mikoyan

They probably also work as the slats on a wing, creating more lift and shaping the airflow over the fuselage; one of the reasons the eagle is such a great dogfighter; to me it is very impressive that after so many years this machine still one of the best dogfighters in the world; true testament of the quality of the work dome by McDonnell Douglas and NASA, if you look in youtube there are videos of small scale model testing flat spins on a wind tunnel and also the drop test from a huey helicopter.

russian test pilots video What kind of HUD is that? looks way more advanced than the one used in the upgraded of the russian airforce su-27.

dude I do that all the time and I donnnt zsssss...zsssee...see any secondary efff.... efff... effecxt.

where can I get this mod!!!!!!!:shocking::shocking::shocking:

They should stick to gundams, I know that one day they will be real! crazy japanese people.

it is cheap to get it but not to own it:cry:

It is me or the mirage 2000 has better instantaneous turn rate than the rafale?

maybe you get that idea from the fact that the russians had accidents on big air shows or had a lot of cameras ready to catch the accidents. Few weeks back we saw a canadian hornet crash just like the 1989 mig-29 paris air show; does it means that the hornet is unreliable? I don't think so. If you look at jet fighters accident data you can see that there are lot of accidents; but you have to consider several factors, like the dangers of flying, meteorological conditions, pilot errors, mechanical failures etc. last time I check the f-15 and f-16 accident data I counted (could be more) around 300 accidents for one type alone; but these data is from all the existing f-16 and f-15s around the world. The flanker had some bad accidents at airshows in the past as far as I can remember this are: -SU-27 flanker from the russian test pilots crashed on italy out of a loop too low (pilot error) -Russian knights crash in china due to poor weather and lack of equipment on the airfield. -su-30mki in paris; pilot error; hit the ground after several barrel rolls; hit the ground tail first; too low even for a tvc aircraft. -su-27 Ukraine; several factors as far as I know; the aircraft was changed at the last minute, the replacement had more fuel that the original aircraft, poor safety organization; pilot error and not sure of this; an engine problem. -russian knights accident; Maks air show, I Don't know if the report is ready but to me it looks like the pilots lost visual on the lead and hit it by mistake; this could also be attributed to the could coverage that day. -Radom air show crash; we don't know what happened there So there you have it; I could be missing 2 more, but you can tell that most of the accidents occurred due to human factors. Another thing I would like to pint up; Generally here in the US there is a dedicated team of pilots to participate on air shows, In other words the same pilots tour around the country doing air show routines; I don't know if that is the case on the air-forces that utilize the su-27; but to me it looks like having a dedicated team of pilots and aircraft just for air shows improves safety a little bit by having the same routine performed over and over instead of calling an combat pilot to do a demonstration once a year.

probably all this pictures are fake or mock ups and the last picture probably is not a russian airforce su-27 http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/aam/r77.html

Did you take pictures of fat albert taking off?

No pictures of operational migs carring r-77 means that no mig-29 in the russian airforce carries r-77 ergo; the f-15s can't carry 8 ammrams. :music_whistling: :music_whistling: Anyway there are few pictures of flankers caring full 10 missiles load; ergo the flanker can't carry missiles at all!:megalol: since I don't see pictures of operational su-30mki caring r-77s ; then the Indian su-30s can't carry r-77s and the f-16 pwns everything except for Chuck Norris and the f-22; since the mig-29 shoot down a georgian UAV with an r-73; then the mig-29 can't use its gun while caring r-73s :megalol:

Too expensive, there were cheaper ways to achieve the same goals, fantastic engineering achievement but not the most practical.

The funny thing is that the russians build a more down to earth version to came out with the same conclusion.

