It’s part of the EU’s expansionist agenda!!

And of course because Europe and the UK in particular has cocked up its energy policy in hock to AGW, we need Russian gas, which flows through Ukraine.

Indeed.

A brief look at a map such as this, and you can understand Russia’s fears completely.

Then, add David Camerons recent, injudicious remarks…..

David Cameron has said the EU should extend its membership deeper into the former Soviet Union, calling for its borders to run from the Atlantic to the Urals.
The prime minister made clear that he hoped the enlargement of the EU would go further and extend beyond the three Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.
“Britain has always supported the widening of the EU. Our vision of the EU is that it should be a large trading and co-operating organisation that effectively stretches, as it were, from the Atlantic to the Urals. We have a wide vision of Europe and we have always encouraged countries that want to join.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/01/eu-extend-soviet-union-david-cameron

Just, for a moment, think about that. To the Urals. But not beyond, apparently.

I was actually thinking more of the UK and US obligations to Ukraine.

At least you haven’t used the word you used in your previous post, “Guarantees”.

Now…what exactly are these “obligations”?

The Budapest Memorandum makes not a single guarantee.

For good reason.

The big players who signed it aren’t stupid.

The Ukrainians originally wanted a proper Treaty, with “Guarantees”.
What they got instead was a Memorandum of “Assurances”.

I was reading on another forum the further extremely interesting point that when the various EU ministers, not least German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, went cheerleading with the demonstrators in Kiev, whilst refusing to meet the elected government, they almost certainly contravened Clause 3 of the Budapest Memorandum first.

Then, there is even doubt of over the status of Crimea when the Memorandum was signed, as The Autonomous Republic of Crimea had declared independence from Ukraine, as was their right.

In fact, they’ve declared their independence from Ukraine, again, as is their right, on 3 seperate occasions, with Ukraine bullying them each time, once with a threat of invasion, and once even threatening to “depopulate” Crimea. (I kid you not, that is the exact term used in the Ukrainian Council of Ministers ultimatum)

So far, Putin has entered the Crimea (only) bloodlessly, which will now hold a referendum, which will show, as it has in the past, that Crimea don’t want anything to do with Ukraine.

It was always readily apparent to me at the time that when the West decided to dismember Serbia (Kosovo) they were setting up a dangerous precedent.
Of course, now small things like the right to self determination, enshrined in the UN, is desperately trying to be ignored, purely because it doesn’t suit.

Facts rarely stand up in the face of baying lynch mob.

It is worth watching BBC News 24 at the moment, the interim Ukrainian President is making some good points.
When Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, its territorial borders were guaranteed by all members of the Budapest agreement.
Ukraine USA, Uk and Russia.

Incorrect.

Double Post…

Its amazing how some sites are saying its not fully stealth because of the nozzle and air inlets etc.
All i can say is that its as stealthy or more then a F-35.
So basically those critics are saying the F-35 is not stealthy enough. The nozzle can be made into the next gen nozzle later or engine etc. The inlets are above the plane and probably made from stealth materials with back scater design. If its rcs is as good or better then a F-35 then its achieved what it has to. If they can produce them in hundreds it takes away the advantage that large numbers of F-35 have.

My suggestion is to stop reading those sites.
They offer basically nothing of value… nothing beyond that which a teenaged armchair analyst could do.
Djcross has summarised it neatly…it’s a prototype to be used for flight validation initially.

Il-96 is massive overkill for the MPA role.
it weighs in at around 270t fully loaded.
To put that into context, it is 50 tons heavier than a B-52 bomber, and more than 3 times the weight of a Nimrod.
A twin engine, such as a Tu-204, Superjet, or an MC-21, or one of the new Russian twin transport aircraft in the pipeline makes better economic sense.

On co operation, China has developed its aviation industry massively, but there are core competencies that Russia still has that are as good, and in some cases better, than anything in the world.
For example…engines..large helicopters..etc
In these fields, co operation will continue.
Co-operation will i think grow in the civil aviation market, and I suspect in space too.

Ka-92 mock-up in the background ?

That has the Naval ensign on the side..and grey paint…so the Lamprey naval helicopter rather?

The Su-11 was basically a modified Su-9, with a more powerful engine and radar.
As such, it might be viewed as an interim type, an upgraded Su-9, pending the imminent arrival of the Su-15.
As said, it was a Mach 2 aircraft.

The Yak 28 Firebar was a long range interceptor, akin to the contemporary F-101 Voodoo… both types had similar top speeds, service ceilings, range exceeding 2000km..etc.

I do not think their performance was relatively poor compared to their contemporaries.
They had their tasks and roles, and were then replaced by their designated successors, much like elsewhere.