dark light

ink

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 586 through 600 (of 1,597 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: New bomber for Russian Air Force #2538331
    ink
    Participant

    Coach,

    Thanks for the pics…

    SOC,

    Thanks for the info…

    in reply to: New bomber for Russian Air Force #2538498
    ink
    Participant

    Also, I’d just like to mention that those of you who are thinking in terms of a development of the Tu-160 or Tu-144 are likely to be way off the mark. If SOC is right (and he often is :)), then there is more chance that a new bomber* will be a development of the T-60S or T-54… SOC, got any artists impressions of these – I know that there was one of the T-60S around a while ago…

    * Assuming of course that there will be a new bomber 🙂

    in reply to: New bomber for Russian Air Force #2538502
    ink
    Participant

    Interesting news to say the least. I’ll be keeping an eye on this project, although I honestly am wondering where the money for it will come. I realize Russia’s economy has made leaps and bounds over where it was in the 90’s, but with the military still underpaid and delays in programs like the Su-34, I wonder why they think now is a good time to start work on a new bomber.

    If they can stretch the budget to include the preliminary R&D work for a project like this it could be good for the country. Spending on things like this is hardly ever a real waste of money, you’re employing highly educated engineers that might otherwise leave the country, developing new technologies and maintaining the technological base, developing new production techniques and supporting domestic high-tech companies. Besides, the money filters back into government hands eventually and could even provide healthy returns if the technologies developed are then used in other products that get exported. For example, whilst developing this bomber the Russians might work on sophisticated navigation equipment that will utalise their GLOSNASS netowrk – these technologies can be used on a multitude of other platforms, including GPS-guided munitions, other military aircraft, civilian aircraft etc.

    in reply to: Iranian SA-15 pictured at Natanz #1799297
    ink
    Participant

    29 Tor-M1

    I was under the impression that Iran had ordered/received 29 Tor-M1 batteries rather than 29 Tor-M1s.

    in reply to: Serbian Air Forces After Divorce #2540624
    ink
    Participant

    The ’29s are going to be overhauled in Russia and ‘upgraded’ (which will probably involve NATO standard navigation and communication equipment).

    in reply to: Better looking aircraft = better performance? #2540782
    ink
    Participant

    The sense of beauty, as well as cuteness, is inherently biological. We consider what is beautiful, is what makes a sexual mate that will pass better biologically fit offspring. Cuteness on the other hand, is designed to instill parental instincts of protectiveness to the young.

    When we apply “beauty” to aircraft, is because we unconsciously see biological forms within these aircraft.

    For example, unconsciously, many aircraft have a penile shape. You have the nose and the radome suggesting one thing, and the side intakes suggesting the nuts. A penile shape stands for male virility and strength.

    The body curves on an aircraft suggest another. Things like fuselage blending and area rule reinforces the unconscious suggestion of the female body and waist.

    Our biological instincts are also triggered by animal shapes and forms, perhaps as a genetic memory. We do fear the look of a certain shapes, like the predatorial look of a shark, and this fear leads to respect, which inevitably leads to a beauty of its own. Some planes may trigger this genetic memory with their suggestion of a predatory appearance. The intake of an F-16 is sharklike, and the nose like the beak of a raptor. The eyes are often drawn into these features. Open inlets for example, like planes in the fifties, suggest an animal’s mouth.

    It can be said that even the plane’s designers are increasingly drawn to animal forms once we have become more interested with aerodynamics. And the first lesson when people didn’t know much about aerodynamics was to look at birds, which provided the primary intuitive model. So intuitively and subconsciously, we continue to blend animal forms into aircraft.

    The third sense of beauty is something else, besides sexual and animal forms. It is the form of mathematics. Our minds are triggered by seeing perfect mathematical forms. like triangles, angles, and of course, in seeing symmetry. Engineering creates its sense of beauty in mathematical forms, planes no exception.

    Crobato,

    A very interesting post, although it must be added that you aspire to a very scientific view of beauty and many poets and artists would disagree with you. Nonetheless, I found what you wrote most interesting 🙂

    In any event, I simply wanted to add something crucial that you have left out of your biological look at the way humans perceive beauty. That something being “habitat”. Humans, like many other animals, have an instinct that enables them to recognise a habitat that has benefits for them, either in terms of food production or defense… This is why landscape painting and photography is popular the world over (at least in the more developed civilisations). This element includes the appreciation of colour to an extent that is not present in the sexual/reproductive factors you focused on.

