dark light

zheng1980

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 44 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: RNAS Yeovilton Airshow #475750
    zheng1980
    Participant

    beautiful photos, Is that a sea vixon?

    in reply to: B-2 at 2005 Edwards AFB airshow #475905
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Great shots, especially the one with B52 and B2 together. The B2 looks extremely menacing

    in reply to: Some shots taken at Aust airshow a while back #475910
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Hi Kiwi, it is the Avalon airshow, this is the only international airshow we have. And that is a C17 globalmaster a very impressive aircraft when you see it taking off and landing, huge but quite agile for its size.

    in reply to: Paris Air Show 1987 #2623195
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Wow Dubya, you still pee your pants at age of 7? 🙂
    anyways, an addition to the request for 1987 Paris airshow, I m also interested in the 1989 Paris airshow, apparently, China brought A-5C and F-8II to the show, was there any flying display for those types? thanks in advance

    in reply to: no Japanese ICBMs — for the time being #2052316
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Japan has no right to build SSMs of any means, its restricted by their constitution, since it can be a vessel used to deliver nuclear weapons. I think too many ppl has forgot what Japan is like 60 years ago, Japanese people are proud and ambitious people, once they have the power, they will expand, and this is already showing as they are slowly changing their constitution. I think people should revisit history lessons again, eg: Pearl Harbour? Rape of Nanking? Occupation of Korea, Singapore, Philipines, China? Asians have suffered too much in hands of the Japanese during WW2, and I think none of the countries would want Japan to have SSM now. I think China should really re-think its policy of not using nuclear weapons first if Japan aquires SSMs of any sort and have nuclear capability.
    As for the North Korean and Chinese threat as seen by JSDF, its full of crap, North Koreans dont have any capability to attack Japan, nor does China want to invade one of its biggest trading partners (or have the capability).

    in reply to: J-8II Info #2664512
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Sens
    you cant mix parts of different aircraft to make a new a/c as you claimed the Chinese had with J8II, it doesnt work that way both in aerodynamic and structural sense.
    to clear the confusion up a bit,
    J-8 are evaluation a/c that was never authorised for serial production, since it didnt have a FC radar, built in very small numbers. Known as J-8 day fighter version.
    J-8I, authorised for productioin in 1985, equipped with Type 204 FC radar.
    J-8I gave way to J-8II after around 100 produced because PLAAF’s doctrine changed during the mid 80s, and thus requirment changed, NOT because J-8I was a failure.

    in reply to: J-8II Info #2664518
    zheng1980
    Participant

    To Flogger,

    I think your assumption of J-8I is based on E152 is simply based on the fact that they look similar. if you look at Sino-Soviet relationship closely, you will understand that their relationship was never an easy alliance. Ever since 1949, China and SU already had some border disagreement, both sides restrained themselvs for a “greater cause”. Even during Stalin era, soviets disagreed on China having a strategic capability eg: having a submarine force, have a long range bomber force (small number of TU-4 were delivered to China as a token of good will on Mao’s birthday), have nuclear weapons. The soviets actually started reduce their tech assistance after 1957, and pull out their tech advisors completely in 1961. So you see, there is no way that SU would provide blue prints of a experimental aircraft to China, (E152 was still top secret before 1961). Mig-21-F13 was completely delivered in 1961, because the agreement was made before 1959, and the negotiations started as early as manufacturing of the first Chinese Mig-17 took place, and thats 1956. You simply cant say that an a/c is a copy of another because they look similar, in that case, we can claim F-15 is a copy of Mig-25.

    in reply to: MiG-19 Farmer #2679881
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Major production versions

    Mig-19 original batch with non all moving horizontal stabs.
    Mig-19S standard day fighter with all moving horiz stabs, there are few small changes in later batches and east german variants such as dorsal fin, number of cooling intakes, gun blast panel shapes etc.
    Mig-19P night fighter with 2 30mm canon or 23mm canon
    Mig-19PM night fighter with a more relaible ismurd radar and no canons, but have 4 AA-1 fitted.

