Of the “terrestrial” ones, only #154 (the MRCA/35 demo) has a probe if I recall correctly, as has the K/KUBs (9-47). The other “terrestrial” ones do not.

Is it me or does anyone else see the irony of putting a defunct empire into a scenario? The USSR for all intent and purposes was collapsed in 1991. The former USSR couldn’t even get spy satellites up at regular intervals in that timeframe. There wasn’t a Soviet Army at the time which is why the US was able to amass in the Middle East.

I myself do not understand what’s so Iraq anno 1991 about this scenario. “Iraq” here is equipped with a vastly different selection of aerial platforms and weapons and if I understand things correctly, they’re also supposed to adhere to a different doctrine. In short, there’s not much of Iraq left here. :p

Ok is timb anything like time ?

You got me there. 😉 And for the sake of clarity, yes – of course.

That new Hellduck delivery that Berkut mentioned a few days back took place today, on schedule.

Articles:
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20130506/936037734.html#ixzz2SVMk5XNI
http://www.sukhoi.org/news/company/?id=5141

No photos yet.

More flying at Gromov, more pilots. T-50-5 is (as we know) completed and will “join the program” in Q3/Q4 2013:
http://www.sukhoi.org/news/company/?id=5135

Speaking of airlifters, how’s the An-124 modernisation process coming along?

Earlier this year they said that they postponed the much-talked about restart of An-124 production (version An-124-300) until at least 2020 because they didn’t think it made sense doing it any sooner:
http://www.rg.ru/2013/02/05/arsenal-site.html

But the existing fleet is being modernised and a few freshened up examples have been put into service now I reckon. What’s the overall status of the fleet though? A quick look here makes you wonder a bit, listing a mere 7 in active VVS duty and a big bunch in “reserve”, whatever that means. According to the news article above they hope to get 25 modernised ones into service, that’d have to include reserve aircraft. Is this feasible? How “deep” is this modernisation? Will they turn grey? 😀

No air force history is complete without having operated a few “lawn darts” or “flying coffins”. Accordingly, dozens of planes have received nicknames like that.

I don’t think anybody in particular was the “inventor” of stealth, as reducing visibility became popular right at the time when aircraft were incorporated in military forces. This visual component of “stealth” evolved through counter-shading and what not, up to the point of active optical camouflage by the second World War.

People started taking a look at reducing infrared visibility when infrared devices started seeing action (also during World War II).

Likewise, reducing radar visbility quickly became a matter of interest when radars became an important component of air defense (WWII again…). Other “stealthy” things like avoiding contrails have been done since planes first were able to reach altitudes where contrail formation is common, and on it goes. These and many others are the components of stealth, and they are all just as old as the things they’re supposed to “hide” from, with visual stealth being the oldest (as eyes predate aircraft :D).

Ufimtsev did however perfect the mathematical framework for calculating radar cross sections (as opposed to the earlier, more trial-and-error laden approach). Thus he can be said to be the father of modern (radar) stealth, but obviously not the inventor of the phenomena itself.

It has to be said that off setting the power balance by sheer performance was the more viable option back in the day, even though certain high performance aircraft also incorporated early “stealth” measures (e.g. the A-12/SR-71). Thus interest in “stealth” skyrocketed at the time that became more difficult, and thanks to Ufimtsev, Lockheed (that saw the potential in his research) and FBW (that was sorely needed to get the earlier products flightworthy) modern stealth made its entrance in the late 70’s (though not in the public eye, of course).

I have a vague recollection of Ufimtsev being tasked by the USSR to model an aircraft based on his ideas. The end result was supposed to have been a grotesque looking thing (F-117-like…) and deemed totally unflyable and useless at the time (pre computer-assisted FBW).

Lockheed engineers had a far more successful go at it later (when the necessary parallell technologies had matured), and when Ufimtsev first saw the American F-117 he’s supposed to have said “that’s exactly what I meant” or something along those lines.

If anything, Lockheed deserves just as much cred as Ufimtsev, I’d say. 🙂 And FBW deserves cred, and the Horten brothers deserve cred… And about a gazillion other inventors and theoreticians, too…