Aircraft Recognition
Re: Aircraft Recognition
One very obvious difference between Mig29 and Su27 is that the Mig29 has small grilled intakes like structures on the area below cockpit leading up to wings on both sides.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
^^^That is useful if you have a view of the top (for example, when aircraft is rolling). Probably the tail boom (or lack thereof) is a better differentiator?
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Jamwal Saab, that is not true for the present day Mig-29s. The grill was for air intake during takeoff and landing ... it has been done away with quite some time back. I think it has been discussed in BR for a long time.
I don't know why you oldies are trying to find small differences in the Mig-29 - Su-27 Airframe ... The plan forms are different ... don't you think if you are given the silhoutte of both fighters from any angle that you would be able to identify them with ease?
I don't know why you oldies are trying to find small differences in the Mig-29 - Su-27 Airframe ... The plan forms are different ... don't you think if you are given the silhoutte of both fighters from any angle that you would be able to identify them with ease?
Re: Aircraft Recognition
The 'upper lip' housed a radar that provided ranging data to the gunsight.Lalmohan wrote:nose shape - the Mig15 is fatter and rounder than the 'upper lip' sabre
To truely appreciate what the russians did to MiG-21 and how it evolved through F, P, PF, PFS, PFM, M etc avataars one needs to read 'Mikoyan MiG-21' by Yefim Gordon. It's a tresure trove for the pic maniacs . Before reading it I didn't know that MiG-21 prototypes tested combined powerpacks, carnards, skids for landing/takeoff from rough/slushy areas etc.shanksinha wrote:^^Bala Jee, Talk about mixtures of MiG-21 and Eurofighter and J-10 and ...........
Cheers....
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Aircraft Recognition
I would like to purchase the book... Could please tell me your source or point to an alternate source...neerajb wrote: To truely appreciate what the russians did to MiG-21 and how it evolved through F, P, PF, PFS, PFM, M etc avataars one needs to read 'Mikoyan MiG-21' by Yefim Gordon. It's a tresure trove for the pic maniacs . Before reading it I didn't know that MiG-21 prototypes tested combined powerpacks, carnards, skids for landing/takeoff from rough/slushy areas etc.
Cheers....
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Saar ji my copy is illicit.Bala Vignesh wrote:I would like to purchase the book... Could please tell me your source or point to an alternate source...
Actually I was downloading WINGS documentaries when I hit upon this link. I thought it is some russian documentary on MiG-21 but was positively shocked to find out the ebook. I suggest you go for the original one from any online book shops.
Available on Amazon for 29 pounds.
Cheers....
Re: Aircraft Recognition
One very intresting and strange feature of F-8 was variable incidence wing. Instead of using carnards/thrust vectoring (with inherent pilot visibility problems) for slow approach to the carrier, it used variable incidence wing to achive high angle of attack and at the same time keep the aircraft as level as possible though at the expense of weight and complexity.shiv wrote: The F-8 Crusader was one of the early shipborne aircraft over Vietnam
Cheers....
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Thanks. I was trying to ID the line drawing of this aircraft since long which is the community avataar of an orkut forum. Initially my guess was Tornado but then neither is Tornado a delta nor it has tandem main gear.nachiket wrote:The CF-105 Arrow, a promising high altitude interceptor designed and developed in Canada that was killed by politics and AmirKhan.
Cheers....
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Aircraft Recognition
OK.. Do you, by any chance, have the link for the documentary and book???neerajb wrote: Saar ji my copy is illicit.
Actually I was downloading WINGS documentaries when I hit upon this link. I thought it is some russian documentary on MiG-21 but was positively shocked to find out the ebook. I suggest you go for the original one from any online book shops.
Available on Amazon for 29 pounds.
Cheers....
Re: Aircraft Recognition
RB, Indranil saar, I'm still a newbie in military matters. Had no idea about grill been taken off. That point was just one of the many obvious differences, but still I had difficulty recognising which plane was which.
One of the major roles of Arrow was to shoot down high flying bombers.With more emphasis being placed on ICBMs, this interceptor had little utility and the additional political/umreekan pressure was too much for Canadians to handle.
One of the major roles of Arrow was to shoot down high flying bombers.With more emphasis being placed on ICBMs, this interceptor had little utility and the additional political/umreekan pressure was too much for Canadians to handle.
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
^^^ Don't worry, they are spatially quite far from each other. To start with they won't even be on the same plane. The Migs actually are flying higher than the A-50. E.G. The Mig in the front is actually not right in front of the same longitudinal axis of the A-50. It is above and to the right of it (may be 30 -50 feet) apart.
Jingo wish: It would have been awesome if IAF would have shown the Migs with more A2A missiles. Only the lead plane has a R-27
Jingo wish: It would have been awesome if IAF would have shown the Migs with more A2A missiles. Only the lead plane has a R-27
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
- Location: Behind Enemy Lines
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
^^Chief, how can you tell that those are Mig's and not SU-30 MKI's??
PS. Not doubting your intelligence, just curious to know that significant telltale between the two, besides what appears to be a black color on the nose of the Mig's..
PS. Not doubting your intelligence, just curious to know that significant telltale between the two, besides what appears to be a black color on the nose of the Mig's..
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
The most obvious difference is the large tail boom between the 2 engine nozzles present on the Su-27 series and absent in the Mig-29. The Su-27/30 is also much larger than the Mig-29. In the IAF context, we don't operate any single seat flankers. The Su-30 MKI is a twin seater. Check the Aircraft recognition thread for other differences.Craig Alpert wrote:^^Chief, how can you tell that those are Mig's and not SU-30 MKI's??
PS. Not doubting your intelligence, just curious to know that significant telltale between the two, besides what appears to be a black color on the nose of the Mig's..
Last edited by nachiket on 28 Sep 2010 04:11, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
(lack of ) Canards.Craig Alpert wrote:^^Chief, how can you tell that those are Mig's and not SU-30 MKI's??
PS. Not doubting your intelligence, just curious to know that significant telltale between the two, besides what appears to be a black color on the nose of the Mig's..
If you compare that picture with this one - you'll notice the difference.
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
The MKI's canopy hump is higher, and I think the main difference is the plane the fuselage and wings are in seems to be slightly tilted upwards, while the nose pointing down is more distinct. Overall the MKI is more "wavy" while the Mig looks "flatter".
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
Craig ... I really don't know how I tell the difference. Its basic cognition for me. I can tell Mig-29 (series) from Su-27 (series) in the first glance. I have never tried to dissect how I recognize them. Probably its because I have ogled at them for so long, it has become second nature .
I guess you would find the Mig-29 to be stubbier and stouter (from the side profile) than the Su-30. Obviously, if you can see the canards, its a dead give-away. The curves are different as Carl_T points out. Also the tail assembly is more drawn out, the wings seem more swept back etc etc.
As I said its a matter of basic cognition. I guess you will have to watch a few more pictures and soon you would be able to tell one from the other. Actually it is not that hard.
I guess you would find the Mig-29 to be stubbier and stouter (from the side profile) than the Su-30. Obviously, if you can see the canards, its a dead give-away. The curves are different as Carl_T points out. Also the tail assembly is more drawn out, the wings seem more swept back etc etc.
As I said its a matter of basic cognition. I guess you will have to watch a few more pictures and soon you would be able to tell one from the other. Actually it is not that hard.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
- Location: Behind Enemy Lines
Re: Miscellaneous Pictures - Indian Military
@ thanks all... The lack of canards explanation works well for me (visibly) Clearly, aircraft recognition isn't my forte I'm more of a foot soldier (hardware/comms) but appreciate your comments, I'm definitely enjoying Shiv's posts in Aircraft recognition thread.. Got a lot to learn, thanks again ya'll
Re: Aircraft Recognition
like indranil I have never tried to dissect how I could tell those two apart, just knew which is which at a glance.
the easiest signs are
side profile
>> canards, obviously
>> tail boom for flankers. the fulcrum's horizontal stabilizers extend beyond the exhaust
>> the engine intake comes right up to the cockpit for the mig-29, it's farther behind the cockpit for flankers
>> a thin strip of the vertical tailfin(s) extends into the fuselage for mig-29. the flanker has much larger tails in proportion and the shape is different as well
for top view, first 2 points above plus the fulcrum has rounded wingtips.
@ Bala Vignesh, please check PM.
the easiest signs are
side profile
>> canards, obviously
>> tail boom for flankers. the fulcrum's horizontal stabilizers extend beyond the exhaust
>> the engine intake comes right up to the cockpit for the mig-29, it's farther behind the cockpit for flankers
>> a thin strip of the vertical tailfin(s) extends into the fuselage for mig-29. the flanker has much larger tails in proportion and the shape is different as well
for top view, first 2 points above plus the fulcrum has rounded wingtips.
@ Bala Vignesh, please check PM.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
MiG 29, Su-27 and F-15 differences
MiG 29
Su-27
F-15
MiG 29
Su-27
F-15
Re: Aircraft Recognition
I have also found it very easy to tell apart the Mig-29 and Su-27 series. I find it difficult however to tell apart a twin-seat Su-35 (not the BM) from an Su-30 MKI. Aircraft I used to have trouble differentiating in the past include the Tornado from an F-111 Aardvark (from certain angles), Mig-15 from a Mig-17 (before I learnt about the difference in the wings) and the B-1B from the Tu-160 (except for the colors ofcourse. never found a black Tu-160 or a white B-1B. I could eventually figure them out easily after ogling at several pics like indranil said )
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Nachiket is there any visible difference between the Su-30 MKI and the Su-35 UB?
Re: Aircraft Recognition
They look pretty much the same to me. Maybe some guru here can help us.indranilroy wrote:Nachiket is there any visible difference between the Su-30 MKI and the Su-35 UB?
Re: Aircraft Recognition
For a long time the US made (and still does make) "F" series aircraft that are fighters - air superiority or multirole, and "B" series aircraft that were bombers, and "A" series of attack aircraft. "RB" was Reconnaissance-Bomber.
Everyone knows the B1 and B2. Many are aware of the B-24 Liberator bomber of WW2 of which the IAF refurbished and operated despite the US actually rendering them unflyable when they left them in India after WW 2.
Here a a few B series bombers from the Korea and Vietname era. Many were optimised for a nuke attack role
B-29 used in WW2 and Korea
B-36 (Peacemaker) - the biggest ever bomber. 6 props and 4 jet engines.
B-47 used in Korea - showing off rocket assisted takeoff (RATO) here
B-52 (Stratofortress) - Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. "Rolling Thunder"
B-58 Hustler. A unique supersonic nuclear bomber with a 3 man crew. Later versions had the crew in separate capsules that allowed supersonic ejection. 25% of all aircraft were lost to accidents. Never used in war and never shot down.
A unique "bomb the crap out of all slanteyes" image B-36, B-47, B-52
Everyone knows the B1 and B2. Many are aware of the B-24 Liberator bomber of WW2 of which the IAF refurbished and operated despite the US actually rendering them unflyable when they left them in India after WW 2.
Here a a few B series bombers from the Korea and Vietname era. Many were optimised for a nuke attack role
B-29 used in WW2 and Korea
B-36 (Peacemaker) - the biggest ever bomber. 6 props and 4 jet engines.
B-47 used in Korea - showing off rocket assisted takeoff (RATO) here
B-52 (Stratofortress) - Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. "Rolling Thunder"
B-58 Hustler. A unique supersonic nuclear bomber with a 3 man crew. Later versions had the crew in separate capsules that allowed supersonic ejection. 25% of all aircraft were lost to accidents. Never used in war and never shot down.
A unique "bomb the crap out of all slanteyes" image B-36, B-47, B-52
Re: Aircraft Recognition
only canards.nachiket wrote:They look pretty much the same to me. Maybe some guru here can help us.indranilroy wrote:Nachiket is there any visible difference between the Su-30 MKI and the Su-35 UB?
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Rahul sir, many thanks for that... And sorry for OT but could you tell me why am i not able to reply via PM to you???Rahul M wrote: @ Bala Vignesh, please check PM.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
@ Carl_T, indranilroy, Nachiket
Su-35UB has canards like MKI. The only external difference I know of is the small difference in the design of vertical stabilizer of the two aircrafts.
Beautiful Flanker Diagrams:
Su-30MKI
http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukhoi/b ... sb024].jpg
Su-35UB
http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukhoi/b ... ks2001.jpg
Su-35UB has canards like MKI. The only external difference I know of is the small difference in the design of vertical stabilizer of the two aircrafts.
Beautiful Flanker Diagrams:
Su-30MKI
http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukhoi/b ... sb024].jpg
Su-35UB
http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukhoi/b ... ks2001.jpg
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Deltas unlimited:
Pure Deltas. Can anyone recall any more?
Mirage III (France)
Mirage 2000 (France)
Mirage 4000 (France)
Mirage IV ( had forgotten this one - added on 29 sep before the edit time closes )
F-102 Delta Dagger (USA)
F-106 Delta Dart (USA)
Convair B-58 Hustler (USA)
Lockheed SR-71 (USA)
LCA Tejas (India)
Hawker Siddeley (Avro) Vulcan (Britain)
Concorde (Anglo-French)
Tupolev Tu 144 (Russian)
Pure Deltas. Can anyone recall any more?
Mirage III (France)
Mirage 2000 (France)
Mirage 4000 (France)
Mirage IV ( had forgotten this one - added on 29 sep before the edit time closes )
F-102 Delta Dagger (USA)
F-106 Delta Dart (USA)
Convair B-58 Hustler (USA)
Lockheed SR-71 (USA)
LCA Tejas (India)
Hawker Siddeley (Avro) Vulcan (Britain)
Concorde (Anglo-French)
Tupolev Tu 144 (Russian)
Last edited by shiv on 29 Sep 2010 09:35, edited 2 times in total.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Some more Beauties that featured the Delta Configuration:
The Dassault Rafale..
The SAAB JAS-39 Grippen
The SAAB JAS-35 Drakken
The Eurofighter Typhoon
The Dassault Rafale..
The SAAB JAS-39 Grippen
The SAAB JAS-35 Drakken
The Eurofighter Typhoon
Re: Aircraft Recognition
^^Bala, I think shiv was talking about pure deltas i.e. Tailless delta with no compound wings or canards. Otherwise we should start with the Mig-21 and Saab Draken onlee.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Nachiket sir..
Don't take me bad, But the Mirage 4000 has canards...
Don't take me bad, But the Mirage 4000 has canards...
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Ah - I forgot the Draken. Good catch. In fact I was going to make a separate list of Delta's with tailplane Like MiG 21 etc. The real reason for making such classifications is that similar looking planes are more likely to be confused with each other. So I guess it is fine to have a list of all deltas with prominent canards. The Mirage 4000 went there with the smiley because I found the picture while looking for images and I forgot the fact that it had canards when I posted it. Anyhow my excuse is that the canards are small and not prominent.
Any other pure deltas that anyone can recall? I know there are a few. This thread could go on forever as we move on to helos and stuff.
Any other pure deltas that anyone can recall? I know there are a few. This thread could go on forever as we move on to helos and stuff.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
^^ Does the B2 count? Also we could put in the Lavi and the Kfir, if we include the canards.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Shameek wrote:^^ Does the B2 count? Also we could put in the Lavi and the Kfir, if we include the canards.
The B2 is a flying wing - yet another category
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Thanks smPratik
Re: Aircraft Recognition
XB-70 valkyrie, trisonic bomber. the project that led to the development of the mig-25 on the other side.shiv wrote:Deltas unlimited:
Pure Deltas. Can anyone recall any more?
@ Bala, you are welcome. PM'ing is mods and admins only. and do get rid of the 'sir' please !
Re: Aircraft Recognition
Why sweat ... Wikipedia to the rescue http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wing See aircraft examples section
Re: Aircraft Recognition
OT but any jingo visiting Dilli must go to the IAF Museum (Palam) to check out one of the hobbled Liberators which was put back into action by IAF without benefit of any assistance.shiv wrote:Many are aware of the B-24 Liberator bomber of WW2 of which the IAF refurbished and operated despite the US actually rendering them unflyable when they left them in India after WW 2.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
The US has a long history of getting two companies to compete. Theer was a time when the XB-70 and the YF-12A were both being developed together. Eventually neither went into service - but the YF-12 A became the eminently successful SR-71.Rahul M wrote: XB-70 valkyrie, trisonic bomber. the project that led to the development of the mig-25 on the other side.
Re: Aircraft Recognition
A few of pictures to point out differences between the Su and the Mig.