eehnie wrote:Some people trying to be "experts" here are only a joke. They know 0, absolutely 0 about the economic and technological meaning of what they are saying.
Well you failed to show that you know more than 0 either. Fortunately you live in 2017 not in Stalin era, so your desire about "official" stuff is getting some value. Stalin didn't do a lots of things "officially" but he actually did them.
It is not possible to hide the development of a new aircraft from 0 as a development from other aircraft. The reason why this is not possible is because the development of a new aircraft from 0 is a lot more expensive than the development of a variant based on a previous aircraft and someone has to pay the difference. Also another very important point against this joke we are reading is in the test protocols, that are very different for the case of a machine totally new and a machine "developed from" a previous machine.
Do you know you can develop something new without starting from 0? By based on something already developed but it can still be a new one? And that development is cheap enough? If yes you are at 0 level knowledge with us, if no then you have successfully went into -1.
According to -1 level knowledge MiG-31 is a "variant" of MiG-25 (Just because it was not developed from 0, rather from MiG-25). Fortunately F-15 is an US aircraft otherwise we would have to label it as "variant" of MiG-25 as well. Also T-90, which is developed from T-72 which is from T-55 which is from T-54 (you can take it further back to T-44 and T-34!). So T-90 is a "variant" of T-54! Again just because it not was developed from 0.
Anyways "officially" they were not branded as "variant" so you didn't brand them either but as for the case of Backfire and Blinder you did because "officially" it was branded like that. Very cool.
The development of a variant has a range of cost that is well known by who gives the funds and is very short for the development of a totally new aircraft. The people is saying Tupolev developed the expensive option and hide it under the cheap option. It makes 0 sense. Who payed the part of the cost of the totally new aircraft that is not justified as the development from a previous basis? To drive the cost of a variant developed from a previous basis to the cost level of a totally new aircraft only can be caused by severe mismanagement. Is someone trying to say that Tupolev assumed own mismanagement to hide a totally new aircraft as a variant developed from a previous basis that should have a development a lot cheaper? No way.
And again you have completely failed to understand the thing about the term "developed from". Which can be a new product rather than a variant. The new product which uses the solutions of the previous faulty products. Costs? Do you think Tupolev has bromance only with Khrushchev? The whole command of the Red Air Force was under his influence.
(Sorry no "official" links for these. You have to learn from history in this case. How about some interviews from old Tupolev employees?)
Also it makes 0 sense from the testing side. The test protocols for totally new aircrafts are far stronger than for a variant developed from a previously tested and accepted basis. To hide an aircraft totally new as an aircraft developed from a previous basis, means that Tupolev consciently tried to send an undertested new model to active service. Is someone trying to say this seriously?
Yes darling. Not someone but basically everyone is trying to say this. I know you don't care because I don't have "official" links but I'm still saying. Using solutions from already tested stuffs reduce the time and cost and testing phase significantly. The first Tu-22Ms and Su-24s got a lots of similarity in airframe! Su-24 got first flight in 1967, Tu-22M two years later 1969. Which is 10 years later from Tu-22. (And that is actually a LOTs of time for testing and developing).
Also the testing engineers are not idiots to know what comes to them. If they see a totally new aircraft they know what they have, and if they see an aircraft developed from a basis they tested previously, they also know what they have. If the testing engineers see something new, they order to test it inmediately. To try to hide a totally new aircraft as a development from a previous aircraft would have been a testing nightmare for Tupolev, would have been profesionally suicidal, and Khruschev/Brezhnev would have been noticed for sure.
FFS this not even -1 level. This is -2. Someone here is still believing that back in 60s in USSR just some "test engineers" got the power and gut of defying order from Tupolev himself as not branding the aircraft as a variant rather a new one, considering the amount of political links Tupolev had. Daaaayyyyyyyyymmmmmmmmmmmmnnnnnn
PS: Gulag did exist and there are "official" proofs of that.
Tupolev was an outstanding engineer. He was known by always to try to include previously developed parts even in new aircrafts to keep the costs of new projects under control, something that made his designs always a little less new or original, than the designs of other offices. But we have still to read some ridiculous things.
Because you choose to ignore the facts and keep dreaming about "official" declarations! I already wrote it but here, read it again:
"According to -1 level knowledge MiG-31 is a "variant" of MiG-25 (Just because it was not developed from 0, rather from MiG-25). Fortunately F-15 is an US aircraft otherwise we would have to label it as "variant" of MiG-25 as well. Also T-90, which is developed from T-72 which is from T-55 which is from T-54 (you can take it further back to T-44 and T-34!). So T-90 is a "variant" of T-54! Again just because it not was developed from 0."
I know you won't follow but still I'm asking, try to understand the thing that just because something is developed from doesn't make it a variant. And stop thinking so much about official comments. Why? Watch North Korea. Full of "official" statements.
(Well I think all my words are going to be in vein
So I'll just ignore this from now. Unless eehnie can stop from being an "expert" and come down to normal level aka level 0. Which means facts and try to understand what others are saying not just keep blabbering about "official" links)