Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[dizman]

Cool stuff, I love the Blue Angels shot with 1 and 3 looking like one plane.

[Dobber]

On 6/8/2017 at 0:32 AM, dizman said:

Cool stuff, I love the Blue Angels shot with 1 and 3 looking like one plane.

Yup great shot. The Angels are untouchable in the flight demo department. T-Birds are impressive too, but no one beats the Blue Angels. Surprisingly, I've even heard U.S. Air Force personnel agree with that.

Chris

Edited June 9, 2017 by Dobber

[David Hingtgen]

Glad I saw the 56FW fly their F-35 when I did---they were just grounded again today. (Oxy probs again)

[Dobber]

What's with all these O2 problems now. F-22, F-35, F/A-18E/F, T-45. I don't recall hearing about issues like these in older aircraft like the Eagle, Tomcat, Fighting Falcon, legacy Hornet, and earlier.

Chris

[Sildani]

Didn't have OBOGS like the new birds do. Like any newish tech, there's bugs that need to be worked out. Regrettably, these bugs are potentially lethal. 

[Shadow]

Footage shot from the cockpit of a B-1B over the Baltic Sea with an Russian Naval Su-27 greeting them.

 

[Dobber]

I thought the Naval Su-27k, also known as the Su-33, had the canards on it. The Flanker family is very confusing.

Chris

[electric indigo]

Yeah, the designation has become quite random. 

Know your Su-30:

[seti88]

16 hours ago, Shadow said:

Footage shot from the cockpit of a B-1B over the Baltic Sea with an Russian Naval Su-27 greeting them.

 

oh wow epic shot of mr red 92! Such a beaut's the 27 lineage is....

read more about it here...http://www.airforcesmonthly.com/2017/06/12/watch-from-the-cockpit-of-a-b-1-as-its-intercepted-by-a-su-27/

[seti88]

11 hours ago, Dobber said:

I thought the Naval Su-27k, also known as the Su-33, had the canards on it. The Flanker family is very confusing.

Chris

this seems to be the SU-27P as per the article and flew from the chkalovsk air base, and not from a carrier, which the canards SU-33 flanker D would be taking off from..

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by seti88

[Shadow]

Still see the RuAF loading mostly older R-27s onto the fighters instead of the R-77.  I agree the designations surrounding the Flanker family is abit overwhelming, particularly the Su-30. I believe the Su-33 Sea Flankers are being retired though for the Mig-29K Fulcrum-Ds.

[kalvasflam]

I have long ago lost track of the Flanker family.  For me, there are only two main types, the platypus  attack version and The mainline fighter version.    Nobody can keep track of all those derivatives with canards,  and a different camouflage schemes, and such. 

 Basically, it is the same  plane with a bunch of different skins,  not  unlike a lot of these modern day games.

[Shadow]

I remember in the 90s when you had the Su-35 and 37 demonstrators, then finally came the current Su-35S that threw everything ontop of its head. I think only the MiG-21 has more derivatives than the Flanker among Russian aircraft.

[slide]

Just now, kalvasflam said:

I have long ago lost track of the Flanker family.  For me, there are only two main types, the platypus  attack version and The mainline fighter version.    Nobody can keep track of all those derivatives with canards,  and a different camouflage schemes, and such. 

 Basically, it is the same  plane with a bunch of different skins,  not  unlike a lot of these modern day games.

close: most of the time there's a "new variant" of Russian machine it's an avionics/computer/internally upgraded model [usually these changes/upgrades filter back into older models to bring them up to current standards, which makes nomenclature even MORE ridiculous] or a straight-up MLU. Su-30 is SUPER complex because of all the export variants [see the chart from a little earlier in the thread].

this means externally, there's little or no difference. and since the Russians tend to use test/eval airframes to also try out new paint-schemes [at random], there's a new model/new scheme crossover that we westerners don't normally have to deal with, what with NATO aircraft all being boring [but effective] grey.

[slide]

Just now, Shadow said:

I remember in the 90s when you had the Su-35 and 37 demonstrators, then finally came the current Su-35S that threw everything ontop of its head. I think only the MiG-21 has more derivatives than the Flanker among Russian aircraft.

test aircraft and service-aircraft do not share the same numbering scheme. The real Russian designations for those airframes translate as "object xxxxx" or "project xxxxx", much like their experimental tank numbering. Also the Russians do not like the idea of the west knowing what's up with their armed forces, so there's a lot of PURPOSEFULLY confusing nomenclature that gets out to us.

Edited June 14, 2017 by slide

[electric indigo]

At least the latest MiG has a very visible profile change.

[anime52k8]

The MiG-29SMT looks so strange in profile. it's like a weirdly truncated Flanker.

[Valkyrie Hunter D]

That is one BEEFY MiG.

[Shadow]

Speaking of Fulcrums. Has anyone seen a single seat version of the Mig-35? All shots I've seen is of the two-seater.

[Dobber]

I looks like the offspring off a MiG and he F/A-18. Very weird.

Chris

 

[Falcon]

Looks like the Mig has got conformal fuel tanks like the new F-16's we keep seeing...

[hal9000]

Well something you don't hear about every day a TV blimp crashed, at the us open.  I got a text from a friend that's on site.  Reports are that the crew parachuted out. 

[F-ZeroOne]

So, having seen that MiG-29, the F-35 probably doesn't seem quite so lumpy anymore right?

[electric indigo]

Nobody builds badass ugly russian fighters like MiG. Take that you girly Sukhois 

[Shadow]

2 hours ago, electric indigo said:

Nobody builds badass ugly russian fighters like MiG. Take that you girly Sukhois 

There was always something about the 2nd gen Mig-23ML series that I just liked. The MLA and MLD made it into more than just a small interceptor.

 

[Firefox]

On 15/06/2017 at 10:44 AM, Shadow said:

Speaking of Fulcrums. Has anyone seen a single seat version of the Mig-35? All shots I've seen is of the two-seater.

The single seater is essentially the same as the two seater but with the second seat replaced by the fuel tank. Thus, they all look like two seater. 

[derex3592]

Anyone seen this yet???

 

https://www.cnet.com/pictures/meet-the-stratolaunch-the-worlds-largest-airplane/?ftag=ACQ9265a8a&vndid=1860861253&nan_pid=1860861253&ad_id=6365968

[Thom]

2 hours ago, derex3592 said:

Anyone seen this yet???

 

https://www.cnet.com/pictures/meet-the-stratolaunch-the-worlds-largest-airplane/?ftag=ACQ9265a8a&vndid=1860861253&nan_pid=1860861253&ad_id=6365968

Yes, looks awesome even with the Rhutan weirdness!

 

This is something NASA should have been doing for decades!

[Shadow]

So Lockheed just showed a new C-130J variant proposed for special operations. Intriguing.

[frothymug]

21 hours ago, derex3592 said:

Anyone seen this yet???

 

https://www.cnet.com/pictures/meet-the-stratolaunch-the-worlds-largest-airplane/?ftag=ACQ9265a8a&vndid=1860861253&nan_pid=1860861253&ad_id=6365968

I actually agree with this launch methodology. This seems like the most cost-effective way to get small payloads into orbit.

I am curious, though, why they didn't connect the tails together to give the entire structure more rigidity. Maybe they figured the payload would have adverse effects on aerodynamic surfaces, but that still shouldn't keep them from simply using it for structure reinforcement. Those wing spars between the two fuselages must be beefy as hell to resist torquing between the two bodies.

[Sildani]

I bet you the fly-by-wire system is programmed to keep the twin fuselages within millimeters of each other within normal parameters. I'll agree though that this is a case of two separate aircraft flying in ridiculously close formation, more so than any twin that's come before. 

[David Hingtgen]

There's a lot of 747 parts in there.  They bought 2 747-400's from United that had sequential serial numbers so as to be as identical as possible.   The cockpits are from them, as are the engines and much of the landing gear.  

[Shadow]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-air-force-has-no-plans-to-restart-the-f-22-after-a-report-found-big-costs/article/2626637

Not surprised. Just disappointed. It's going to be a looong wait to the 6th generation fighter program.

[F-ZeroOne]

F-35A at Paris airshow, where that ultimate arbiter of combat aircraft effectiveness the online airshow video has definitely determined, ending all possible arguments and stopping any further discussion that the F-35 is the ultimate air combat machine past, present or future/more useless than a Brewster Buffalo thats already been shot down/sexier than a PaK-FA wearing a bikini/uglier than something found at the bottom of the ocean/what actually launched the proton torpedoes that destroyed the Death Star:

 

 

[electric indigo]

I only saw three failed attempts to pull a cobra...