IvanK Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 No warm up before moving off ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antartis Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 No warm up before moving off ??? Probably did warm up. I saw they cut a piece of video at the 0:20. Asus Prime Z-370-A Intel core I7-8700K 3.70Ghz Ram g.skill f4-3200c16d 32gb Evga rtx 2070 Ssd samgung 960 evo m.2 500gb Syria, Nevada, Persian Gulf, Normandy 1944 Combined Arms A-10C, Mirage-2000C, F-16C, FC3 Spitfire LF Mk. IX UH-1H, Gazelle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tflash Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Inside and outside the Kuznetsov - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ibg7dG3TjYY&feature=related Also, Su-33 pilot's point of view during take-off and landing can be seen here - http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=387592 Some very nice footage indeed, thanks! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamianJG54K Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 MiG-29M2/MiG-35 Does anybody know what is that yellow thing behind the main landing gear of this MiG-29M2? I mean this.... Regards!! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DamianJG54K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron886 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 You mean the gear door? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Wheel bay cover. It's slightly remodeled since -29 days, it's hinged to engine nacelle instead of wing. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vtsgoose1606687932 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Probably did warm up. I saw they cut a piece of video at the 0:20. The early mk spitfire's have to takeoff in a few minutes after startup because they cannot cool the engine enough.:pilotfly: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] http://virtual-aerobatic-group.nl/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 my god they test with people inside cockpits, live fire armor tests mi28 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Fj9hdmEeBY&feature=related This video reminds me of me and my cousin being 7 years old doing pyro experiments with gunpowder and sulphur behind uncle's shack. Don't these Russian scientist have any better testing ground and methods?! Entire area looks improvised, like a junkyard, a poor man's fix at least! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Still T-72 hull? What's bad with T-72 chassis? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucic Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 What's bad with T-72 chassis? For a tank that is barely in service yet - outdated, to say the least. F-4E Phantom module for sale -25% non-Steam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamianJG54K Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 You mean the gear door? Wheel bay cover. It's slightly remodeled since -29 days, it's hinged to engine nacelle instead of wing. Thanks for the answer!! :thumbup: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DamianJG54K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikoyan Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 super hornet close call! http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/detektif_conan78/5509/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flаnker Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Мои авиафото Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 For a tank that is barely in service yet - outdated, to say the least. Yes, initial T-72 were outdated even in mid '80s, Yugoslav army used to modernize T-72 and produce their own MBT called M-84 which was 20% / 80% domestic/export production. However, chassis is something that hasn't changed much and if it worked in '70 why wouldn't it today? Take a look at the MiG-21, it's an 50 YO design that still works in practice. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucic Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Yes, initial T-72 were outdated even in mid '80s, Yugoslav army used to modernize T-72 and produce their own MBT called M-84 which was 20% / 80% domestic/export production. However, chassis is something that hasn't changed much and if it worked in '70 why wouldn't it today? Take a look at the MiG-21, it's an 50 YO design that still works in practice. If you say no significant progress has been made in hull design during the past half a century, I simply give up. F-4E Phantom module for sale -25% non-Steam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topol-m Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 If you say no significant progress has been made in hull design during the past half a century, I simply give up. It's chassis, it's not an engine or an active protection system or a fire control system... chassis. T-72 possesses a tested good-enough one, and it seems they don't want to invest a lot of money into a new one that won't drastically improve the tank's performance. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamianJG54K Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Wow nice cammo..... Regards!! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DamianJG54K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mvsgas Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) At first I thought that F-18 photo was photoshopped, but I think it is real. http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=112990 I ran into this photo in Holloman.af.mil, what missile is that? QF-4 drone launch An unmanned QF-4 drone prepares to launch a missile Jan. 9 over White Sands Missile Range, N.M. This was the first time an air-to-ground missile had been fired from an unmanned drone. (U.S. Air Force photo) http://www.holloman.af.mil/news/story_media.asp?id=123082272 Edited January 5, 2012 by mvsgas To whom it may concern, I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that. Thank you for you patience. Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topol-m Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Cool! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elchacal Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Nice Vid!, thanks for share it! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hassata Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Wow nice cammo..... Really nice. Wonder what the story behind that is. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucic Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 It's chassis, it's not an engine or an active protection system or a fire control system... chassis. T-72 possesses a tested good-enough one, and it seems they don't want to invest a lot of money into a new one that won't drastically improve the tank's performance. I wouldn't want to go OT for too long but the reality is when a significant tech progress is made and you really don't need any better performance it usually means you can get a cheaper unit - aiming for the similar performance, using newer technology. You guys also seem to forget that it's not like there is a hull and completely separate armor layer. So you actually say 'naaah, we don't need our armor any better, we're fine with cold rolled steel, 'cause we like it traditional!" which is silly. I guess you were too fixated on the mobility aspect of a tank hull. Which isn't that insignificant on it's own, though. Then another detail seems to be forgotten. A new tank will likely be in service for another 20 years or so. Then a statement "no changes in 50 years" will turn into "no changes in 70 years" :) F-4E Phantom module for sale -25% non-Steam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamianJG54K Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 I'm back with the same question. At first sight, it looked like it was the main landing gear door, but take a closer look at this image. There must be something else, but what is it? It's seems, by the angle of this photo that, this "yellow thing" its only on one side of the aircraft. Regards!! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DamianJG54K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RvETito Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 It's a new generation EOS for A2G purposes. "See, to me that's a stupid instrument. It tells what your angle of attack is. If you don't know you shouldn't be flying." - Chuck Yeager, from the back seat of F-15D at age 89. =RvE= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts