Author Topic: Trivia #1  (Read 2682 times)

Offline Blinder

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 547
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2014, 04:39:56 PM »
Look closer.

(Image removed from quote.)

I love that Polish paint scheme... Especially with the WWII heroes they honor on the tail.

In T/O and landing config the engines draw air from the gills on the upper surface of the LERX. Internal doors close the main intakes. The Su-25 doesn't need any since it sits so high off the ground in a nose-up attitude.

(Image removed from quote.)

I want a Frogfoot!  :old: What are they selling for these days?
Fighter pilots win glory .... Bomber pilots win wars.



17th Guards Air Assault Regiment (VVS) "Badenov's Red Raiders"

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2014, 05:36:39 PM »
I've heard about a privately owned SU-25, but I've never seen it, and I have no idea what something like that would cost. Lots of decadent imperialist capitalist money for sure!  :confused:
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Sombra

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2014, 06:25:50 PM »
Look closer.

(Image removed from quote.)

I love that Polish paint scheme... Especially with the WWII heroes they honor on the tail.

In T/O and landing config the engines draw air from the gills on the upper surface of the LERX. Internal doors close the main intakes. The Su-25 doesn't need any since it sits so high off the ground in a nose-up attitude.

What your picture shows is the original solution for MiG 29, but as already stated, they changed it in later models to retractable grids in order to use the space inside the LERX for more fuel:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?53622-Su-27-3x-vs-Mig-29-Take-off-amp-landing-from-Unpaved-Rough-field&s=2e717145d60bff855c429b9305fa5f9c&p=847660#post847660

Similar to Su-27's:

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=199152&view=findpost&p=1877412

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8802
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2014, 06:36:22 PM »
Until you've done a FOD walk-down on GTMO's ramp, you haven't done one yet. We'd collect at least a dozen land crabs every morning... The occasional Iguana too....
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2014, 06:54:12 PM »
Those were developed for the naval version of the MiG-29 the K-model. They only needed to stop it from inhaling deck crewmen and their back-pocket spanners! ;)  Unlike the MiG-29 the Su-27 is not a "front line fighter" and wasn't expected to operate from rough unprepared runways. Its primary mission was/is to defend the Soviet Union/Russia from strategic bombers. However, still the Su-27 has a highly effective protection against ingesting foreign objects.



Anything that gets through that screen won't be big enough to cause any problems.




Except for the original MiG-29M all the modernized versions also have the gills, like this MiG-29SMT:

"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #20 on: June 10, 2014, 05:06:41 PM »
This info came from a Russian pilot.  He said the FOD screens on the Mig-29 did not work as intended.  Since they retract, anything on the screens will just get sucked into the engine when retracting.
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2014, 07:31:34 AM »
What MiG did he fly? The 29K?   On the land based 29s there are no screens. There are doors.





I can't see how any FOD would get stuck on those doors unless you somehow spray them with mud. There can't be enough airflow to suck anything up from the ground.


The screens on the Su-27, in my previous post, retract downward trapping the FOD underneath them.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Sombra

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2014, 12:37:09 AM »
Quote
Except for the original MiG-29M all the modernized versions also have the gills, like this MiG-29SMT:

If I'm not mistaken, the MiG-29SMT is an upgrade designed around the early airframe, so it can be retrofited to existing MiG-29s. It was an attempt to give old 29s capabilities similar to the MiG-29M. From what I have read, there is a further development around it, the SMT-2, that dispenses with the louvers.

The MiG-29M has been the basis for the "latest and greatest" development, the MiG-35 (so devoid of louvers too). You get a glimpse of the grids of the engines in this video at 0:20. It's the best that I could find!

http://youtu.be/zDfmfp4dUrc?t=20s
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 12:49:39 AM by Sombra »

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2014, 03:19:29 AM »
Yes, all the upgrades for the MiG-29 are just that... Upgrades. I've never heard of the SMT-2, but the MiG-35 seems to be an upgraded 29M. Mikoyan must need more export money to develop the LMFS! ;)
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2014, 06:21:52 PM »
Quote
On top of all this, it was discovered that the unique FOD doors on the MiG-29's inlets were not stopping material from getting into the engine ducts. Since the doors retracted "up" into the inlet, debris that was kicked up by the nose wheel lodged on or at the bottom of the door seal and then was ingested into the engine when the door opened during the nose gear lifted off the ground during takeoff.

This problem was known from the earliest days. After the first four MiG-29 prototypes were evaluated, the nose gear was moved further back, but nose wheel "mud-flaps" or guards were still required to protect the engine from flying debris. It took until 1988 before all delivered aircraft were so equipped, therefore the initial batch of InAF aircraft had to be locally retro-fitted with mud guards and that activity was not completed until June 1992. All costs were supposed to be re-imbursed by the contractor but Mikoyan reneged and left the InAF with $300,000 in liabilities. In subsequent MiG-29K/M models the FOD doors were replaced by screens that closed "down", forcing any debris out of the louvers repositioned to the lower side of the inlet duct..

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-2b.htm
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline XxDaSTaRxx

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2014, 10:08:57 PM »
Enjoy your cabbage soup and Vodka for dinner comrades
Quote from: Latrobe
Do not run.
Face your opponent with all you have.
If you die you have something to learn.


Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2014, 01:02:32 AM »
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-2b.htm

Like I said: "I can't see how any FOD would get stuck on those doors unless you somehow spray them with mud."

From your link:

"On top of all this, it was discovered that the unique FOD doors on the MiG-29's inlets were not stopping material from getting into the engine ducts. Since the doors retracted "up" into the inlet, debris that was kicked up by the nose wheel lodged on or at the bottom of the door seal and then was ingested into the engine when the door opened during the nose gear lifted off the ground during takeoff.

This problem was known from the earliest days. After the first four MiG-29 prototypes were evaluated, the nose gear was moved further back, but nose wheel "mud-flaps" or guards were still required to protect the engine from flying debris. It took until 1988 before all delivered aircraft were so equipped, therefore the initial batch of InAF aircraft had to be locally retro-fitted with mud guards and that activity was not completed until June 1992."
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 01:05:45 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline TheCrazyOrange

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 278
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2014, 02:31:50 AM »
It seems to me a similar solution could quite quickly be retrofitted to any engine. @

Offline shermanjr

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 341
Re: Trivia #1
« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2014, 01:43:21 PM »
motivated police call
475th fg dgs
404th fighter group Winter SKy Deth ground
361 st fg
1st pursuit squadron avg
+flyingfury+ main arena
in game name pattonjr