BlackcatOriginally Posted by pluto77189
The reasoning for this is pretty obvious. The US is saying that if they were involved in a war, and the galileo system was being used against the US forces, then we would shoot them down. What’s so hard to understand about that?
it is not at all hard to understand, but pretty much clearly gives u the reason as to Y Galelio is important when there is no war at all in real terms, coz either way if no other option is there US would give u the 4th grade service from GPS at the Unkils cost and U’ll have to accept that, now war time is different and we’ll come on to that later.
Of course we would shoot them down.
k fine. But i guess there are more GPS jammers than Galelio shooters, what do u think
Would anyone expect the US to leave them up there, potentially causing the deaths of US servicemen? Of course not.
just think it from the other way round
when it comes to war, you don’t keep the playing field even.
thats what dicates war, and especially american war, else it would have been NY bankers who would have been in Beijing. But then they have not yet got their arse cooled off from the Vietnamese fire.
Is it “Fair” that we not only have GPS, but will make sure only our side has it?
Of course not
Is it “fair” that we will have the ability to destroy the sattelite network of our enemy, but they won’t be able to do it to ours(maybe)?
ofcourese not either, but then the American “optimistic self-confidence” which is as vaild as the “Russian misfortune” will get the beating and change the lives of the ignorants for the rest of the human century
first of all, I don’t see us getting into war with China any time soon, especially after what Powell said recently.
Yes, and thats not any surprise. But then America simply dont have any bussiness in the Chinese backyard. IF they were really concerned abt Taiwan, they should have made it resolve during the Honeymoon periods 1962-1989.
And not to mention is the brilliant on-time dose that Jian Zemin (pardon the spelling) shot off during his visit to Washington during Clinton period which was a time when Americans was accusinf Chinese of stealing American technology. Maybe the handiwork of Republicans to embrass Clinton Admin or the CIA workd (more probable) to harass Chinese president, that before he started his speech the mike went dead. But to the surpise of the ‘brilliant’ minds who worked out that, The chinese pres took that chance and basted out to the theory of Chinese stealing American stuffs by saying that no one would steal anything from someone who don even know to make any decent mikes. (not his exact words or somment)
I just saw this statement as the US being clear, that if the system becomes a threat to US, we will deal with it as such–nothing personal.
Yes but the guys u r gonna deal with are not donkey riding American brothers.
On a related note, the ABL is supposed to have a very high anti-satellite ability. Considering the thing has a potential rang ein excess of 200miles through the atmosphere, I would assume it to be even greater straight up. Also, taking out a rocket is probably a much more difficult task than disabling a satellite, bristling with antennae.
well i don know abt the ABL ability, but taking out the rocket would be the easier task if the admin really belives in pre-emption. Y should u ever let the thing happen in the first place???…… shooot down evey rocket blasting off from the South American continent. Dare?
But I guess NASA wont be so stupid to let that happen!
Of course, that all depends on IF the thing ever works.
u r pretty well right here, h many tests have been successful for the AB ?
BlackcatI relooked at the photo google posted and it looks like it is very long. So it is possible that there is two plugs, one for the VLS and one for the AIP.
Do u have any other pic of the same model??
anyone have got more from that South African exhibition?
Severe,
is that upfront silos on the Akulas also meant for that better handling of the sub?
BlackcatGarry,
yes sorry, I should have mentioned that , but i think I’ve been writing Bars for Akulas … anyway those who don like Russian names, learn with me ….
Russian SSN Bars (western designation Akula)
Russian SSBN Akula (western designation Typhoon)
(Added later)
as Severovdvinsk noted, The Russian name of the western designated Akula is Shchuka-B and not Bars. But Bars is the name of 1st (or 2nd?) unit of that class and hence getting to be designated as Bars class.
Austin,
I dont think there might be a possiblity for that U-212 or U-214, but then if we are going in for Amurs its for that wider sea-denial capablity and a high speed hunt is off (atleast one can say that) …so maybe smaller U-212 or U214 comes in, but then they too dont have any 30 knots so as to hunt any surface ships or any SSN , so I pretty much dont get their role in IOR as we dont need any inshore hugging fast running hunter whose maximum speed is still below 25 knots.
So we can just go in for Scorpene (but w/o any French Armaments, that has to be made a must!) and standardise it with Klub and other weapons, but I really dont think if Klub finally settle in with IN, if Torpedoes would be a good choice unless its the 650 mm Russian monster, coz the Klub series can do that sub surface hunting at 40+Km so maybe the sub will mostly be filled with an all Klub family? ….. So at that rate IN sub fleet will in future will be having the offesnive weapons in the form of Klub family (sub-surface) and Brahmos
Also another one …… I have market 5 Silos, so that mean 10 Silos for Brahmos???…… but the other one shows or mentions as 8 silos, either I have mistaken it or there is something else
And yes another news being that Prithvi-III naval variant was tested today. The tested missile is reported to be 250Km and is said to have been test fired from a specially build underwater canister!
So I guess things are moving forward for the indian ATV. But not the least impressed with that 250Km! ……. atleast 700Km should be there for any naval version of the ballistic missile Prithvi. But then its that 750Kg thats gonna shake the arse and thats cannot be matched by the cruise missile coz of which I am a supported for thesemissile. But I want the original configuration of Prithvi (1000 Kg warhead) to be developed into SLBM with atleast 700Km.
.
BlackcatHey I never meant for that A or B war. 🙂
But then, A come infront of B in any way u take it 😉 …… I just meant to put that beautiful picture of that family searched for a title and could not get any better one, thats all. 🙂 😎
BlackcatHey I never meant for that A or B war. 🙂
But then, A come infront of B in any way u take it 😉 …… I just meant to put that beautiful picture of that family searched for a title and could not get any better one, thats all. 🙂 😎
BlackcatAustin,
Also how are they going to insert a AIP ( fuell cell) system in to the submarine needs to be seen
Actually I think they had already finished their work on an Amur with an AIP module but could not progress much for lack of funds for building subs and also for that Kristal-E or something named 2nd Generation Electro-Chemical Generators (or what the west call as Fuel Cells) …. now the Amur as a whole did not progres much coz after 90 there was little funds available to develop completely thie 2nd generation AIP, which I think should have got a boost if the Indian political bosses did not went around searching the west and insted had put-in a joint effort to develop with the Russians their AIP, which in all probablity will have been a full TOT with later-on developing their 3rd Generation AIP (which they intend to poull out b4 2010) with nearly 100 days of submerged endurance.
and here a pic of the Amur1650 with AIP module and the module in detail….. and plz note that Amur is also built with different modules and one module is that AIP and for a damn good undewater sea-denial one 2 modules would be needed , yes –
– AIP module &
– Brahmos Amur Complex module
.
BlackcatOh GOD ……. no one Loved the pic or what?? :confused: ……. I though that was the best one i got of Airbus … anyway tks for ur response 🙂
And I thought you where gonna post a photo of all the forums members! I am thoroughly dissappointed at you!
yup would have loved too … but …. 😉
Let me introduce you all to The Worlds Most Popular Family
737-200, 737-300, 737-400, 737-500, 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 and the 737-900
Over 4200 units sold and more still in the air today than the whole A320 family twice over
hey why not take the year from where actually Airbus started and for a specified period ….like we take from 86(?) to 2004 for the A320 family and then for that same period, mean 18 years period for the B737 family…..shall we calculate the numbers?
yeah blackcat is right
but the whole Airbus-fleet is a family too
well i just took a family member of the Airbus large and successful family …. 😀
and u guys are probably lying, I think Sandy also love Airbus 🙂 , but a little shy to put it out oz of u guys ….. 🙂
.
BlackcatOh GOD ……. no one Loved the pic or what?? :confused: ……. I though that was the best one i got of Airbus … anyway tks for ur response 🙂
And I thought you where gonna post a photo of all the forums members! I am thoroughly dissappointed at you!
yup would have loved too … but …. 😉
Let me introduce you all to The Worlds Most Popular Family
737-200, 737-300, 737-400, 737-500, 737-600, 737-700, 737-800 and the 737-900
Over 4200 units sold and more still in the air today than the whole A320 family twice over
hey why not take the year from where actually Airbus started and for a specified period ….like we take from 86(?) to 2004 for the A320 family and then for that same period, mean 18 years period for the B737 family…..shall we calculate the numbers?
yeah blackcat is right
but the whole Airbus-fleet is a family too
well i just took a family member of the Airbus large and successful family …. 😀
and u guys are probably lying, I think Sandy also love Airbus 🙂 , but a little shy to put it out oz of u guys ….. 🙂
.
BlackcatMost certainly, would love to see more technical details of the aircraft(s). It’s quite hard to obtain any real interesting technical stuff on these aircraft…but please, more pictures 🙂
k for u here are some …will post more lateron, as no time now …
——————————————————————
This is for the Tu-204-120 or the version with western avionics and the Rolls Royce Engine
Introduction
The Tu 204-120 is an advanced aircraft design offering important benefits in the single-aisle medium-range 200-seat airliner market and also in cargo/package freight transportation. It incorporates the latest developments in aerodynamics, structural design, fly-by-wire avionics, ergonomic cockpit systems and high reliability engines.
The Tu 204-120 integrates class-leading design, engineering and systems technologies from around the world into an aircraft, which translates into major financial benefits to operators and passengers comfort. The combination of significantly lower acquisition and operating costs will ensure that the Tu 204 provides all of the benefits of established western manufactured aircraft with many additional features and at the same time offers an unbeatable cost per (seat x mile) to airline customers. The Tu 204-120 is the first commercial aircraft to combine fully the best of the East and the best of the West.
3 first Tu 204-120 aircraft (2 passenger and 1 cargo) have been delivered in 1998-1999 to the Egyptian operator Cairo Aviation – “Air Cairo”.
7 more planes are to be delivered in 2000 with target 10-12 aircraft/year in 2001-2003.
An “English cockpit” version of aircraft will be certified in 2000 year with full set of operation manuals in English.
Tu 204-120 An advanced aircraft from a proven family
– over 3000 Tupolev aircraft designed and manufactured
– 1000 Tupolev aircraft in operation today
– operators in more than 30 countries
– Tu 204-120 is the first Tupolev aircraft to be available with western engines and avionics, English language cockpit and operational manuals
– Tu 204 aircraft is aimed to substitute an ageing Tu 154M aircraft In a family of Russian modern twin-engine middle-range Tu-204-120 aircraft successfully incorporate advanced achievements in Russian and foreign aerospace technology, experience of the company’s highly qualified specialists in production of reliable and the best in Russia aeronautical engineering. Having high fuel efficiency and high level of comfort as well as low price compared with foreign analogues Tu 204-120 aircraft is quite competitive and the most cost-effective airliner for air lines with a range of up to 6800 km. Tu 204-120/120C aircraft are certified by AR IAC of the Russian Federation and meet international noise level and toxic emission requirements.
Tu 204-120. Aircraft characteristics
In today’s highly competitive airline markets, maximum operational effectiveness of an airline can only be ensured by the selection of equipment, which is both reliable and highly flexible in its operational capabilities. The Tu 204-120 meets both of these requirements. The aircraft is designed to comply with both Russian and Western certification standards for transport category airplanes (NLGS-3, AP-25/JAR-25/FAR-25). Noise and emissions levels are below the respective ICAO limits of Annex 16, Volume 1 Chapter 3 and Annex 16, volume 2. The cockpit design allows the utilization of a three man crew. Fully English language cockpit and operation manuals in English will be available starting from January, 2001.The Tu 204 fly-by-wire system reduces crew workload and maximizes the aircraft’s operational capabilities including provision for automatic navigation by optimum routings at all flight stages from take-off to landing. The 43,000lb thrust RB211-535E4B engines has a proven track record of minimum operational disruption with over 11 million hours of commercial operation. More than 800 engines are currently in service with over 45 operators around the world. The aircraft interiors are designed and manufactured to the latest international standards of comfort and safety.
Following western-made equipment is installed on aircraft:
– Electrical system of “Sundstrand” (USA) firm;
– Hydraulic pumps of “Vikkers” firm;
– Engine bleed-off system of “Allied Signal” (USA) firm;
– Inertial navigation system of “Honeywell” (USA) firm;
– engine vibrationcontrol system of “Vibrometer” (Switzerland) firm;
– Lloading/unloading equipment for cargo plane of “Ancra” (USA) firm;
– Interiors of “Sogerma” (France) firm and Gillfab (U.K.) firm materials;
– Other components and units (HAMILTON STANDARD, SCHNELLER/BUDERUS SELL, B. F. GOODRICH, AMPEX, PRESSURE SCIENCE, ROHR CORPORATION).
The Tu 204-120 has an impressive lift/drag ratio of 17.5. Its moderately swept supercritical wing and winglets are optimized for high cruise efficiency.