104 has a fantastic server, but I think that missions could be better if the pilots collaborate more instead of going for the kill. A few months back we had a blast (ares falcons) trying do bomb an airfield; we had to talk to each others to coordinate the attack; at the end I had to engage instead of bombing; but still it was fantastic; and it was all, because of the cooperation between players; I also have to tank Iraqi outlaw too for his skilled work. Maybe missions can be made with tons of ground units attacking the airfields; that way players would have to do ground attack in order to keep flying. Maybe if someone can work as a ground controller, there is a mod for that I believe. Cruiser missiles can also be implemented; these would target airfields (where the players are parked) so if players don't want to get killed on the ground they would have to chase b-52s and bears to stop them form launching their missiles; naturally this bombers would have to be escorted, SAMS would be ready to protect them too. Night missions could add some spice to the mix; what about fog over the airfields; using that would force pilots to coordinate their landings and hopefully avoid taxyway take offs and runway parking.

The flying was insane! but how you guys coordinate the smoke to do the writing?

que tal funciona el sidewinder con blackshark?

I used to build my own models using balsa wood, because the scale model market was very limited in my country; I made around 39 of this little models; my first model was an su-27; then I made an f-18 and I couldn't stop building them; I also have to point out that there are great plastic models in the market but most of them fail to capture the shape of the real airplanes; I have yet to see a decent su-27 and mig-29 model from the kit companies. This is my list (very long sorry): su-27 (probably build as many variants as the real jet) f-18 su-35 mig-25 mig-23 with working variable wings f-14 same features A-6 I felt in love with this airplane after watching intruder! tu-144 dc-3 mig-31 (came out almost perfect) mig-29 (two versions, the last one was the best) f-117 cardboard (had to make each facet of the fuselage, came out smaller because of the drawings I had were very small) f-22 f-15 very hard to make accurate since it has some complex top fuselage shape; I had better experience with the su-27 (had to make a nemesis for my flanker collection) mig-17 su-25 spitfire very small fokker dr1 p-51 tu-22 mig1.42 gave it to a friend as a gift (bad idea) superhornet a-10 il-76 which was cannibalized to build a tu-154 SR-71 U-2 su-47 Before painting my models I set the center of gravity to do a little glide test; after testing all this models I can tell you that the foker dr1 was the best gliding, very stable. The super-hornet was the second best, with slats, rudders and flaps deflected for slow speed, the third was the flanker and the mig-29; for most of the other models I could not get them to glide at all: for example the f-16; the egle would glide good until it stall then it would pin. While I build my scale models I build rc aircrafts, I also designed a small aerobatic airplane based on the su-26 but I crashed it due to fuel tank problem; I was working on my improved version when I came to the US. My last balsa model was a 1/32 mig-21, I made it for a industrial design assignment; it had working elevators (used cables and pulleys to connect the elevators with the stick) retractable landing gear, flaps and articulated cockpit. I got 4.8 for my mig the best score for that assignment, jeje while my classmates build mundane stuff like tv controls and stuff like that... I gues I'm a nerd:pilotfly:

xv-70 crash sequence.

If you pull the trigger I'll report you to the administrator for vulching

I know but I dough that the f-16 departs only like that; but what about this? http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/i.p.Hodja/4694/ or this http://wrightsquawks.blogspot.com/2009/09/f16-departure-from-controlled-flight.html or Mar 2007 [w/o] 87380 87-0380 USAF 93 FS F-16D Block 30H News article Details The aircraft crashed around 10:15 hours local about 35 miles east of Marathon, Florida. It was determined by the AIB that the crash was caused by pilot error. A speed that was too low with a shifting center of gravity forced the jet out of control. The pilot, Maj. Timothy B. Piccin, ejected safely.

To me the biggest deal breaker is the flight model, there is no way that an aircraft like the f-16 don't have some kind of inertia or dampening; maybe the performance is accurate in numbers but to me it doesn't feel like the thing is really flying through the air. Also I recently read an f-16 accident report and it says that you can loose control under certain conditions if you are not careful, on falcon the airplane would not enter into a flat spin at all using the same configuration of the real airplane.

have you guys seen this before? tornado crash!

Watching the mig-23 video can we speculate that the su-27 also uses compressed air to open the cockpit? Is there anyway we can find the su-27 translated to English ? About the cold war museum, they need to get a hold on a mig-25! also can we find the mig-25 manual? Now look at that afterburner!

here is a fantastic video for this discussion: mig-23 walk around!

cold war museum mig-23, they also have a mi-24 airworthy! I believe that they want to fly the 23 too! walk around