Vekkinho Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 With western parts in eastern products prices shall equal in the near future! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 You could say the same about F-15 v Su-27, no? So yeah, let's wait and see. We probably won't 'see' for another 40 years down the road though... :furious: Well it might not have the airs and graces F-22 has but when it comes to results I don`t think there will be much difference. It even might have some advantages over F-22 - like payload, range, etc., until we see some official data though I`m not making assumptions. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKungFu Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 here's the blueprints to the real T-50 haha just kidding....it's just some stupid drawing I made a long time ago. Don't even begin to tell me the flaws 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Oh look, a VF 19 :P [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RvETito Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Although it may seem ready to fly from what I read the first flight will (eventualy) happen in february 2010. What is more interesting these days the announcement for PAK-DA project which should be the backbone of the russian strategic aviation after 2015. I wonder what they would need that for since the Tu-160, Tu-22M3 and Tu-95MS are continously upgraded. "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...
GGTharos Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Aren't those airframes aproaching the end of their lifetimes though? Take the F-15 for example, it has been upgraded up the wazoo and there's just not much left that can be done with that airframe in terms of upgrades. Might be the same for bombers. USAF is also making a few waves about a future strategic bomber project. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topol-m Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Absolutely. Not only that but the new bomber will not be just an upgraded T-160/22/etc. it will be a new aircraft, designed and constructed with all the new technologies/materials that exist/will exist, with significantly reduced RCS, capable of meeting the requirements for a future heavy bomber. You can`t rely on 50 years old designs. If you could then we would have never seen B-1, B-2 cause the B-52 is enough. Well it isn`t and the first two also need already or will need in the near future a replacement for some specific tasks that they are not capable of managing effectively. As GG said the USAF have their own projects and programs and I`m sure they are ahead cause, as the russian officials said, the PAK-DA program is still in a very early stage. All these projects are so far in the future that we shouldn`t be preoccupied with them ;) Unless something speeds up the development we won`t be seeing any of those bombers any time soon. :cry: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RvETito Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 You don't expect much to be upgraded of a bomber's aiframe unless you want it to do something special. The americans are still running 50-years old B-52's quiet successfuly. "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...
topol-m Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 You don't expect much to be upgraded of a bomber's aiframe unless you want it to do something special. The americans are still running 50-years old B-52's quiet successfuly. B-52, B-1, B-2 - pretty different looking aircraft ain`t they? These 3 are used for different tasks, you can`t expect B-52 to do what B-2 is created for. :doh: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zakobi Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 B-52, B-1, B-2 - pretty different looking aircraft ain`t they? These 3 are used for different tasks, you can`t expect B-52 to do what B-2 is created for. :doh: B-2 is soooo old style... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffin Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 (edited) I don't know how reliable this is and which source is it from (no such member on sukhoi.ru forum) but will be really cool if it's true! Космонавт Алёшин: Короче так. Это всё покажут по ящику к Новому Году. Типа бонус вместо "Булавы". Понятно? Больше ничего не скажу.They will show it on new year on TV instead of Bulava (wich failed). http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4653238&postcount=1211 Edited December 27, 2009 by Griffin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilde Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 What does "New Year" mean here? Gregorian Calendar? Also, those speculations about price and ability made me giggle. You know, in WW2 the Allies bombed the sh*t out of Germany trying to end production of military gear. They ruined Germany's economy but that had no significant effect on quality or quantity of German gear. Meaning: the American economy is not automatically an indicator of quality or quantity in military equipment. Just because the total turnover is 5 times as big doesn't mean they can produce 5 times the planes or 5 times the quality. It just means they produce more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) - and we all know they consume more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) too. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikoyan Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 What does "New Year" mean here? Gregorian Calendar? Also, those speculations about price and ability made me giggle. You know, in WW2 the Allies bombed the sh*t out of Germany trying to end production of military gear. They ruined Germany's economy but that had no significant effect on quality or quantity of German gear. Meaning: the American economy is not automatically an indicator of quality or quantity in military equipment. Just because the total turnover is 5 times as big doesn't mean they can produce 5 times the planes or 5 times the quality. It just means they produce more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) - and we all know they consume more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) too. ;) And waste more... for real, military projects waste money the same way kids trow the food after just one bite (my american cousins do that all the time, for a person like me, coming from an underdevelopment country I just wanted to murder their behinds with a ruller!):mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zakobi Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 What does "New Year" mean here? Gregorian Calendar? Also, those speculations about price and ability made me giggle. You know, in WW2 the Allies bombed the sh*t out of Germany trying to end production of military gear. They ruined Germany's economy but that had no significant effect on quality or quantity of German gear. Meaning: the American economy is not automatically an indicator of quality or quantity in military equipment. Just because the total turnover is 5 times as big doesn't mean they can produce 5 times the planes or 5 times the quality. It just means they produce more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) - and we all know they consume more food (cars, sneekers, houses, TV shows..) too. ;) That's not completely truth. When russians captured some Kingtigers, they revealed that some had inferior armor, compared to the Tiger I. That was due to that the industry couldn't make it the same quality, since the factories was bombed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 That's not completely truth. When russians captured some Kingtigers, they revealed that some had inferior armor, compared to the Tiger I. That was due to that the industry couldn't make it the same quality, since the factories was bombed. ...and those tanks were lightened after experience in muddy plains of Russia! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffin Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 (edited) What does "New Year" mean here? Gregorian Calendar? Russians use the same calendar as everybody else, it's the orthodox church that uses the Gregorian one. EDIT: Sorry, I meant Julian... :doh: You know, in WW2 the Allies bombed the sh*t out of Germany trying to end production of military gear. They ruined Germany's economy but that had no significant effect on quality or quantity of German gear. I don't know about tanks but they propably suffered from the same material problems as did the aircraft. It's a well known fact that late German fighters had alot of quality problems. Also the shortages meant that the new versions couldn't be produced to such numbers that the older aircraft could be replaced. Bf-109K4: Poor build quality and short airframe life-span due to end-of-war production problems. Edited December 29, 2009 by Griffin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilde Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 That's not completely truth. When russians captured some Kingtigers, they revealed that some had inferior armor, compared to the Tiger I. That was due to that the industry couldn't make it the same quality, since the factories was bombed. ...and those tanks were lightened after experience in muddy plains of Russia! Yes well, the Königstiger was a bad concept. It was superior to any other tank of the time - when the infrastructure allowed it like in Germany or Benelux/northern France. What I meant was, that despite sustained bombardment the military industry was able to produce more equipment in 1944 than any year before. And most of it was state of the art still, like for example the machine guns (massive numbers + quality), the planes (unique jet fighters in WW2), the submarines (numbers + quality) and so on. It's a bit flawed argument admittedly. Don't want to compare Russia now with Germany then. I just wanted to point out, that a smaller industry doesn't result in a guaranteed military production inferiority. Maybe I should have skipped it all together. :music_whistling: Russians use the same calendar as everybody else, it's the orthodox church that uses the Gregorian one. EDIT: Sorry, I meant Julian... :doh: Yeah, the different calendars in use confused me. Though at least it made me go read up about it. Always nice to learn about things like that. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FeoFUN Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Fake or the real thing? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topol-m Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 can`t tell :( If it`s fake it`s a good one. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boberro Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 IMHO fake... front does look like MiG too much for me... Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FeoFUN Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Yep, it's fake, indeed - found same scene in Pilot's blog. Mig-29K/KUB rollout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffin Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Can't make out any stealthy designs from this angle. Looks more like a MiG. Funny how this picture explodes it's way through every forum in just "seconds". :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Looks like a fail to me. No PAk FA in 2009 as promised as I expected. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffin Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 (edited) In aviation business you quickly learn that schedules are not to be trusted. They change constantly. Same seems to apply to aviation software business (read sims). Hoping to see this bird soon and really hoping it will be a success. Edited January 1, 2010 by Griffin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 There's lots of snow in Moscow region these days so I say it's a fake! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts