Zephyr Net

You can't deny that some of those planes the Russians copied.

C-5 = An 140

Take a look at these two, there's no difference that I see.........except the 140 is painted white..............

B-1 = Tu 160

Same as above........

F-111 = Su 24 / MiG 23

these are the ones that come to mind when I think about photo copys.

The Su 15, 17, 27, Tu 95, MiG 15, 17, 21, 25, 29 are the ones that come to mind when I think about Russian planes made from their own designers and not copied (and even the last one was built to counter the F-15..........

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

MiG-23 is relatively unique. Su-24 is a F-111 bite off. Their whole sweep wing design is just trying to be like teh F-14 and the F-111 because of the capabilities of swing wing.

_________________
"Smile, AMRAAMs love you!"
"May the PATRIOTS down the FROGS!"
1Lt. Centurian57_76/369th

For all your FA needs and Game Remod 6 visit

Wrong, the MiG15 was a nearly direct copy from a German WWII prototype (Ta-183)

Yes, Partly.

Especially the US and Russia tried to be easy on Germany after WWI, but unfortunately they didnt succeed, as France insisted on Germany being weakened as much as possible. The reperations (which Germany would not have been able to pay in half a century) and the willingness of the Weimar Republic government to pay them (well, what else should they do) were one of the reasons which made the people want a radical change.

yes i agree tank,

all what happened to the re-taking of the falklands then. and as a plan the re-taking of the embassy by SAS, that was exceptional, lol.

France tried to have big balls after WWI and look where it got them in WWII. Shoulda listened to us. But nope they wanna be cool or attempt to at least.

_________________
"Smile, AMRAAMs love you!"
"May the PATRIOTS down the FROGS!"
1Lt. Centurian57_76/369th

For all your FA needs and Game Remod 6 visit

Actually that is absolutely wrong. The MiG-15 developed from a unique design and did not evolve from the claimed FW design. However the very first jet combat aircraft in Argentina and also in France did. The MiG-15 has been traced back to indegenious development. However its swept wing data did come from Germany and its engine from Britian.

THe TU-160 has no relation to the B-1 except remote shape. Its design is totally different as was its mission. TU-160 was actually developed out of research from the TU-144 supersonic transport. The TU-160 project had developed through many differnt designs before settling on the swept wing body design. However its actual design has nothing whatsoever to do with the Rockewell International B-1. Its performance, speed, range, and bombload is actually quite superior to the Bone...

The TU-95's basic fuselage came from their TU-4, which inturn as you all know was the B-29. THe Russians were limited for a very long time to operating bombers with the internal dimensions of the B-29 as they had no jigs nor capability to produce any that were bigger as all bomber production at the time relied on these and could not be interrupted..

BIG WROTE:

""""You can't deny that some of those planes the Russians copied.

C-5 = An 140

Take a look at these two, there's no difference that I see.........except the 140 is painted white..............

B-1 = Tu 160

Same as above........

F-111 = Su 24 / MiG 23

these are the ones that come to mind when I think about photo copys."""


Of course u cant deny some planes are copies, The Tu-4 and MiG-15 are copies, yes the An-140 and Tu-160 look at lot alike the Us counter parts, but i dont belive they are copies, exceptialy sence the first b-1 was cancled, I dont belive that Russins are stupid enuff to copy a plane that was cancled by its original designers. While the An-140 well i just dont know, but is it just me or do all modern transports have certain resemblence to eachother? While the Mig-23, ur way off as it bares no resemblence to the F-111 or F-14. There is a USSR plane from the 50's with swing wings, i have been trying to find it and show it to all, as it seems to be what helped USSR create the swing wing planes, it was a test bed. The Su-24 is pro a play off, the F-111.

The one that was:

Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2003 19:40 pm Post subject:

SORRY

The one that was:

Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2003 19:40 pm Post subject:

SORRY

Well, direct copy was exaggerated, there were some refinements like the tail, which proved to be better on the Mig15 than on Kurt Tank's own continued project wgich was not so successful in Argentina.

The B-1A was no cancelled due to design flaws but more or less because of Carter's disdain for anything warlike. B-1A was a very capable aircraft. Tu-160 is basically the same damn thing just with a lot less of a payload and a lot less sophisticated avionics and system.

_________________
"Smile, AMRAAMs love you!"
"May the PATRIOTS down the FROGS!"
1Lt. Centurian57_76/369th

For all your FA needs and Game Remod 6 visit

it was also cut due to the development of the cruise missile.

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Yeah SALT II talks.

_________________
"Smile, AMRAAMs love you!"
"May the PATRIOTS down the FROGS!"
1Lt. Centurian57_76/369th

For all your FA needs and Game Remod 6 visit

CENT WROTE:

The B-1A was no cancelled due to design flaws but more or less because of Carter's disdain for anything warlike. B-1A was a very capable aircraft. Tu-160 is basically the same damn thing just with a lot less of a payload and a lot less sophisticated avionics and system.

I never ment that the B-1 was flawed, hell the B-1A was way better the the current B-1B, it was faster! But what i menty is that the russians may have not known it was trashed due to politics and not design flaws. I mean u would copy something that some who createded it doent want. Its like stealing someonse trash. I got nothing againts the Bone, I like the sucker way more then any other bomber.