dark light

a89

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 349 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Pakistan Air Force #2212023
    a89
    Participant

    Great article by Air Commodore Abdus Sattar Alvi and his experiance flying against the Israelis in 1973

    Very interesting Mountain, thanks for sharing!

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2015 #2213595
    a89
    Participant

    AFAIK, the BARS-29 never flew on the MiG so someone would have to pay for integration first. Could be wrong, though..

    Good point, I don’t think it was ever mounted/certified. I have been looking for information and it seems that it was proposed to India as part of the MRCA tender.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/mig-confident-of-win-in-indian-fighter-contest-203253/

    Later an Zhuk AESA model was presented.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2015 #2213788
    a89
    Participant

    LIMA: Malaysian firm proposes MiG-29 upgrade

    There a couple of interesting things about the upgrade. Is the extra fuel tank conformal? As far as I understand conformal tanks can be removed on the ground, but that extra tank in the back of the cockpit looks fixed to me. The article then states:

    In addition, the aircraft would have greater commonality with Malaysia’s fleet of Su-30MKMs. The work would be done in Malaysia under licence from RAC MiG.

    Su-30MKM are based on Su-30MKI, which will undergo a deep modernization soon. Is this really an advantage if we consider Su-30MKM was designed and introduced a decade ago?

    Years ago Tikhomirov developed BARS-29 for MiG-29. This model was based on the N001M BARS used by Su-30MKI, but did not find any clients. Indian MiG-29K were sold with Zhuk models, and the same with SMT. Was there a possibility for India to acquire Mig-29k with BARS-29 for logistics reasons? Or there were other reasons. At the end of the day, Tikhomirov had large contracts to fullfill and Phazotron did not get as many…

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 14 #2215680
    a89
    Participant

    Su-25SM3 continues to tease. Plus now they is the rumored Gefest&T cheap modernization of the Su-25, though it is unclear if VVS is buying it or if it is a band-aid project for the Iraqis.

    Are you sure it is a SM3 and not a test platform? A video posted in russiadefence show UB samples being repaired and upgraded.

    in reply to: Which is tougher A10 or Su-25 (genuine question)? #2219099
    a89
    Participant

    Ukraine’s Su-25s were obsolete, as most have no been upgraded since the 80s. Also, the upgraded ones do not have new RWR/ECM thus no real improvement. If 1980s Su-25s would be replaced by 1980s A-10 the result is likely to be the same.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 14 #2219914
    a89
    Participant

    I was under the impression they were just going to grab the extra Polet airframes, but there has been talk of new airframes since apparently.
    Weird since Il-96 was for all intents and purposes declared a “dead” project, past the fitting out of several special purpose airframes.

    Maybe they are going to complete some unfinished frames. According to Russianplanes.net there are 4 still to be completed.

    in reply to: How would you re-build the Argentinian military aviation? #2221821
    a89
    Participant

    Argentina would need to get a certain number of F-16 to pose a threat to the Falklands. Ideally, it should be a modern variant like Block 60 (AESA radar, AN/ALQ-165 Self-Protection Jammer…).

    Apart from F-16, are there ex-US Navy F-18C/D available for sale? A large number has been retired in recent years and replaced with Super Hornet. Range is not as good as F-16 but is a modern fighter-bomber.

    in reply to: should USAF stuck to F-14 over the F-15? #2221980
    a89
    Participant

    you are right, but also some other airforces did evaluate both for the same role. Iran and Japanese

    Iran wanted the long range capability of the Phoenix. What about Japan? Israel also evaluated both but chose the Eagle. The F-14 was optimised as an interceptor with focus on BVR*. One of the Israeli test pilots found the F-14 controls heavy, and the sensitive engines meant that the jet could not be flown as aggressively as they used to do. The Eagle was seen as a superior platform for air-superiority role.

    Any details on Japan evaluation?

    * It struggled against TA-4 in WVR.

    a89
    Participant

    Well, IMHO, none: After Su-27s F-15s made their BVR duel in the fight for air superiory, F-16s were to encounter escorting Su-27s along with Su-24s, Su-25s, MiG-29s were to encounter escorting F-15s along with F-111s and A-10s.

    I thought most of the Soviet Su-27 operated in PVO units…

    in reply to: How would you re-build the Argentinian military aviation? #2223928
    a89
    Participant

    If Argentina were to get Kfir Block 60 with AESA radar. How would it affect military balance with RAF based aircraft? RAF has 4 EF-2000 supported by radar/EW facilities in Mount Pleasant.

    a89
    Participant

    When launch conditions are met, a voice signal and HUD sign simply tells the pilot to launch his missile. Usability is debatable, but such deep navigation features are still not present on any variant of any western aircraft.

    NATO operates Link-16 with a similar purpose.

    German MiG-29Gs had their datalinks removed and were operating MiG-29 on -backup- TACAN based navigation.

    So MiG-29 uses datalink as main navigation tool? From what I understand it uses an inertial navigation system. Did export Fulcrum used it as well?

    Also nice to see steryotypes about Soviet pilots having no autonomy are repeated as fact. lol.

    HTR1, can you expand a bit more on this?

    in reply to: Did the Luftwaffe make the right choice with the F-104? #2226623
    a89
    Participant

    Hartmann, who flew the Six, said if Germany could have afforded it, they would have bought it.

    Do you have more details on Hartmann testing? F-104 affair caused his retreat from the Luftwaffe, as he opposed F-104 acquisition. I am sure this caused a lot of friction with other former Luftwaffe aces, but I have not found anything.

    in reply to: MiG-21 upgrades versus F-5 upgrades #2226654
    a89
    Participant

    In terms of raw performance and avionics I would think both aircraft are comparable. Most recent upgrades for both date from early 2000/late 90s. Maybe MiG-21 could have an advantage in BVR due to R-77 and higher speed. F-5 has a clear advantage in range though.

    I would choose depending on access to spare parts. Croatia has been struggling to overhaul MiG-21s.

    in reply to: Did the Luftwaffe make the right choice with the F-104? #2228889
    a89
    Participant

    Initially Germany was going to acquire F-11F Super Tiger, but some pilots still preferred the F-104. Steinhoff, who was head of requirements section of the Luftwaffe decided for the F-104. The Super Tiger he tested had an issue with the afterburner, preventing higher speeds than M1.3. Grumman tried to invite him to try again the aircraft but the choice had been made.

    The F11-F did not have the raw performance of F-104, but was much safer to fly. Maybe it would have been a better choice.

    in reply to: The AESA radar retrofit market #2232149
    a89
    Participant

    How would an upgraded AESA F-15 compare with a current EF-2000 (mechanical radar)? The American fighter has obtained a few contracts in recent years, beating more modern airframes. I think it’s combination of range, performance, avionics and weapons is still hard to beat.

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 349 total)