Short field performance is enhanced by powerful high-lift, double-slotted flaps and slats across the entire wing-span together with automatic ground spoilers.
Cruise efficiency is further enhanced by the capability of adjusting the aircraft center of gravity position by up to 10% of MAC without resorting to drag-inducing aerodynamic trimming. Up to 2820 liters (745 US gallons) of fuel can be transferred between the main wing fuel tanks and the third tank built into the vertical stabilizer. This can be carried out in-flight allowing the aircraft center of gravity to be optimized throughout flight.
The aircraft’s triple fly-by-wire systems have independent manual reversion. An advanced ergonomic cockpit layout ensures low crew fatigue.
Advanced composite materials are used throughout the secondary structure with the aim of minimizing weight.
The high by-pass ratio Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B power plants are the most reliable engines in the world and have achieved a record time on wing of over 26,000 hours or 6.5 years between overhauls. This reliability makes a major contribution to reducing the cost of operation; the -535 has the lowest combined fuel/maintenance cost of any engine in its class, an advantage extensively demonstrated in over 11 million flying hours on over 350 aircraft, worldwide.
Allied Signal carbon brakes are installed to ensure maximum payload capability and lower maintenance costs. The braking system has two independent main and alternate channels operating independent groups of brake cylinders. Both channels have standby electronic control units and electro-hydraulic units.
Switching from one to the other is automatic. The braking system has full anti-skid sensors and control parameters. Wheel rotation is decelerated prior to the gear being retracted. For ground maneuvering a nose wheel steering system allows up to 70 degrees of swing when controlled by the steering tiller and has two independent control circuits with self contained electrical and hydraulic systems.
Tu 204-120. Design features
– Fuselage skin panels. Strengthened stringers (aluminum-lithium). Advanced lightweight structural materials. High surface smoothness.
– 6-ft winglet (composite)
– Conventional 46 m length fuselage. New state-off-the-art interiors
– Fin 2820 liters fuel tank. Auto C.G. management using fuel transfer
– Broad use of composite structure: Rudder Elevator Wing parts
– APU choice
– Oval body cross section Width=149.5 in (3.8 m) Height=161.4 in (4.1 m)
– Variable incidence horizontal tail
– Container under-floor capacity
– Most advanced wing design with 28 sweep and 42 m / 137.8 ft wing span with winglets
– Full span leading edge stats
– Engines RB211-535E4B
– Fly-by-wire nose gear steering
– Glass cockpit (dark environment) FMS, EFIS, EICAS, Cat IIIA VOR, DME, INS fly-by-wire FC (triplex analogue backup)
– Combination of Russian and Western made avionics
– Advanced 3 man crew flight deck
Tu 204-120. General arrangement
Composite materials in aircraft frame
Composite materials account for over 18% of the aircraft weight giving operator benefits not just in reduced operational empty weight (OEW) but also in terms of increased structural and mechanical efficiency and reduced maintenance burden.
Composite materials are primarily used in the wing trailing edge control surfaces and high lift devices together with leading and trailing edge sections and control surfaces in the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. The carbon, glass and organic reinforced plastics used in these areas ensure maximum corrosion resistance. The reduced number of fasteners and joints compared with similar metal units reduce the time taken for line maintenance inspection.
Extensive use of carbon, glass and organic reinforced plastic structures results in major operator benefits.
Operator benefits
– reduced weight
– higher structural integrity
– reduced maintenance burden
Tu 204. Trim Tank System
The Tu 204-120 has a third fuel tank within the vertical stabilizer. This 2820 liter (745 US gallon) tank has the dual benefit of offering both additional range capability and center of gravity (CG) optimization. Fuel may be transferred fore or aft during flight to maintain proper pitch trim without incurring the additional aerodynamic drag associated with conventional aerodynamic surface trimmers.
In the event of a main pump failure, fuel can still be transferred from the vertical stabilizer trim tank by a standby pump. An integrated fuel management system provides information on fuelling, total fuel, fuel flow, fuel transfer and CG position and automatically controls fuel transfer.
CG optimized by use of2820 liter (745 US gall) fuel tank in vertical stabilizer.