    Major Chinese versions

    J-6 = Mig-19S with less cooling intakes at the rear, a new parachute housing at the base of fin.
    J-6A=Mig-19P with 2 PL-2B missile fitted later
    J-6B=Mig-19PM
    JZ-6=Mig-19S with recon equipment installed under nose, with nose canon deleted.

    in reply to: MiG-19 Farmer #2680089
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Hi Phantom, here some answers

    Mig-19P has a radar in the nose, thats why the nose canon was deleted, u r rite about Mig-19S having 3 canon and so did the J-6 in PLAAF. the AA-1 Akali is a beam riding missile with little chance of hitting a fighter, since the carrier a/c have to keep the target illuminated at all time until hit with his/her gunsight. thats why the Chinese version of Mig-19P (J-6A) was fitted with 2 PL-2B IR missiles later.

    in reply to: Q-5 Fantan #2688942
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Hi crobato

    the one in green is actually a Q-5D, and that one doesnt have laser targeting capability, the glass windows probably have something els as it points directly downwards, while a laser designator or range finder needs to point foward as well.

    in reply to: Searchwater AEW vs Hawkeye and Erieye AEW systems #2691491
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Excuse my ignorance on AEW and AWACS, just a question, if for example PLAN has installed the serachwater onboard the Y-8 transport, it will have better range and endurance and cruise alt, would it give a slightly better coverage as it is flying higher than the helo? Since seaking’s searchwater antenna is installed in one bag outside of the helo, how come PLAN’s Y-8J has both nose atenna and antena in the extended tail? Finaly question, Can marinetime patrol a/c like Nimrod MR.2 with an adequet radar able to be used as a simple AEW for low flying a/c?

    in reply to: PAF's A-5s #2694473
    zheng1980
    Participant

    To Arthur
    If the 30mm gun was installed, it would put even more weight on the a/c. Twin 23mm guns were sufficient to strafe any armoured vehical including tanks at that time.

    If any conflict with India occurs, I dont think MANPADs are the most threatening for PAF A-5Cs, AA guns like ZSU-23 Shilka or 35mm oliekon is much more capable of taking down the A-5C. MANPADs are not really for bringing down fast flying attack a/c, Israelis had many A-4s survive SA-7 shots during the Yom Kippur war. btw, what kind of MANPADS does India have? SA-7?

    in reply to: PAF's A-5s #2694572
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Hi troung, heres a pic of PLAAF J-6 shot down in vietnam, my memmory didnt serve me correct, it was an J-6 that was shot down.

    more info on the A-5, it has armour protection for cockpit and enigne, with bullet proof windscreen. its WP-6A was originally intended for J-6III, which as a modest 4% thrust increase, but with all the extra weight from armour, more fuel and longer fuselage, it is much less nimble than the J-6. That can be reflected by the PAF’s disappointment at its AtoA performance.

    in reply to: PAF's A-5s #2695256
    zheng1980
    Participant

    Hi troung,

    PLAAf Q-5s were used and have proven how tough they were, they were used in Sino-viet conflict of the 80s, one of the Q-5 was shot by a flak right in the butt, and more than half of the vertical tail was gone, yet it managed to return to base. There was a pic of this a/c with damaged tail. during the conflict, it was also proven how crap the H-5 beagles were, I believe at least one was shot down, and theres a pic of it with NVA troops posing beside it.

    in reply to: JH-7 and F-2, maritime strike #2695369
    zheng1980
    Participant

    To clear up the Argentine a/c I mentioned before, I was implying that the same achievement as what the Argentians did cant be repeated under mordern air warfare environment.

    one of the fatal flaws on the British part that lead to the sinking of Sheffield was the lack of AEW a/c. Now if countries like Japan, China, now all have AEW platforms in one form or another, flying wavetop level and pop up for attack wont be an advantage

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 44 total)