dark light

Y-20 Bacon

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 721 through 735 (of 1,779 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: If you could only choose one Flanker type.. #2168040
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Guess I should be more precise. I’d want the structural improvements and some of the new electronics of the Su-35S in a twinseater.

    The MKI is from the Irkut line of Flankers, with canards and the heavier front end.

    sounds like what you want is the former Su-35UB?
    http://static.laodong.com.vn/uploaded/phamthuhien/2015_07_27/sukhoi%20%289%29_nzqx.jpg
    http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-35_su-27m/gallery/su-35ub_2.jpg

    I believe its a Knaapo bird.
    not sure if its based on the old Su-35 or the Su-30MKK or related to the Su-35S

    in reply to: If you could only choose one Flanker type.. #2168407
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    If I’m a poor dictator: new built MiG-29 SMT
    If I’m a rich dictator: Let KnAAPO pimp a Su-30MK with Su-35 tech. Call it the Su-30MKPimp

    isnt that pretty much the indian Su-30MKI upgrade?

    in reply to: Tornado F3 vs F14s from an RAF pilot #2168428
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    I have heard that before about the F-14, I didn’t know that they had the F-15 in mind.
    I’m a Tonka fan so I’m glad we had the F3.

    I posted a link in another thread from a book that talked about the selection process. F-14 and F-15 were the only US types considered. F-15 seemed to beat out the 14 in performance requirements.

    ironically another ADV user, Saudi Arabia, ended up replacing it with the F-15 in the air intercetion role

    in reply to: T50IQ – Iraq's new trainer / light fighter #2168787
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Should have posted this here.
    http://i.imgur.com/a4jaZYK.jpg

    got any more pics? glad they decided to not use that boring ass scheme the Koreans use

    in reply to: Tornado F3 vs F14s from an RAF pilot #2168790
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    so basically

    pilot said

    If F-14s were allowed to use the phoenix, we’d be wasted
    4-5 different merging scenarios, Tornadoes attempted a hit and run tactic, Hawks kept nibbling on the heels of the 18s and 14s, Brits win completely
    pilot wouldn’t want to do the jobs of carrier pilots

    end of story.

    nice stuff. its worth noting the RAF heavily considered the F-15 and F-14 to meet their interceptor needs against soviet bombers before settling on an inhouse design.

    in reply to: J-11D or Su-35 for Pakistan #2172273
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Sorry guys … and even if in a few minutues I will surely get my punishment !

    Why keeping on these stupid questions ? (it’s like Nepal buying a Klingon Bird of Prey, what’s better to defend ?)

    China will never, never sell the J-11D nor any other J-11-version to Pakistan. That’s a fact and even if there are surely different opinions on wheather CHina illegally copied the Flanker or simply added own parts besides a Russian non-agreement (but then still payed for them). they will strictly obey the contract in non-exporting an Flanker.

    Even more the J-11D is so far the flag-ship of China’s Flanker-development and if it will ever procurred in larger numbers the PLAAF and PLANAF will get then first and all.

    So this discussion is simply a bit lame …

    Deino

    1. do you have any proof of this? last i recalled all it was was a bunch of assumptions. any actual links or articles? there’s tons of articles on the Russian side crying foul. Other wise you have no proof.
    2. if it does exist, does it cover non license built versions like j-11d or j15 or 16?

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2172456
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Why Russian aircraft are flying without Flags, Red Stars or not even serial numbers on them?

    because they’re volunteers

    derp burp

    https://burkonews.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/tanki-v-stroiu-1024x842.jpg

    more on their way 😉

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2172930
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    some things from livefisting

    Here are five reasons why the CH-47F Chinook in IAF colours (as detailed for the first time by artist Saurav Chordia above) could be a true game-changer in Indian service:

    1. The IAF has had a troubled run with its spare heavylift rotory wing capability. Of the four Mi-26 Halos it bought in the eighties, three remain (one was written off after a severe crash-landing five years ago). But even before the accident, the platform has had typically severe serviceability issues that have mostly seen only one in the air at any given time — not the worst of scenarios for such a small fleet, but grossly less than what the IAF wanted from these machines. Replaced with a full-sized fleet of new generation helicopters will give IAF planners the kind of heavylift rotory wing flexibility they’ve never had before. Squadron-sized numbers (and, of course, newer circumstances) will shore up serviceability and put more numbers in pilots’ hands. The last few years have demonstrated that the ability to have more than one of these helicopters in the air at any given time is the difference, quite literally, between life and death. More numbers of heavylift copters in aero-bridge operations during humanitarian relief or disaster reconstruction work will be crucial.

