Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
So MiG-29K has greater range than Su-33
The MiG can carry external fuel tanks...
Well, I was thinking about the fact that the Su-33 has to choose bettwen weapon and fuel for it's missions so it gives you a diagram in 3 dimensions: range (y) depending on load (x) and fuel (z), not a cercle.
The Su-33 can get airborne with a full air to air load of weapons (its primary use) and full fuel on the long takeoff run position.
So can the MiG.
Going back to the K topic, I was thinking that making an improved K class before going for a big carrier could be benefic for russia. At least building 1 and improving the K. They can make 2 of them for the price of 1 big as the developpement was already done for the K and the modernisation parts can be derivated from other ships (electronics from the frigate, nuc reactors from icebreakers ..), and now with the Mig-29K they can use the aviation for attacking other ships with Kh-35/31 in big numbers.
I disagree. They have learned a lot from the design of the K and also the new modular systems they have developed for their new ships... putting that to use in a new design that take advantage of this makes more sense than trying to rebuild the K so the K can have a sister ship.
R-15B for an example had below 100h lifespan, you know why? Rubbish metalurgical choices, or better say lack of any, stainless steel all over the place, so its not WW2 issue. Its issue still.
Ignorant western view... what sort of lifespan in a real war do you think it would have?
In 50 years time the Tiger tanks will work like clocks and the T-34s will be junk... of course in war time conditions T-34s will do the job cheaply enough to be built in tens of thousands... how many of those tigers have you got left? The land mine does not care how good quality that German engineered Tiger is...
The MiG-25 is a case in point... most so called western experts looked down their noses at the aircraft, but it is the fastest flying normal turbojet engine in the world. In comparison the engine in the SR-71 has almost no air flowing through the hot section of its turbojets... bypass air acts like ramjets... no moving parts just fuel burned.
The MiG-25 could have done the same but the requirements were relaxed to reduce costs... stainless steel was used for the airframe because all the wielders who could wield titanium were making subs and the rest of the titanium being produced by the Soviets at the time went to making SR-71s...
In many cases it was a choice not to spend rather more money for a modest increase in speed... at mach 3.5 the SR-71 was no safer over Soviet airspace than it it had been 1,000 times cheaper and only managed Mach 2.5.
