By: RSM55
- 1st May 2009 at 22:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think it was supposed to take part in the flypast over Moscow on 9 May..
(At least Sukhoi/KnAAPO was 'hoping' to have it ready in time...)
Maybe that is why???
Ken
Nah. The fly-by layouts published till now don't feature any Su-35. And even if, I doubt they would have flown it there. If they really wanted to, they still got the two other frames.
By: fightingirish
- 2nd May 2009 at 20:44Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[...]
When I first time looked the date the crash happened there is one thing that still keeps me wondering about. Why are they rushing to fly that fighter on Sunday? :confused:[...]
Maybe VVIP's ?!
originally maiden flight was scheduled for Friday, then postponed till Monday
flight attempt on Sunday took place because of unnamed hi-ranked comission arriving, according to some reports
[...]
By: djcross
- 3rd May 2009 at 08:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And in many cases people spout uninformed claptrap on internet forums!
Experience trumps fan boyism. You don't have to be psychic to understand that malfunctions very early in a flight are very likely caused by maintenance errors.
Read posts #55 and #58. Both tell the story of Frolov fighting a jammed cockpit control after maintenance had been performed. Maintenance errors cause crashes. Those errors occur in every air force and account for a healthy percentage of lost fighters every year. Thankfully, Frolov lives to fly another day.
If it makes you feel better, the F-22 that crashed on takeoff at Nellis AFB in December 2004 was due to a flight control malfunction caused by an improper FCS shutdown and restart while a maintenance check was being performed. The B-2 that crashed on takeoff at Andersen AFB in February 2008 was due to improper actions by the ground crew during pre-flight preparations. So you see, maintenance errors cause crashes in every air force.
By: martinez
- 3rd May 2009 at 09:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Maybe VVIP's ?!
originally maiden flight was scheduled for Friday, then postponed till Monday flight attempt on Sunday took place because of unnamed hi-ranked comission arriving, according to some reports...
Ahh, but what kind of hi-ranked comission is working on Sunday? It is simple as that, do not push too hard on the "saw", bcs this kind of $hit will happen. They will regret that twice not waiting till monday.
By: haavarla
- 4th May 2009 at 10:27Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ahh, but what kind of hi-ranked comission is working on Sunday? It is simple as that, do not push too hard on the "saw", bcs this kind of $hit will happen. They will regret that twice not waiting till monday.
p.S. I found this picture on my HDD....8)
Good pic's martinez.
It looks to me that those pylons and perhaps those small verticals fins under the engines are the only one thing with contact to the ground here?
By: niksi
- 4th June 2009 at 15:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I am not an expert in assessing the damage, does anybody know what's gonna happen with the 903? Does she go to the surgery room or to the graveyard?
By: CommanderJB
- 4th June 2009 at 15:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My opinion is somewhat uneducated, but I would tend to think that there is probably a definition of graveyard job in post #70, sadly. I doubt much is even salvageable, let alone repairable.
By: Arthur
- 4th June 2009 at 21:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Scooter,
You bringing up the F-35 in this thread is trolling.
This is a public and final warning. Further trolling or unwillingness to properly engage into a discussion WILL result in a suspension of your posting rights.
By: medal64
- 4th June 2009 at 22:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It seems like they apply very small amount of composite materials at the aircraft's body.(It's body still seems like standart su-27).I couldn't see any big gaps at the body or at the wings of the aircarft (or something composite).Where is 5th generation technologies.Radar of the aircarft is not AESA, the engine is a development of the AL31F.Just avionics are looking like 5th gen!!!Maybe it's enough...:)
By: haavarla
- 5th June 2009 at 07:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It seems like they apply very small amount of composite materials at the aircraft's body.(It's body still seems like standart su-27).I couldn't see any big gaps at the body or at the wings of the aircarft (or something composite).Where is 5th generation technologies.Radar of the aircarft is not AESA, the engine is a development of the AL31F.Just avionics are looking like 5th gen!!!Maybe it's enough...:)
plz explain to me how you see that there is very little composite materials on this wreck??
By: martinez
- 5th June 2009 at 08:03Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No one will ever put effort to repair this burned and melted airframe, no fck way. They`ll start from the scratch.
A several years ago a Mig-29 burned on the runway during take-off when pilot set the throttle to AB. Left engine exploded while some parts hitting fuel tanks set the a/c on fire. The Mig accelerating but with speed still below 70km/h, pilot could not use the ejection seat and had to jump out from the inferno after stoping it in the grass.
When comparing what left from the burned Mig with those Sukhoi Su-35 pictures, our Mig came out much better but damaged fuselage a wing spars by the fire implied, that repair will be pointless.
Posts: 409
By: RSM55 - 1st May 2009 at 22:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nah. The fly-by layouts published till now don't feature any Su-35. And even if, I doubt they would have flown it there. If they really wanted to, they still got the two other frames.
Posts: 1,151
By: fightingirish - 2nd May 2009 at 20:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Maybe VVIP's ?!
Posts: 809
By: bloodnok - 3rd May 2009 at 07:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And in many cases people spout uninformed claptrap on internet forums!
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 3rd May 2009 at 08:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Experience trumps fan boyism. You don't have to be psychic to understand that malfunctions very early in a flight are very likely caused by maintenance errors.
Read posts #55 and #58. Both tell the story of Frolov fighting a jammed cockpit control after maintenance had been performed. Maintenance errors cause crashes. Those errors occur in every air force and account for a healthy percentage of lost fighters every year. Thankfully, Frolov lives to fly another day.
If it makes you feel better, the F-22 that crashed on takeoff at Nellis AFB in December 2004 was due to a flight control malfunction caused by an improper FCS shutdown and restart while a maintenance check was being performed. The B-2 that crashed on takeoff at Andersen AFB in February 2008 was due to improper actions by the ground crew during pre-flight preparations. So you see, maintenance errors cause crashes in every air force.
Posts: 1,189
By: martinez - 3rd May 2009 at 09:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ahh, but what kind of hi-ranked comission is working on Sunday? It is simple as that, do not push too hard on the "saw", bcs this kind of $hit will happen. They will regret that twice not waiting till monday.
p.S. I found this picture on my HDD....8)
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 4th May 2009 at 10:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good pic's martinez.
It looks to me that those pylons and perhaps those small verticals fins under the engines are the only one thing with contact to the ground here?
Posts: 3,652
By: Flanker_man - 4th May 2009 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you look closely, the ventral fins are not in contact with the runway - they are undamaged when the Su-27 stops.
The load was taken entirely by the pylons.
Like I said, the aircraft was jacked up, the undercarriage was lowered - and it was flown back to Kubinka a few days later.
There is video somewhere of the undercarriage being lowered....
Ken
Posts: 577
By: pesho - 4th May 2009 at 16:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
martinez posted it on the previous page:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqiArXOodo4
Posts: 195
By: bob909 - 4th June 2009 at 10:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://photofile.name/users/sergxon/96063153/107599303/
Posts: 699
By: CommanderJB - 4th June 2009 at 11:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ouch...
Looks like Frolov did the right thing by ejecting, that's for sure. That is some horrific damage.
Posts: 521
By: press - 4th June 2009 at 11:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think two weeks of hard work and dedication will make this plane flyable again ;):D
Posts: 639
By: soyuz1917 - 4th June 2009 at 15:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
the best part is it looks like the whole radar just melted away! :dev2:
Posts: 402
By: niksi - 4th June 2009 at 15:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As I am not an expert in assessing the damage, does anybody know what's gonna happen with the 903? Does she go to the surgery room or to the graveyard?
Posts: 699
By: CommanderJB - 4th June 2009 at 15:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
My opinion is somewhat uneducated, but I would tend to think that there is probably a definition of graveyard job in post #70, sadly. I doubt much is even salvageable, let alone repairable.
Posts: 639
By: soyuz1917 - 4th June 2009 at 18:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
they use magnesium for the radar housing because its so light weight right? That should explain why there isnt so much as a trace of the radar....
Posts: 7,877
By: Arthur - 4th June 2009 at 21:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Scooter,
You bringing up the F-35 in this thread is trolling.
This is a public and final warning. Further trolling or unwillingness to properly engage into a discussion WILL result in a suspension of your posting rights.
Posts: 1,114
By: medal64 - 4th June 2009 at 22:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It seems like they apply very small amount of composite materials at the aircraft's body.(It's body still seems like standart su-27).I couldn't see any big gaps at the body or at the wings of the aircarft (or something composite).Where is 5th generation technologies.Radar of the aircarft is not AESA, the engine is a development of the AL31F.Just avionics are looking like 5th gen!!!Maybe it's enough...:)
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 5th June 2009 at 07:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
plz explain to me how you see that there is very little composite materials on this wreck??
Thanks
Posts: 1,189
By: martinez - 5th June 2009 at 08:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No one will ever put effort to repair this burned and melted airframe, no fck way. They`ll start from the scratch.
A several years ago a Mig-29 burned on the runway during take-off when pilot set the throttle to AB. Left engine exploded while some parts hitting fuel tanks set the a/c on fire. The Mig accelerating but with speed still below 70km/h, pilot could not use the ejection seat and had to jump out from the inferno after stoping it in the grass.
When comparing what left from the burned Mig with those Sukhoi Su-35 pictures, our Mig came out much better but damaged fuselage a wing spars by the fire implied, that repair will be pointless.
Posts: 1,912
By: QuantumFX - 5th June 2009 at 08:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thats a depressing sight....:(