Corrosion prevention
– Condensation drain system in fuselage belly incorporating improved heat insulation scheme
– Extensive wet fastener installation; Foam sealed airframe components
– Enameled features below passenger floor for hydraulic fluid resistance
– Exposed structures treated with corrosion-inhibiting compounds
– Fuel tanks feature internal protective coatings
The aircraft structure is composed of modern composite materials and lightweight constructional metal alloys such as aluminum-lithium and titanium. In addition to their mechanical property advantages, these materials also give significantly improved corrosion resistance. To further enhance corrosion resistance heat and sound insulation systems have been tailored to reduce condensation build-up and channel moisture to drain valves provided in the bottom of the pressurized cabin section. Fasteners in key areas are assembled wet and exposed structures are treated with corrosion inhibiting compounds.
Flight safety
– Outstanding reliability and multiplexing of airplane vital systems
– Non-inflammable, non-toxic, smoke-inhibiting materials in interior
– Individual passenger oxygen masks
– Flight crew smoke masks
– Fire-extinguishing system in baggage compartments and engines
– Emergency escape provisions
Payload Vs Range
Tu 204-120. Takeoff noise
The Payload Vs Range graph and the noise of Tu-204 is given below
.
BlackcatMost certainly, would love to see more technical details of the aircraft(s). It’s quite hard to obtain any real interesting technical stuff on these aircraft…but please, more pictures 🙂
k for u here are some …will post more lateron, as no time now …
——————————————————————
This is for the Tu-204-120 or the version with western avionics and the Rolls Royce Engine
Introduction
The Tu 204-120 is an advanced aircraft design offering important benefits in the single-aisle medium-range 200-seat airliner market and also in cargo/package freight transportation. It incorporates the latest developments in aerodynamics, structural design, fly-by-wire avionics, ergonomic cockpit systems and high reliability engines.
The Tu 204-120 integrates class-leading design, engineering and systems technologies from around the world into an aircraft, which translates into major financial benefits to operators and passengers comfort. The combination of significantly lower acquisition and operating costs will ensure that the Tu 204 provides all of the benefits of established western manufactured aircraft with many additional features and at the same time offers an unbeatable cost per (seat x mile) to airline customers. The Tu 204-120 is the first commercial aircraft to combine fully the best of the East and the best of the West.
3 first Tu 204-120 aircraft (2 passenger and 1 cargo) have been delivered in 1998-1999 to the Egyptian operator Cairo Aviation – “Air Cairo”.
7 more planes are to be delivered in 2000 with target 10-12 aircraft/year in 2001-2003.
An “English cockpit” version of aircraft will be certified in 2000 year with full set of operation manuals in English.
Tu 204-120 An advanced aircraft from a proven family
– over 3000 Tupolev aircraft designed and manufactured
– 1000 Tupolev aircraft in operation today
– operators in more than 30 countries
– Tu 204-120 is the first Tupolev aircraft to be available with western engines and avionics, English language cockpit and operational manuals
– Tu 204 aircraft is aimed to substitute an ageing Tu 154M aircraft In a family of Russian modern twin-engine middle-range Tu-204-120 aircraft successfully incorporate advanced achievements in Russian and foreign aerospace technology, experience of the company’s highly qualified specialists in production of reliable and the best in Russia aeronautical engineering. Having high fuel efficiency and high level of comfort as well as low price compared with foreign analogues Tu 204-120 aircraft is quite competitive and the most cost-effective airliner for air lines with a range of up to 6800 km. Tu 204-120/120C aircraft are certified by AR IAC of the Russian Federation and meet international noise level and toxic emission requirements.
Tu 204-120. Aircraft characteristics
In today’s highly competitive airline markets, maximum operational effectiveness of an airline can only be ensured by the selection of equipment, which is both reliable and highly flexible in its operational capabilities. The Tu 204-120 meets both of these requirements. The aircraft is designed to comply with both Russian and Western certification standards for transport category airplanes (NLGS-3, AP-25/JAR-25/FAR-25). Noise and emissions levels are below the respective ICAO limits of Annex 16, Volume 1 Chapter 3 and Annex 16, volume 2. The cockpit design allows the utilization of a three man crew. Fully English language cockpit and operation manuals in English will be available starting from January, 2001.The Tu 204 fly-by-wire system reduces crew workload and maximizes the aircraft’s operational capabilities including provision for automatic navigation by optimum routings at all flight stages from take-off to landing. The 43,000lb thrust RB211-535E4B engines has a proven track record of minimum operational disruption with over 11 million hours of commercial operation. More than 800 engines are currently in service with over 45 operators around the world. The aircraft interiors are designed and manufactured to the latest international standards of comfort and safety.
