I heard them say prepare to abandon, but it doesn’t seem they made it out in time. Anyone know for certain?
If you look at Nellis AFB near Las Vegas, Nevada, you’ll see some Israeli F-15’s, German Tornados, F-111, F-15, F-16, A-10, B-1, etc. To have F-111’s that image must be several years old.
Does anyone have a URL link to video of the F-35 flights? (in WMV format)
I saw the F/A-22 one, it was so cool. Better than the Su-37 flight performance.
If you mean X-35 then there are some videos at Yahoo Video and JSF.Mil
The IMAX film “Fighter Pilot ” is about as good an aircraft movie as I’ve ever seen.
Why is it that the usa can justify and allowe some eastern european countries to retain older soviet era aircraft and or purchase suffisticated new aircraft, but when it comes to the balkans, in particular x-yugoslav republics, they are prevented in ataining or upgrading their airforces.
The following article by Igor Bozinovski was posted airserbia.com regarding the Su-25 operated by the macedonian af…
The Republic of Macedonia will sell its four Su-25 jets to the former Soviet republic of Georgia in a deal that is reportedly coordinated by the United States, says Yevgeny Sidorov, the political analyst of the Russian Information Agency RIA Novosti. He claims that in April and May, both Macedonia and Bulgaria agreed to provide Georgia with seven Su-25 jets. Since Macedonian Air Force has only four Su-25 jets on strength (three single-seat Su-25 Frogfoot-A and one two-seat Su-25UB Frogfoot-B) it is to expect that the other three examples will be surplus Bulgarian Air Force examples. According to the Russian political analyst, Macedonia is likely to be among the countries that will deliver for free around 2.000 assault rifles and plenty of ammunition to Georgia. Other countries said to hand over weapons and ammunition to Georgia are Hungary, Romania, and the Czech Republic.
The four Macedonian jets were procured from Ukraine during the armed conflict in 2001 at a total price of 8 million USD. However, in attempting to meet all its obligations for full integration and membership of NATO, Macedonia agree to remove the Su-25 jets from its Air Force and Air Defence Force (Voeno Vozduhoplovstvo i Protivvozdusna Odbrana โ VV i PVO) before the end of the year 2004 at the latest. To that end, Macedonian Su-25s officially ceased flying on March 1, 2004, when all four aircraft were grounded. Since then, their engines have been run up weekly to keep them in airworthy condition, thought no further flying has taken place. In the meantime, the Macedonian Ministry of Defence was looking for the most adequate way to remove the small fleet of excellent condition Su-25s from the Air Force inventory. The following possible solutions have been considered: returning the jets to Ukraine in exchange for long-term Ukrainian maintenance and overhaul for Macedonian fleet of Soviet-era helicopters or signing a bilateral agreement for delivery of one An-32 transport aircraft to the Macedonian Air Force; selling (or even donating/compensating) its Su-25s to some friendly country, like for example Georgia – country that still operates the type; to put the Su-25s in long-term storage; to permanently exhibit them like museum examples across the country or at outskirts of Petrovec air base; to use them as a targets at the Krivolak training center; or to scrap/destroy them with international assistance. Donโt matter what the final solution will look like, for sure it will be a very sad end for a short-lived jet-era of the Macedonian Air Force.
Igor Bozinovski
1.jul.2005.
Define Justify and Allowe[sic].
The article states the deal was coordinated by the US, not forced by the US. Coordinated could mean anything from using US diplomatic personel in each of the respective countries to convey the details to providing transportation for the weapons exchanged. Macedonia agreed to dispose of the aircraft to meet requirements for entry into NATO (which the majority of the military force is US, it’s not a straight US foreign policy tool) and is driven primarily by the need for as much interoperability as possible.
What made it so draggy? The only obvious thing I see is the block on the top of the VS.
The article thinks the B-2 can carry two of these externally? That doesn’t seem right to me…
After reading the article, it is speaking of the JASSM XR when it mentions external carriage on the B-52 and B-2.
I think that’s just the normal gap between the fixed and moving surfaces. Both of the pics you show as examples have the control surfaces in a moved position. When the surfaces are in the stremlined position, those gaps are likely less evident/more streamlined.
Max Speed @ 75,000 ft = M4.0? ๐ฎ
I wonder what firing time is required to actually cause structural damage to the average airframe.
It would probably be significant as opposed to weakening the outer fuel casing on a TBM. The actual ‘Kill’ on a BM is not from the laser, it’s from the internal pressure from the burning fuel that blows out the weak spot created by the laser. Actually trying to melt skin and structural components of a fighter would take much longer bursts, but as you said…. sensors and pilot are a lot more vulnerable.
arent they the TR-3 model now ? I wonder what exactly they are used for in this day of KH-12 10cm res satellites ?
hopefully it didnt crash spying on India ๐
Ad-hoc photo recon, signals intelligence, radar imaging, atmospheric sampling, etc.
Basically, the time sensitive things you need, that don’t justify repositioning space assets to view immediately.
I’m almost positive it’s targets won’t include ‘hordes of fighters’ as it’s number of shots is limited by it’s fuel supply for the laser. It’s main target will be theatre ballistic missles as they’re the hardest threat to defend against in a regional conflict. I could see it targeting fighters in a self defense situation, but the tactics used by it and it’s supporting forces shouldn’t let that happen.
So let’s say this deal does go through along with sales of F-18E/F to India. Then the Indian-Pakistani situation explodes into a conventional shooting war (leaving out BM use altogether).
You’ll be left with IAF using a mix of Russian, US, and Euro Aircraft (SU-30’s, F-18E’s, Mirage 2000’s, Mig-29K’s- if the Indian Navy gets involved) supported on the ground with legacy soviet air defenses with a smattering of Pac-3’s going against a mix of Russian, US, and Euro aircraft (F-16’s -possibly their C/D deliveries, Mig-21 derivitives and Mirage III’s) supported on the ground with legacy soviet/chinese air defenses with Crotale and Mistral SAM systems.
I wouldn’t wish war on any country and don’t see it as amusement, but if it did happen, it would put to rest most of the conjecture and arguments on these types of boards.
I also heard the structural composit pieces did not meet the strength criteria and had to be replaced with heavier conventional structures which contributed heavily (no pun intended) to the weight, performance and controlability problems.
African or european swallow. :p