Bring it on … admittedly, the Cheetah C upgrade was done for the simple reason that there were sanctions against South Africa at the time. So yes, it probably isn’t the most cost effective solution. But it was also meant as an interim measure until the year 2000 or so until a replacement was developed/procured. I used it purely as an example of what can be done with an old airframe such as the Mirage 111. Having said that, there is considerable controversy over where the airframes came from, with ex Israeli Kfir’s being bandied about.
I do know that it was an expensive programme with 38 aircraft procured for just under US2billion. I must check references and I’m unsure what the total package was re spares and hidden/related/buried items procured! I think the airframes were zeroed and basically re-manufactured so to all intents and purposes they were new aircraft. And considering now that fact, as well as the aerodynamic refinements made, perhaps it was a bad example!!
The Cheetah C is basically what you described. R-Darter for BVR, modern smart munitions, glass cockpit with HOTAS, complete avionics upgrade including new lookdown/shootdown multimode radar and internal modern EW systems. Airframe aerodynamic modifications and 50% newly rebuilt structure. Frameless wraparound windshield, lower cockpit side coaming, Fuselage stretch, IFR probe.. Pity about the engine though.
We could always keep count of the Godwins, I suppose………
Exactly
Now how many nations has the US invaded with the intent of conquering them? North Korea?
Cheaper to rule via proxies.
How many times has the US acted in response to allied requests for assitance?
Cheaper to rule via proxies. :p
A US chap started this topic. It seems the common denominator in most conflicts these days is the US.
My quote..You shoulda quoted it too in your answer :diablo:
I didn’t realise you were appointed the independent judge. In fact I didn’t realise this discussion was a contest.
Everything is a pissing contest in the end Darling 😀
I think we should take the 30 000 nukes owned by Russia and the US and share them out at the UN. 😉
We could always keep count of the Godwins, I suppose………
Exactly
Now how many nations has the US invaded with the intent of conquering them? North Korea?
Cheaper to rule via proxies.
How many times has the US acted in response to allied requests for assitance?
Cheaper to rule via proxies. :p
A US chap started this topic. It seems the common denominator in most conflicts these days is the US.
My quote..You shoulda quoted it too in your answer :diablo:
I didn’t realise you were appointed the independent judge. In fact I didn’t realise this discussion was a contest.
Everything is a pissing contest in the end Darling 😀
I think we should take the 30 000 nukes owned by Russia and the US and share them out at the UN. 😉
At the end of the day…how many countries has North Korea invaded?.. The US? :diablo:
A US chap started this topic. It seems the common denominator in most conflicts these days is the US. :dev2:
So after a careful reading, I think Gary wins.
I’m just disappointed Sferrin didn’t poke his head in more often. Generally does when Gary is around. Have you two met?
I think it is a little like having a steroid cheat at the Olympics. Perhaps we should all have nukes…it is going to end up like that anyhow. Just a teensy little bit of thought would reveal that something cannot be un-invented. Indeed, it seems once a nation has nukes it is safe from a round of light-hearted bombing.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others!! 😀
At the end of the day…how many countries has North Korea invaded?.. The US? :diablo:
A US chap started this topic. It seems the common denominator in most conflicts these days is the US. :dev2:
So after a careful reading, I think Gary wins.
I’m just disappointed Sferrin didn’t poke his head in more often. Generally does when Gary is around. Have you two met?
I think it is a little like having a steroid cheat at the Olympics. Perhaps we should all have nukes…it is going to end up like that anyhow. Just a teensy little bit of thought would reveal that something cannot be un-invented. Indeed, it seems once a nation has nukes it is safe from a round of light-hearted bombing.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others!! 😀
Wow it’s coming through my neighbourhood. I’ll be waiting along Boundary Road in Milnerton and try get some pictures.
No, but he used the word Higher as maybe opposed to the R-29. The R-35 Mig23MLD does have aerodynamic refinements as well as the R-35, so maybe that is what he means as opposed to the vanilla Mig-23.
Technology transfer, cost, and political hypocrisy!! Hee hee. The Turks (quite rightly) do not want to be held ransom, and also want a good deal.
It’s commonly known as looting… :dev2:
Cue Sferrin and co… :diablo:
Perhapbs I should clarify. In comparison to other turbojets, the ‘raw’ figures on the R-35 look very impressive. Same weight as the J-79 but much more powerful. I’m aware that the J-79 is an earlier generation engine, but then if you compare the later models with what is essentially ‘ a warmed over R-29’…I also see that it is smaller than the R-29, so if anybody could explain if they are essentially the same engine I’d appreciate it.
By best, I didn’t mean just raw thrust. I’m aware the West started concentrating more on turbo fans in the sixties, so the Sov Union perhaps developed the turbojet a little further. The J-75 was a big beast weighing in at around 6000lbs for less thrust. It was an earlier engine as well. The olympus was not used operationally on a jet fighter to my knowledge. As also explained earlier, the different models used in the Vulcan and those meant for the TSR2 were very different engines.
I’m trying to establish the various figures of TBO, SFC etc. to find out if the increase in thrust achieved was a lower life, or more advanced design and materiels. I also would like to know if the R-35 was installed in lets say a Mirage F1, would it supercruise? The external dimensions of the R-35 are a lot smaller than the Atar…With a renewed emphasis on supercruise, wouldn’t a turbojet make sense as opposed to a turbofan?
Either way, it is a very impressive turbojet, and probably the most powerful ever put into a production fighter jet.
Wow..I second that. If anyone has that article..please..
I’d shove an R-35 turbojet (8500kg dry 13000 a/b) up the back of a Cheetah C. Apparently it is smaller than the ATAR. Fit the Advanced Combat Wing (ACW) with the slightly more fuel it carries. Add Rafale radar. 😮
So the new intake has been integrated on all the D models I take it. I was also on the SAAF unnofficial website and a gentleman there said that there was work done on Atar blades that apparentely reached the single crystal stage quite a few years back.
Mpacha..all said and done, do you have any info on the Atar Plus. As mentioned earlier, there was a reference on the CSIR website as I was trawling through their site. I cannot recall which section it was now, but basically it stated that the various parametres of the Atar Plus project were validated at the CSIR and that that particular section was involved in the Atar Plus project. I assumed at the time that perhaps they were doing contract work for SNECMA, but could find no refernce to it anywhere in association with them. Kurt stated that his friend does have knowledge of it and that it is a thrust upgrade. So Project Recepient in your opinion is not related to Atar Plus? (if it exists)