wilhelmNot wishing to get on anyone’s goat here but… the UK abolished slavery of it’s own volition at a time when it was probably the most powerful country in the world. The Japanese and Germans had to be bombed into submission for their slaves to be freed…
I’m not commenting on the Aboriginal issue as I know little of it. Nor am I saying that ‘Empire UK’ gave up its slaves for entirely selfless reasons or did so without dissent or that the UK is now some kind of multi-ethnic utopia – clearly not.
Rather that the country’s policy-makers eventually evolved a more enlightened stance on bonded labour thanks in no small part to democracy and the free speech exercised by its citizens.
Thus, I think a distinction can be drawn between the UK and the former Axis powers on this issue at least… when it came to slavery we eventually something about it. When it came to extermination camps… we did something about that too.
Yes…. quite.
I note with interest the use of “extermination camp” as opposed to the more usual “concentration camp”….nice touch. Emily Hobhouse would weep.
I also have always been amazed at the vitriol Australia sent South Africa’s way during the 1970’s and 1980’s for the abhorrent system of apartheid, yet looking at their own house…… The hypocrisy was astounding.
wilhelmAlthough I always enjoy your verbal jousts, you guys should really get a room…..:diablo:
wilhelmA picture was posted on a thread on this forum.
wilhelmI really don’t know about that so unfortuantly i can’t answer and give you my ‘informed’ opinion, infact its the first time ive heard the subject mentioned, but it sounds interesting. I do wonder if its a trick question, anyway no i don’t know at all. Too have a stab at an answer i’d have to say neither got it right, designing for war time loses seems good, except you might only be at war for 5 in every 50 years, yet designing for peace time means when you do get into a war you could find yourself short if you get me. Interesting, thats if i did understand the question correctly. 🙂 Edit:thanks for the spelling help too, i need it! I will try to find out more to answer your question later but at the moment i’m reading about ant eaters.
No worries Jon… it wasn’t a trick question. Actually, I reckon you answered it pretty well in my opinion. Just mentioned it as the Soviet system was very different to the Western system. The Soviet planes had low Time-Before-Overhaul figures, reflecting the concept that sorties will be intensive during war time and that it would be unlikely that an aircraft would survive the entire war. Western practice designed far longer TBO figures reflecting gentler peacetime flying rates over, say, 30 years. After events like the Gulf War/Serbia, you often hear of worries of airframe life being “eaten-up” , thereby upsetting carefully planned overhauls, MLU’s and even replacement dates.
Two very different methodologies. I suppose there are pro’s and cons to both concepts, but it did lead to certain criticisms of the Soviet system and the so-called “junk” hardware it produced. I think this shows a basic misunderstanding of the concept. In many ways, the Soviets never stopped fighting their “Great Patriotic War”.
I for one can see flaws and strengths in both systems, but will not be brave enough to stick my head out in this forum as you will judge from this thread alone!!!!;)
wilhelmwhatever dude, whatever, just trying to be polite. Carry on chilling out as i am.
I don’t think so at all.
What is your opinion on the Soviet practice of designing for “war sortie and attrition” rates versus the Western model of designing for peacetime rates? Who do you think got it right in your opinion?
By the way, you’ve got ‘grammar’ spelled incorrectly in your signature.
wilhelmwow you need to calm down and chill out, don’t let your emotions get the better of you 🙂 no need to be abusive either 😉
You see Jon, smileys actually don’t cut it. Your reply has no substance….. no info….no intelligent argument refuting my arguments. I’m as chilled as an ice block. Just calling you out for what you are.:p
PS: Your trolling skills need some brushing up.:diablo:
wilhelmlol don’t get to upset just because i expressed an opinion thats not the same as yours, i will stress it again though that i think the PAK-FA is nothing more then vapourware, a paper plane if you like, it does not exist. Its not my problem if the Indians are being scammed thats there lookout. people will come back with the odd answer ‘but but the 117 was hidden for years’ yes yes it was hidden, but then so was the existance of the whole damn program, they didnt say ‘we have this super stealth thing but were not ready to show you’ did they?
In any other situation in the world like this with a product that failed to come to appear people would ask questions, this is the Duke Nukem Forever of aircraft.
The most we have seen is some silly ‘artists’ drawings, a few f-22 rip off wind tunnel models covered in tipex and thats it the sum total of the PAK-FA saga and i’m sorry if that hurts your feelings or upsets you Wilhelm but thats the facts here.
I think we all know that if the Russians had this monster of a jet they’d love to show the world to make us quake in fear, i don’t think Vlad would miss out on that for the world. i think you Russia fanboys will just have to accept it, pull yourselves together and get over it – it might be a shame yes but honestly theres plenty more fish in the sea…
“Sigh…”
Listen to me child. I’m not upset by the relative slowness of the PAK-FA programme. I do not stand to make money off it, and it will not help feed my family. I live halfway across the globe from Russia. I don’t speak Russian. Therefore, my feelings aren’t hurt. I’m interested in the project insofar as I’m interested in aviation. Not a little willy waving contest with someone who was not even in school yet when the wall came down.
As stated before, the difference between the MFI programme and the PAK-FA programme has been explained to you in the PAK-FA thread. This is not my opinion. It is two different programmes by two different political entities/countries for two different jobs. You have chosen to ignore that and say that the current PAK-FA is one programme going back to Soviet times in the mid 1980’s. I don’t think therefore that the gestation period of the PAK-FA is exceedingly long. Not the quickest sure, but the Eurofighter and F-22 also had long development periods. And that with stable economic and political platforms.
i will stress it again though that the PAK-FA is nothing more then vapourware, a paper plane if you like, it does not exist. Its not my problem if the Indians are being scammed
Really????:rolleyes:
Are you implying that there is no PAK-FA programme at all??? What in your expert opinion do you think India will sue for when this information comes to light? How come ‘lil Jonboy from Hampshire knows this but nobody else?
My problem with you is that this has been explained to you before.
Therefore you are a troll. It’s the only thing that fits.:( Other distinguished and long time members here have also noted this. Please stop derailing threads with repetitive garbage.
wilhelmHhhhmm i’d put France ahead of Russia in terms of quality to be honest, the Rafale is far more advanced then any Russian jet. Infact i would go so far to say that Russia is really slipping behind, what with the imaginary PAK_FA plane that for the last god knows how many years has been just a year away from flying, its painfully obvious to all but the most unblinkered eyes that there is no aircraft, just a paper plane.
This has been explained to you in the PAK-FA thread. I thought at first you were a semi-literate teenager, but I suspect now that you are just a little troll.
wilhelmNo, the original AL-41 was significantly larger than the AL-31.
Do you have any figures at hand? All the ones I have at my disposal indicate otherwise. Off the top of my head right now weight difference was about 7%, diameter and length much the same, in line with the design goal of making it compatible with existing airframes using the Al-31. Below is a quote from Yuriy Lastochkin.
These motors are related in size which allows the use of the modular principle in the replacement of old elements for the new which were developed for the AL-41.
wilhelmDoes anyone know the dry thrust of the 117S? I seem to remember 8500 to 9000kg, but I could be mistaken.
What is the projected thrust development curve for this engine? I assume now that the original AL-41 is now dead? I’m talking of the original for the MFI, not the mooted AL-31 with AL-41 tech. Or will it make a later appearance for the Su-34 and later model PAK-FA’s? It was, afterall, supposed to be interchangeable with the baseline AL-31 was it not?
wilhelmI’ve heard it mentioned that the Tu-160 has a lower RCS than the bone … is this true?
wilhelmRussian equipment is judged as simple and robust to be operated by everyone.
Having experienced years of hearing that everying built in the USSR was inferior to anything built in the USA, I was surprised when I got to examine Russian aircraft first hand. I am referring to light aircraft up to AN2 size and comparing them to USA light aircraft such as cessna’s, Beechcraft and Pipers.
My impression is the build quality is far higher, greater precision in the fit and very functional designs. USA built could be regarded as over priced here in Australia.
What? But that can’t be true. To use the example Garry provided….
“It’s not true…It’s not true….It’s not true….”:rolleyes: 😉
You’re upsetting some of the folk here…:diablo:
wilhelmSure i’ll back it up, its that little thing called history, go back and look what those countrys that always got pounded used, hint: it wasn’t ‘western’ equipment.
The Soviet/Russian gear never ever lived up to expectations/hopes of its users.
Are you talking about (generally isolated) 3rd world countries flying downgraded export models of older generation jets versus generally a first world country/coalition flying later aircraft with no downgrades. Even the Serbian relied predominantly on a Soviet design from the 1950’s (mig-21) with a couple of barely serviceable early variant Mig-29’s in urgent need of an overhaul.
Like I said, back it up with some intelligent examples please.
PS: Judging by your picture, you need a haircut.:)
wilhelmIf you’re worried about uncontrolled immigration, vote for an anti-immigration party.
If you’re worried about being a minority in your own country, have more children.
I haven’t been following the debate very closely, but the above solutions seem obvious to me if you are so inclined.
wilhelmIf you’re worried about uncontrolled immigration, vote for an anti-immigration party.
If you’re worried about being a minority in your own country, have more children.
I haven’t been following the debate very closely, but the above solutions seem obvious to me if you are so inclined.
Sign In