Following western-made equipment is installed on aircraft:
– Electrical system of “Sundstrand” (USA) firm;
– Hydraulic pumps of “Vikkers” firm;
– Engine bleed-off system of “Allied Signal” (USA) firm;
– Inertial navigation system of “Honeywell” (USA) firm;
– engine vibrationcontrol system of “Vibrometer” (Switzerland) firm;
– Lloading/unloading equipment for cargo plane of “Ancra” (USA) firm;
– Interiors of “Sogerma” (France) firm and Gillfab (U.K.) firm materials;
– Other components and units (HAMILTON STANDARD, SCHNELLER/BUDERUS SELL, B. F. GOODRICH, AMPEX, PRESSURE SCIENCE, ROHR CORPORATION).
The Tu 204-120 has an impressive lift/drag ratio of 17.5. Its moderately swept supercritical wing and winglets are optimized for high cruise efficiency.
Short field performance is enhanced by powerful high-lift, double-slotted flaps and slats across the entire wing-span together with automatic ground spoilers.
Cruise efficiency is further enhanced by the capability of adjusting the aircraft center of gravity position by up to 10% of MAC without resorting to drag-inducing aerodynamic trimming. Up to 2820 liters (745 US gallons) of fuel can be transferred between the main wing fuel tanks and the third tank built into the vertical stabilizer. This can be carried out in-flight allowing the aircraft center of gravity to be optimized throughout flight.
The aircraft’s triple fly-by-wire systems have independent manual reversion. An advanced ergonomic cockpit layout ensures low crew fatigue.
Advanced composite materials are used throughout the secondary structure with the aim of minimizing weight.
The high by-pass ratio Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B power plants are the most reliable engines in the world and have achieved a record time on wing of over 26,000 hours or 6.5 years between overhauls. This reliability makes a major contribution to reducing the cost of operation; the -535 has the lowest combined fuel/maintenance cost of any engine in its class, an advantage extensively demonstrated in over 11 million flying hours on over 350 aircraft, worldwide.
Allied Signal carbon brakes are installed to ensure maximum payload capability and lower maintenance costs. The braking system has two independent main and alternate channels operating independent groups of brake cylinders. Both channels have standby electronic control units and electro-hydraulic units.
Switching from one to the other is automatic. The braking system has full anti-skid sensors and control parameters. Wheel rotation is decelerated prior to the gear being retracted. For ground maneuvering a nose wheel steering system allows up to 70 degrees of swing when controlled by the steering tiller and has two independent control circuits with self contained electrical and hydraulic systems.
Tu 204-120. Design features
– Fuselage skin panels. Strengthened stringers (aluminum-lithium). Advanced lightweight structural materials. High surface smoothness.
– 6-ft winglet (composite)
– Conventional 46 m length fuselage. New state-off-the-art interiors
– Fin 2820 liters fuel tank. Auto C.G. management using fuel transfer
– Broad use of composite structure: Rudder Elevator Wing parts
– APU choice
– Oval body cross section Width=149.5 in (3.8 m) Height=161.4 in (4.1 m)
– Variable incidence horizontal tail
– Container under-floor capacity
– Most advanced wing design with 28 sweep and 42 m / 137.8 ft wing span with winglets
– Full span leading edge stats
– Engines RB211-535E4B
– Fly-by-wire nose gear steering
– Glass cockpit (dark environment) FMS, EFIS, EICAS, Cat IIIA VOR, DME, INS fly-by-wire FC (triplex analogue backup)
– Combination of Russian and Western made avionics
– Advanced 3 man crew flight deck
Tu 204-120. General arrangement
Composite materials in aircraft frame
Composite materials account for over 18% of the aircraft weight giving operator benefits not just in reduced operational empty weight (OEW) but also in terms of increased structural and mechanical efficiency and reduced maintenance burden.
Composite materials are primarily used in the wing trailing edge control surfaces and high lift devices together with leading and trailing edge sections and control surfaces in the vertical and horizontal stabilizers. The carbon, glass and organic reinforced plastics used in these areas ensure maximum corrosion resistance. The reduced number of fasteners and joints compared with similar metal units reduce the time taken for line maintenance inspection.
Extensive use of carbon, glass and organic reinforced plastic structures results in major operator benefits.
Operator benefits
– reduced weight
– higher structural integrity
– reduced maintenance burden
Tu 204. Trim Tank System
The Tu 204-120 has a third fuel tank within the vertical stabilizer. This 2820 liter (745 US gallon) tank has the dual benefit of offering both additional range capability and center of gravity (CG) optimization. Fuel may be transferred fore or aft during flight to maintain proper pitch trim without incurring the additional aerodynamic drag associated with conventional aerodynamic surface trimmers.
In the event of a main pump failure, fuel can still be transferred from the vertical stabilizer trim tank by a standby pump. An integrated fuel management system provides information on fuelling, total fuel, fuel flow, fuel transfer and CG position and automatically controls fuel transfer.
CG optimized by use of2820 liter (745 US gall) fuel tank in vertical stabilizer.
Corrosion prevention
– Condensation drain system in fuselage belly incorporating improved heat insulation scheme
– Extensive wet fastener installation; Foam sealed airframe components
– Enameled features below passenger floor for hydraulic fluid resistance
– Exposed structures treated with corrosion-inhibiting compounds
– Fuel tanks feature internal protective coatings
The aircraft structure is composed of modern composite materials and lightweight constructional metal alloys such as aluminum-lithium and titanium. In addition to their mechanical property advantages, these materials also give significantly improved corrosion resistance. To further enhance corrosion resistance heat and sound insulation systems have been tailored to reduce condensation build-up and channel moisture to drain valves provided in the bottom of the pressurized cabin section. Fasteners in key areas are assembled wet and exposed structures are treated with corrosion inhibiting compounds.
Flight safety
– Outstanding reliability and multiplexing of airplane vital systems
– Non-inflammable, non-toxic, smoke-inhibiting materials in interior
– Individual passenger oxygen masks
– Flight crew smoke masks
– Fire-extinguishing system in baggage compartments and engines
– Emergency escape provisions
Payload Vs Range
Tu 204-120. Takeoff noise
The Payload Vs Range graph and the noise of Tu-204 is given below
.
Blackcatand u most probably hate most western truth also …. nice
BlackcatNow a reason for the delay in the building of Amurs can also be attributed to this development (or speculation , as u can say) as PJ-10 was intended as a weapon platform for tri-services which included its launch platform from Sea, Air and land, but a point which was not noted was the sub-surface launch of the same. And the platform which could host India’s first sub-sea launched Brahmos PJ-10 could be ….. this Amur (?), which still is in its development stage.
This will quickly fill in a void with its firepower before the ATV come in – but Bars will be entering earlier than Amur, if its on its way – Russia had earlier too made very customised and even a fully new platform (An-32) for Indian Defence services, so this won’t be a surprise on that front. But surely could be one, if the displayed one is actually the one intended, as that seldom got any real attention.
This could also mean a sub-sea launch of the PJ-10 would be there before Bars set sail from the top of the world and Amur before it get into service.
here are some more pic, a close up of the above and the silo hatches of the Akulas in the opened position. The second one will give u a good measure of its size.
.
Blackcatk let me repost it as to the Amur thread …. hope u guys dont mind.ty
—————————————–
Now let me also get this one over here which I think, I had missed on earlier occations. So though y not post it here now again my renewed intrest for the Brahmos Amur Complex has given me this , and Victor, do u got any other pic of that model?
But if I’m not wrong, I think what i found out was that, during DefExpo’04 Rubin did display their new Amur or say the Brahmos Amur Complex! …… and that largely went unnoticed???
below are some pictures – two from Harry’s collection and the other one that of Rupak’s (if I am not wrong) collection when he put up his collection on some temp site during the days when DefExpo’04’ was going on.
the first thing that I always had circling my mind has been the incompatiblity of that Amur 950 and Amur 1650 to what I had in my mind to the size and shape of the two members of the Amur family. But it had to make a force landing as Harry reported it as Amur 950 and Amur 1650 which I guess was in tune with what was displayed over there. And I guess Harry, I had asked u if u had any better close-up pictures of that Amur model (and Gorshkov), earlier too. But plzzz this time check again if u got any other pictures of the Amur model —- though a preferrable one would have been be a bit more topper view.
If u guys check out the models namey the displayed 950 and 1650, then it (atleast for me) don’t match up to whatever figures I’ve got for these two. With the one mentioned as 950 not even close to the 950 (from my POV). Also from the two pictures, the one that Rupak (?) took did not have the placard ‘Amur 950’ placed in front of it, which I think is a modified Amur 1650. Where as the later-on (?) pictures of that model show that Placard, naturally binding that model firmly as Amur 950 in which, we as of now did had no great intrest. Now was that intended for misleading or say to make it stay from pyring eyes w/o actually putting cover??? ……. was it a managed affair or someone misplaced it ??? ….. well I don’t know, Hope Harry and others would be able to throw some light over his (if any) discussion with the guys at the Rubin’s Stall. Now was there a reason for Rubin to display the Amur950 when the Indian Navy’s clear definition for sea-denial meant a real capable SSK??? ….. well i guess not, untill and unless Indian Navy had any immediate needs for smaller subs meant for the role thats intended for Amur 950.
In the said Amur 950, which I think is a modified Amur 1650 ….
– u can see some ‘hump’ which has been given a good smoothing finish for keeping the hydrodynamics to the best.
– u can also see somewhat top-to-bottom cylindrically shaped ‘vaccum’ , 5 of them, in-line.
– u can also see a hatch opened right on top of one of that silo or Silo number 4 as I’ve designated it for ease.
Now my speculation of that model being a modified Amur 1650 is also based on these things, coz the cylindrically shaped top-to-bottom affair has not been seen on any earlier figures, but don’t know if 950 is said to have any such thing. The hump on its back if considered to be a meter high would make the PJ-10 with its 9m length fit in very well considering that the height of the Hull is 8.2 meters for Amur1650. But if this actually is a modified Amur1650, then it could well be having 10 Silos in 2 rows with a meter and more (?) to spare between these rows for passage. Also the hatch that can be seen opened directly above and in line with one of the speculated silo does not seem like a regular rescue one. But it looks more like the missile silo hatch with a rectangular outside and a circular shell attached from the bottom …….
now thats what I felt like from my observations and is bound to be terribly wrong, if someone can throw more light on what I feel is a modified Amur 1650. Or it could also be truly the Amur-950 with 5 VL silo, but then with a hull height of 6.4m , accomodating PJ-10 class or the Klub-class would need nearly 3 m hump on its back, which is not the case here.
So I’d like to take my view of it being actually a modified Amur1650 with VL silos, which intentionally slipped-off the media during the expo, untill somone put more info on that model and put to rest what I believe as to what it is.
below pictures of –
the std Amur-1650;
Sectional drawing from Rubin’s site for that very closer view;
amur model which I believe is actually an Amur-1650 with Brahmos complex;
Project-750 hope its Amur 750.
.
Blackcatwhat to do with this thread??
Google can u combine this to the other thread and merge it with the other one and rename it to something like —- Amur with Brahmos Complex …. or any suitable one?
the new one started by u
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=33666
BlackcatIndian,
the below happened after EU officially told india in spring this
year that access to mil-std signal would not be permitted. I have
heard nothing about india’s proposed $300 mil investment in galileo after that! or of china’s $250 mil (though they might still stick around in the hope their electronic cos get to make some galileo receivers)http://t2wesa.r3h.net/SPECIALS/ESA_…CU0W4QWD_0.html
18 July 2004
India and Russia on July 18 signed a protocol to boost co-operation in space including joint development of the GLONASS navigation system and launching Russian GLONASS spacecraft by Indian rockets.The protocol signed by Anatoly Perminov of the Russian Federal Space Agency and ISRO Chairman Gopalan Madhavan Nair also provides for the joint projects in space exploration.
and thats the best thing to happen ….. yes both – the advocates got dumped and also India is now goin with Russia ….
those idiots who have been drooling abt their new found western daddies got dumped …. I hope each and every project rcieves that same response. I’d be pretty happy.
I feel really pity as to the way the leader snd mindset change when see dollars, real pity … any Indian with a bit of forward thinking and national intrest in mind would have collaborated with the Russians earlier and not after getting dumped by the west …. and also there is another thing waiting, which India should not miss ….
and here is a stat of the Number of Satellites that each nations have sent up…… note that the Russian launch of satellites have not decreased very much after the 90’s and indeed have been greater than the US satellites during the last decade ….
.
Sign In
