out thrust vector engines :confused:

    tvc nozzles have been installed since 2003.

    in reply to: How Did the MiG29 Handle in the German Air Force? #2601193
    martinez
    Participant

    When it counted, F-16s had no problems actually shooting MiG-29s out of the sky, either.

    Hmmm, why this always ends up with somebody having silly arguments like that? You destroyed GCI and Command points with cruise missiles and then outnumbering them in air you enjoyed the hunt. Does this show the combat effectiveness of your aircrafts? That is ridiculous 😀

    in reply to: How Did the MiG29 Handle in the German Air Force? #2601743
    martinez
    Participant

    Someone should write a book about those days, would be a highly interesting read..

    There already exists a book about those days and I know that other one is being prepared. 😉
    book

    I know a few guys who spent time in Syria, Lybia, Irak fulfiling their duties as flight instructors and ground personal on the L-29,L-39, L-410. Well, they do not always remember those days with a smile. Every day they were confronted with situations they would rather not be confronted with. Our crews supplied their ground controllers to insure safe flight operations, sometimes they run their own airforce base under control, because Arabs were not able to keep the airbase operational every day. It happened often that their ground personal dissapeared, not going to work for a day, in some cases for a week, because of unknown reasons…….. The mentality far into middle age, their weak will to fight, lack of interest to solve own problems, sluggishness and disinterest in work, then no wonder about their morale in those MiddleEast conflicts.
    Also, sometimes our technicians were involved in repairs of damaged soviet hardware. For example they worked on the Su-22, a few years before the Czechoslovakia received that plane from the Soviet union. To teach Arabs to fly was said to be an experience that none of them could ever forget. We got students from Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Algeria and other third world countries. I have heard many pilot life stories, their behaviour in the cockpit, comments on their skills. In general, an Arab flight student required approximately 20-30% more flight hours to make his first solo flight. Of course, we had also smart students, good for flying, but the majority demanded a special care of their flight instructors.

    in reply to: AA-11 Archer question #2044629
    martinez
    Participant

    Thanks Garry, I would not say it better myself. I tried once the HMS cueing on the Mig-29 FM simulator at the AFB. After a while I used it completely subconscious. The Russian HMS may look obsolete, but it`s simply and effective tool and makes any IR missile even more lethal. Anyway, I don`t understand why US dropped it, if they had a similar design already on the F-4. Any clues? Thanks

    in reply to: AA-11 Archer question #2044661
    martinez
    Participant

    Well it did sound logical when I said it 😀
    Daniel

    😉

    Some corrections to my previous statements. The target data for the R-73 are supplied by RLPK, KOLS and the NSC. That`s all the combat employment manual says. Also, the R-73 seeker is able to lock-on after “blind” emergency launch. I dare to say the 60degree off-boresight capability of the R-73E could be real or at least I believe it.

    in reply to: AA-11 Archer question #2044669
    martinez
    Participant

    Actually I think you’ll find its a function of a high off boresite shot with the missile being cued by the HMS. The missile is launched while the target is outside the missile seekers own field of view. Target information is provided by the HMS. Until the missile can bring its own seeker to bear on the target the pilot must maintain contact with the target via the HMS to continue cueing the missile onto the target. Once the missile seeker has accquired the target then the missile can be left to its own devices.

    Daniel

    Hmm, it does sound logical if you think this way. The R-73 off-boresight angle is 45 degree which is less than the N-019 radar scan limits (azimuth ±60, +57degree in elevation), then the HMS caged with the N-019 could provide an initial launch data to the R-73 seeker. After the missile is launched it has to turn quickly to the target sector according to data loaded when on pylon. The missile should be able to acquire the target with its own IR seeker. Actually the combat manual doesnt mention such a feature, or whether it is possible for R-73 to achieve lock-on after launch. The benefit would be an increased off-boresight to 60 degree which is fact the limit of the Mig-29 HMS.

    what do you think?

    in reply to: AA-11 Archer question #2044724
    martinez
    Participant

    just read article where they have said that AGATS milimetric radar shall be used on the A-11 to make it all weather , the benifit also includes better aerodynamic performance due to a more “pointy” nose.

    The new missile is also said to have midcourse update but that is bye radar not by helmet cueing.

    if I`m not mistaken, you spoke about this one. The “150mm in diameter” radar seeker fits to the R-73 well.
    M

    in reply to: AA-11 Archer question #2044727
    martinez
    Participant

    2meat
    an official Vympel leaflet taken at Paris airshow 2005. I hope it convince you that the Swiss writer was wrong.

    best regards
    M

    in reply to: Paris 2005 Air Show Question #2616079
    martinez
    Participant

    Hi guys, I`ve found this nice-looking photo gallery from Lebourget05, check it out.
    LeBourget2005
    Hard to tell what was the best, judging from the pictures. I`m sorry. 😎

Viewing 15 posts - 1,021 through 1,035 (of 1,048 total)