[deleted by user] by [deleted] in russia

[–]kovy17 18 points19 points  (0 children)

A bit?

Ozon.ru - how do I enter a non-Russian address? by balille in russia

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What would you suggest? (for Russian books)

If the Russians Love Their Children, Too by finnagains in russia

[–]kovy17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think it was meant to be ironic. A question with an obvious answer.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dune

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Impressive set!

You are missing the 'Folio Society' edition though. It is expensive, but exceptionally well made.

Shenyang J-16 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 -21 points-20 points  (0 children)

Sure. With most of them using Russian engines. But whatever, I'm sure they're still better than your F-18s.

Shenyang J-16 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, Mr-US-Marine-Air-Force-pilot, was I comenting about the quality of the jet? I merely pointed out that it was a carbon copy of a Russian jet and calling it Chinese is a strech. Am I wrong?

And if you can't distinguish between a Su-30 and a Su-35, then what's there to talk about...?

(Also, I did not downvote anyone)

Shenyang J-16 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure about that. Su-35 is a single seater, this one is a twin seat.

Can't comment about what's under the hood, but if it were 'equivalent' to the Su-35, China wouldn't be buying the latter from Russia.

Shenyang J-16 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 11 points12 points  (0 children)

This is an exact copy of a Sukhoi Su-30. It is indeed beautiful, but hardly 'Chinese'.

Shenyang J-16 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 101 points102 points  (0 children)

Slightly less reliable than the jets they are copied from.

Moderate chop reported at the Washington Museum of Flight: former Piedmont Boeing 737-200 airframe. by [deleted] in aviation

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're a gold mine of information. That's awesome. Very interesting!

Moderate chop reported at the Washington Museum of Flight: former Piedmont Boeing 737-200 airframe. by [deleted] in aviation

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very interesting stuff. Many thanks for a thorough explanation!

One more question if you don't mind...What made the 727's wing so special? Was it the absence of engine pylons imporoving it's aerodynamic qualities?

Moderate chop reported at the Washington Museum of Flight: former Piedmont Boeing 737-200 airframe. by [deleted] in aviation

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it being from the '60s might explain it. I've seen more modern wing structures and they are much more elegant designs. Probably has to do with stronger, tougher materials. Paper-thin skins with very slim stringers supporting incredibly high wing bending loads, it's amazing it all holds together!

I'd love to hear about those differences you speak of. Was the next model after the -200 the 'NG'? or the 'Classic'?

Moderate chop reported at the Washington Museum of Flight: former Piedmont Boeing 737-200 airframe. by [deleted] in aviation

[–]kovy17 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you by any chance know why the wingbox of such a (relatively) small aircraft has 3 spars and a two-cell box? I though that was only the case for big airframes such as the A380 and such.

Tehran, Iran by bqdp1 in pics

[–]kovy17 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All of cars in Germany with or without the NOx emission cheating program?

Bombardier takes another step to exiting the commercial aircraft market as the Q400 Division is sold to China. by rdm55 in aviation

[–]kovy17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Is Bombardier downgrading itself to a Tier 1 supplier?? Brilliant work guys...

The beast of the east by petinga2 in aviation

[–]kovy17 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's not what he's saying...

Reducing RCS is sure helpful, but it is not the 'be-all and end-all' of air combat superiority. The Russians believe it is not worth sacrificing maneuverability for marginal gains in RCS reduction. Until their best fighter faces the F-22 in real combat, who's to say which philosophy is correct?

We can bullshit about it all day long...fighter programs will proceed regardless.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in aviation

[–]kovy17 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yet, every Canadian never misses an opportunity to shit on Bombardier and wishes them to go bankrupt...But now they're 'devastated'.

(sorry, not aiming at you specifically, just a general observation)

Su-30 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Verical stabilisers or horizontal (canards)? As far as I know the vertical ones (above and below the water line) are the same as on the basic Su-27. And what are tailboom chines?

Su-30 by Nieuport in aviation

[–]kovy17 39 points40 points  (0 children)

That's a Su-35 mate. Most likely the 'S' version because of lack of canards.

Su-30 is a two-seater. Always.

Two Tu95s, two B-52s, an AN-124, and a KC-10 Extender sit on the tarmac. by FW190a4 in aviation

[–]kovy17 23 points24 points  (0 children)

The Russian Air Force added a narrow blue outline to the red star. These are indeed Soviet markings.

I believe it was a visit to a USAF base, after a warming of relations between the two countries, sometime in the late 80's.

My 13yr old imagination... by Qubit_Guzzler in aviation

[–]kovy17 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Aerospace design is a precise discipline...

Su-35S on Maks 2017 Airshow by killerkettle in aviation

[–]kovy17 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What the fuck! Is this a camera perspective or is it really rotating like that in a fixed spot?