dark light

a89

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 349 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 14 #2237301
    a89
    Participant

    According to previous news, a total of 11 Il-96 are planned for VVS:

    http://lenta.ru/news/2014/05/16/il96/

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2249328
    a89
    Participant

    Upgrade should lower exploitation cost, but performance won’t be any different without the PS-90s. I am dissapoint.

    Maybe PS-90 production is not enough? At the end of the day it is used in several aircraft, even if the others are not produced in such numbers (Tu-204SM).

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXIV #2249752
    a89
    Participant

    Sensor and Data Fusion is an area where the US has traditionally maintained a lead over Russia.

    Networking is one of those ares that i have been looking for information. Is there a Russian equivalent to the Link-16?

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2252691
    a89
    Participant

    Tu-160s will get modernized NK-32s starting in 2016.

    Do we know the characteristics of the modernization?

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2254961
    a89
    Participant

    I am sure M program feeded into BM program; but that is not the same as saying BM is based on M. Because it isn’t. M was much more advanced and very different from B or BM.

    Which is what I meant.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2255292
    a89
    Participant

    No it wasn’t.

    The current update does not have any air to ground weapons capability included.

    I am talking about early one (1999). If you check Yefim Gordon’s book on MiG-31 you can find information on this modernization.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2255413
    a89
    Participant

    The BM modification then is not the BM modification it is now.

    There are quite a few details on the first BM modernization, which was based on the MiG-31M. Russkaya Avionika installed 3 MFI-68 screens for the WO and 1 for the pilot. radar was upgraded to Zaslon-M standard and new missiles were integrated (R-77, Kh-25, Kh-59, Kh-31, KAB-1500, KAB-500). What about the current one?

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2255596
    a89
    Participant

    Or a new modernization for that matter. Interviews with NIIP has suggest there is a second stage modernization for Zaslon. Also, R-37M needs to becomes operational already dammit.

    I am not surprised because Mig-31BM first flight was back in 1999. I assume other components (MFD) will be changed as well.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2256264
    a89
    Participant

    I will post these question here to avoid opening another topic.

    According to this article (in Russian, use google translate) Indian MiG-29 were originally for Eastern Europe clients. Is this correct? I have never read anything like this because India was MiG-29’s first foreign operator. Orders were placed very early, first contract was signed on february 1984. Several more followed during the 80s and early 90s.

    http://lenta.ru/articles/2014/11/17/export/

    East Germany had ordered a second MiG-29 batch in the late 80s, but was never delivered. Other Eastern European countries were supposed to buy more. Yugoslavia was expected to get another 28.

    Did the Soviet Union/India signed a contract regarding these specific aircraft or it was the Soviets altering production schedule/priority?

    It would not be the first time it happens either. MAPO-MiG inherited a large number of MiG-29 destined to Soviet VVS and Iraq. In the 90s and 00s they were sold to other countries (Algeria -later Russia-, Yemen, Bangladesh…).

    According to an article written (Airforces Monthly 9/14) by Alexander Mladenov, training centre at Astrakhan uses MiG-29 9.12A export varians. Where did these come from? In 1992 Russia inherited over 400 MiG-29, there is no reason to resort to export variants…

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2256805
    a89
    Participant

    Aircraft family “Ermak” will develop by 2016

    Is this project the same as PAK-TA? Also, Ilyushin had some designs that matched very well the characteristics of this project: Il-106 with 80 ton payload.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2263372
    a89
    Participant

    Russia has begun testing a new NK-32 engine. It was used in Tu-144L and 160 but was removed from production in the 90s. As it has been selected for new PAK-DA, it has been put back into production. When first announced, some doubted the capability still existed, but progress has been quick since then. Two things I find interesting:

    – What are the changes introduced to these new types. Electronics, materials and other components can be improved as base engine is +20 years now.
    – PAK-DA is supposed to be subsonic. Why the choice of the engine? It is the most powerful military engine but there are civilian types which could be used. Maybe it is due to dimensions. GE90 is twice as powerful but diameter is also twice as large,

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/russia-tests-engine-for-new-bomber-405805/

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXIV #2211537
    a89
    Participant

    I am puzzled though, isn’t R-27 a lower performing missile compared to the R-77? Why was it not inducted into service?

    Economical crisis prevented acquisition or/and modernisation of aircraft to allow use. In year 2000 there was a handful of Su-27/MiG-29 that could use them*. I don’t think I have ever seen a VVS aircraft on exercises with R-77.

    * Upgraded Su-27 and some late MiG-29.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2215284
    a89
    Participant

    Nice … besides that are there already any orders for that type, especially from the Russian military or will they rely on the modernized Mi-8/-17 series since they are cheaper ??? … and what about the so called Mi-38-3 ?

    I wonder the same. Does the difference in performance between Mi-171A2 and Mi-38 justify the cost of the tooling and production? The helicopter has been on development for years and no customer has signed any contract.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 13 #2216557
    a89
    Participant

    Not true at all.

    So what do you think were the reasons? Cancelled Chinese licence production was for Su-27SK, not Su-30 versions.

    in reply to: New AN-124 in Russia #2216844
    a89
    Participant

    Both projects are now dead. An-124 is less of a problem because the Russian Air Force still has a few samples stored. There is a plan to bring these back to service*.

    Il-76MD-90A can replace An-70 in most situations, but fuselage diameter is lower, thus 35% of vehicles tipically used by a division don’t fit. I wonder if Ilyushing will develop some designs that were supposed to replace Il-76 (Il-106). A few months ago it was mentioned that funding had been received for a 80 ton payload aircraft.

    * Actually, there are more in reserve than flying. According to http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-124 the ratio is 8 flying to 16 in storage.

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 349 total)