    2. Trials in 2010-11 convinced the IAF in no small measure that the tandem rotor capability would enormously boost what they were already doing with the conventionally framed Mi-26, especially in high-altitude operations. A comparison of what the tandem rotored Chinook could do in terms of landing approach capability, centre of gravity envelope etc., as opposed to the aerodynamic, performance and safety constraints on the CH-53 Super Stallion/Mi-26 proved to be too substantive to ignore. In simple terms, the IAF was convinced the Chinook could get more done, cleaner and safer.

    3. The Chinook is substantially smaller and with a lower payload capacity than the Mi-26, but a higher degree of loading/unloading flexibility (especially rear loading) coupled with a significantly greater number of cargo/troops/equipment configurations convinced the IAF that switching to the tandem rotor machine made more sense than explore the very capable Mi-26T2, that sports better engines, avionics and safety features than the variant the IAF currently operates. The Chinook’s performance with under-slung cargo also won the IAF over.

    4. The Chinook’s flying qualities, agility in the air, significantly lower rotor diameter and landing flexibility will allow the IAF to fly it where it couldn’t have even thought of taking the Mi-26. High altitude border areas, along narrow ridges and valleys, to deliver equipment, humans or materials for construction, road-building/repair, communications infrastructure building, disaster relief, casualty evacuation or any of the several other mission profiles the Chinook is built for. Why is that a game-changer? Because the IAF cannot satisfactorily deliver heavy payloads to precise sites even now. If not fully in some areas, tandem rotor operations will close the gap significantly, allowing the IAF to deliver closer to sites of requirement than ever before.

    5. The Chinook is only the second heavylift helicopter the IAF will have ever operated. Unlike the Mi-26 that has performed strictly a troop/cargo transport role, the Chinook will obviously have a special missions profile as well. While the IAF has been looking at the MH-47 special operations configuration, the CH-47F variant it has chosen will definitely be used for special operations training and exercises, and will necessarily integrated with the larger joint special forces orbat. The IAF, a master at finding innovative new uses for its kit, could throw up several surprises behind the stick of a Chinook.

    in reply to: Indian Navy news thread #2019870
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    The top one is P17… it’s quite a bit cleaner and sleeker than the Talwar below, and P17A would likely be sleeker still.

    sorry i was confusing p17 with p17a. my bad.

    in reply to: General Discussion #243101
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    just a normal day in murica!

    in reply to: Only in America #1806450
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    just a normal day in murica!

    in reply to: Indian Navy news thread #2019875
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    A shivalik and a Talwar…. I wasn’t aware they were so similar in size, despite the P17 being almost two thousand tons heavier at full load

    tahts the p17? what a shame. i was expecting much cleaner lines.

    in reply to: General Discussion #243122
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Russia ain’t really gonna bomb ISIS because they fear ISIS. the Daesh guys will likely respond by using its plethora of Russian speaking Muslims and attack soft targets internally as revenge.

    in reply to: Could the U.S. remove Russia from Syria? #1806528
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    Russia ain’t really gonna bomb ISIS because they fear ISIS. the Daesh guys will likely respond by using its plethora of Russian speaking Muslims and attack soft targets internally as revenge.

    in reply to: General Discussion #243123
    Y-20 Bacon
    Participant

    its a proxy war
    if anyone is going to remove anyone it’ll be through their puppets:

    if US wants to remove Russia, they will simply supply SAMs to all rebels not named ISIS or Al-Nusery school.
    if Russia wants to remove US, they will keep bombing anyone not Assad.
    Turkey will keep bombing Kurds

    and no one is really bombing ISIS

Viewing 15 posts - 721 through 735 (of 1,779 total)