    In any case, this element combines with those that you mentioned when we are evaluating something man-made for its beauty… Although all of this is also shaped by our cultural and social background.

    in reply to: Kursk:New Photos #2063537
    ink
    Participant

    Wow.

    in reply to: Artists Impressions #2543221
    ink
    Participant

    Here’s one of the J-10.

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2543233
    ink
    Participant

    I just had an idea. A comparison of previous artists impressions with the finished product might make for an interesting thread… It might also be useful to illustrate to some of us the fact that artists impressions can be way off the mark.

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2543253
    ink
    Participant

    Agreed – its ugly. Hope this isn’t what they’ve been working on all this time.

    in reply to: PAK-FA updated info, anyone? #2552021
    ink
    Participant

    PS and “nod-nod, wink-wink” hint: I would not expect any open-source picture of the 5th gen. fighter/flying saucer/hypersonic frying pan well after its first flight. And its official “first flight” will not be its first either

    Thanks for making this point. I get the impression that some people here think that, in this age of instant information, we’ll all be invited to attend the first flight… And to bring our digital cameras too. Some things, it turns out, are still pretty secret.

    in reply to: A new RuAF news thread #2555901
    ink
    Participant

    Russian military budget news:

    MOSCOW, March 9 (RIA Novosti) – A total of 5 trillion rubles ($190 billion) will be earmarked to equip the army and Navy with modern arms until 2015, Russia’s president said Friday.

    Speaking at a military award ceremony in the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin said the global situation dictated the need to improve Russia’s military structure.

    “We cannot fail to notice the constant attempts to resolve international disputes by force, the threat of international conflicts, terrorism, the escalation of local conflicts and the spread of weapons of mass destruction,” the president said

    He said a considerable part of the funds will be allocated to buy state-of-the-art weapons and hardware, develop science and the defense industry.

    “We are trying to integrate the defense industry with the civilian sector of the economy, primarily with the high tech sectors,” the head of state said.

    He set the top brass the task of focusing on combat training. “The Armed Forces once and for all must resume the [permanent] practice of large scale military exercises, missile launches and remote marine missions,” Putin said.

    He stressed that Russia consistently promoted the creation of a global security system.

    “Our country is open to dialogue and cooperation with all those interested in forming effective international legal mechanisms to maintain global stability,” the president said.

    The president said in this very hall several years earlier discussions were held with the Americans on their abandoning the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

    “Without going into details, I will say that our negotiations were further discussed by the Americans with their allies,” Putin said. “One of the few amiable partners in the U.S., Colin Powell [the Secretary of State at the time], told Europeans: Why argue? What anti-missile defense are you talking about and where? They have nothing left, no missiles, only rust. This is just a theoretical argument.”

    Russia, which has long been anxious about the opening of NATO bases in former Communist-bloc countries and ex-Soviet republics, strongly criticized recent U.S. plans to deploy an anti-ballistic missile system in Central Europe as a national security threat and a destabilizing factor for Europe.

    Washington continues to insist that the proposed deployment of missile defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic are intended to counter possible strikes from North Korea and Iran, which are involved in long-running disputes with the international community over their nuclear programs.

    The U.S. aroused further security concerns in Russia last week when a senior Pentagon official said Washington would like to station a radar base in the Caucasus and Ukraine.

    The president also said that ensuring social guarantees for servicemen was an urgent task. He said service pay must be given particular attention, and problems with personal housing for servicemen must be solved by 2010.

    in reply to: Production Su-34 #2505773
    ink
    Participant

    IMHO for Russian Air Force Su-30MK cost about 20% more than Su-34.

    I’d say that was pretty unlikely but I’m willing to change my mind if provided with evidence.

    in reply to: New MiG-35 (in flight) photos #2507624
    ink
    Participant

    Silly me, I always thought it was the gas tank volume they lacked most.

    You’ll be interested to know that that too has changed.

    in reply to: Helicopter Survivability #2508236
    ink
    Participant

    But as I said, that were just introductory remarks.

    Might I then suggest that you never ever introduce anything again?

Viewing 15 posts - 586 through 600 (of 1,597 total)