20 Just Planes

Just Planes

Posted on September 27, 2012 by team


Just a few jet planes and bombers shot in the middle of hot August. Hot air was melting under the iron birds that were taking off and landing despite the unbearable heat.


Across the network:

loading...

The hot day made undress even the dummies.

Advertisement


Across the network:

20 Responses to “Just Planes”

  1. Tiger says:

    The Su 34 looks very good, a very beautiful plane. Funny to see the old su-24 as well, still flying.

  2. Jeebs says:

    I always loved how sweet the Su-34 looked but your government might want to look into some new Air Brake Chute

    • vorontsevich says:

      You don’t replace brake chutes, just because of small tears. There are certain allowances though, once reached they should be replaced.

      But otherwise, its just normal wear and tear, from being used.

  3. America says:

    Wow, they still fly “06” in military service?

    • Collonut says:

      Yes, they will be retired after american fiasco F-22 and F-35 )))))

    • vorontsevich says:

      Whats wrong with them? In many ways the best interceptor in the world, why on earth would they be dropped from service. Or, if you meant their age, nice try, it was built in the 80’s. That means its the same age as most of your F-15’s, F-16’s and FA-18’s.

      • America says:

        Technology is quickly passing them by if not already so long ago. Any plane that is intentionally penetrating Russian airspace today is likely to be able to fly circles around the Mig 31, not to mention take it out at standoff distance before it becomes a threat.

        They are nice fast eyes-on recon aircraft anyway. And they may as well try to do something when they get their. But safer and less expensive to just send a missile up after ID.

        • vorontsevich says:

          “Technology is quickly passing them by if not already so long ago.”
          Ever heard of upgrades like the Mig-31BM? Of course you won’t have, unless its the museum pieces that are B-52’s in which case oh yes, upgrades are the best.
          Besides, in no way is even the original Mig-31 behind modern technology. It has a very good PESA radar thats very powerful, it has a modern “IRST”, and most importantly it has a unique datalink, which means that four Mig-31’s flying ~200km from each other in a straight line, can cover well over 800km with their radar, with just four planes(trying doing taht with any other plane).

          “fly circles around the Mig 31″ Not sure what you mean by that. The Mig-31 has one of the highest performance capabilites of any fighter. Very few can match that.

          “take it out at standoff distance” LMAO @ that one. The Mig-31 is armed with R-37 missiles. In case you didn’t know, it has a maximum range of close to 400km. I seriously doubt a flight of Mig-31’s can be picked of from distance, like you seem to think. IIRC, there are no air-to-air missiles that can match that.

        • vorontsevich says:

          “They are nice fast eyes-on recon aircraft anyway.” What makes you think that a multi-million dollar, supersonic, heavy interceptor of all things, is suited, let alone going to be used, for reconnaissance. Lol. There are plenty of specialized lighter smaller planes for that, not to mention UARVs.

          “But safer and less expensive to just send a missile up after ID.” The whole point of having an air-defense network is to not be reliant on just one weapon. Example, if Russia used only the S-300/400 and nothing else, it is quite possible for someone to find a way to defeat it. But in real life, Russia doesn’t use just S-300/400’s but Pantsir’s, Buk’s, Tor’s, Tunguska’s, Strela-10’s, etc… Which makes it much harder. AND in addition to all this, there also the Mig-31 and the Su-30. So for any potential enemy, its not just one system to defeat, but a whole network of many layers that you have break down.

          • America says:

            “its not just one system to defeat, but a whole network of many layers that you have break down.”

            Hmm doesn’t sound so different from when 18 yr old beginning pilot Mathias Rust penetrated Soviet airspace for an extended period of time, ultimately landing in Red Square, in a CESSNA. :)

            lol it took the Moscow police to finally apprehend him. I seemed to recall that kicked off the largest Soviet military purge since Stalin’s time.

            • vorontsevich says:

              Lol. Do a bit of further reading about that. You might find enlightenment.

              • vorontsevich says:

                On second thoughts I might as well as give it to you, since you’d probably have trouble doing that on your own.

                The Cessna was tracked all the way by the PVO, but why didn’t they shoot it down? 1) They weren’t given orders to open fire (contrary to what western propaganda may tell you, the Soviet/Russian military does have a chain of command and the PVO had a very effective one), 2) There were several PVO units out on exercise at the time (which means that unless “proven” hostile, they would be assigned as freindly, 3) The Cessna was mistaken for a domestic one (the Yak-12 is similar).

                Besides you, as an American (Im assuming you’re an American) are one to talk about air defenses. The Rust case meant that a lot of PVO generals lost their jobs, and also contributed to the new air defence projects. But none was harmed. But less than 20 years later, the American equivalent, NORAD had an even more spectacular failure, and not just one, but FOUR, in ONE DAY! And here’s the killer part, NORAD’s failure resulted in the deaths of, what, maybe 3000 people? Lol. Try harder.

    • Tiger says:

      Yes they are, because unlike the F-22 and 35 they actually work and their financing and maintenance is already covered…a bunch of over-indebted Bison Herders and Welfare Ghetto Superstars is trying to come across with technics…produce a proper car first! Or a proper culture!

  4. Tovarich Volk says:

    I think that MiG-31 ’06’ is a trainer, due to the fact that it has a double cockpit. As far as the braking chutes are concerned, I’m sure there are acceptable allowances for tears in them, and since the ones pictured are being used, they are obviously within spec. Besides, those chutes probably only cost the equivalent of a few hundred dollars to maybe a thousand dollars at most to replace.– They are for the most part consumables.

  5. Y5K says:

    Isn’t VERA radar able to detect stealth aircraft?
    If all military radar in the world were changed to vera radar, is there anything different between stealth fighters and non-stealth common fighters, in terms of the detection?

    • vorontsevich says:

      Well, it doesn’t detect aircraft themselves, but instead tracks radar and radio emissions. And even then it only gives a rough estimate of the location, not a pin-point one like a search radar or thermal scans would provide. (Of course, even a rough location is enough to concentrate other more powerful and specialized assets, because stealthy or not, all aircraft emit heat and have thermal signatures).

      There are a few weaknesses to Vera.

      1)like I said, not being accurate or specialised. 2)it can only detect radio and radar transmissions, which means that if an aircraft maintains radio silence, and turns of its radar, then Vera is useless.
      3)it can pick up a lot of things, even mobile phones, so you’d have to filter all that out.

      So, Vera can’t “detect” stealth aircraft. But it can give a general location of an “unidentified” or “unaccounted for” blip, which is usually enough to send up some interceptors. But if something like Vera is used in an air-defense network (I think NATO refers to it as “IADS”), then it could be very useful. New radars, like the Nebo series can detect stealth aircraft, a vera like system could be used to check for any transmissions from the aircraft, and then Mig-31’s (like the above America guy’s beloved 06) could go upto intercept, or S-400’s could launch at it.

      Sorry for the long answer. :D

      • Mummeli says:

        And then there is this whole concept of ‘stealth’ aircraft. Almost all radars can detect them, it’s all about the distance of the detection.

        So there’s no ‘invisible to radars’ aircraft.

Leave a Reply

  • Popular: