MIG-21 "Fishbed"

1381

MIG-21 "Fishbed"

offline
  • Pridružio: 26 Jan 2018
  • Poruke: 72



Kec ispred Fakulteta strojarstva i brodogradnje u Zagrebu.



Registruj se da bi učestvovao u diskusiji. Registrovanim korisnicima se NE prikazuju reklame unutar poruka.
offline
  • djox  Male
  • Legendarni građanin
  • Pridružio: 23 Nov 2010
  • Poruke: 58439

Rumuni


https://www.facebook.com/Scramblemagazine/posts/2691124110914106



offline
  • Pridružio: 30 Jun 2007
  • Poruke: 5921
  • Gde živiš: Novi Sad, severna Srbija

Наоружани Л-17 на аеродрому Ниш, 01.04.1999. године.


offline
  • Pridružio: 01 Dec 2009
  • Poruke: 1436
  • Gde živiš: Borca Sebes gde obicno .......

pored r-60 na spoljnim nosacima sta nosi na unutrasnjim?

offline
  • Pridružio: 15 Mar 2008
  • Poruke: 469

K 13 vjerovatno
..

online
  • Pridružio: 31 Dec 2011
  • Poruke: 3047

R-3R.......poruka ima manje od 10 simbola pa sam dodao

offline
  • Toni  Male
  • SuperModerator
  • How bad do you want it
  • Pridružio: 18 Jun 2008
  • Poruke: 22561
  • Gde živiš: Petrovgrad

Trishul o tome sto nisu svojevremeno nabavili ometace za celu flotu

MiG-21 Bison Upgrade Project Left Incomplete

Citat:To improve the beyond-visual-range (BVR) capability of its MiG-21bis light-MRCAs, the IAF in 1995 selected the Phazotron NIIR-developed Kopyo (Spear) multi-mode monopulse pulse-Doppler radar, which was to be fitted on to each of the 125 MiG-21bis at a cost of US$840,000 (Rs.2.89 crore) per unit. The Kopyo was to be used in both the air-defence and ground-attack role for guiding air-to-air missiles and air-to-ground precision-guided weapons. A CAG audit noticed conducted in November 2009 revealed that since its induction, the performance of the Kopyo had not been satisfactory due to various inadequacies in the air-to-ground range (AGR) mode. One of the reasons for the poor performance was the software, which was still under development/modification as of July 2009. The IAF stated in November 2010 that specialists from Phazotron NIIR were sent in November 2010 to India to load new applications software to resolve the inaccuracies in AGR mode. However, there was no improvement in the AGR mode further.

The audit also noticed from the report submitted by the IAF’s South-Western Air Command in December 2010 that missile integration checks were successfully completed only in December 2010. India’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) stated in November 2012 that AGR mode did remain inconsistent and inaccurate, but the BVR capability of an aircraft pertains to its capability to fire air-to-air missiles. The error in accuracy of AGR mode thus affected the delivery of air-to-ground weapons only and did not affect the BVR capability of the upgraded MiG-21 Bison fleet. The MoD also stated that further trials did not result in any significant inputs that could improve the AGR mode further. The MoD’s contention was in conflict with its reply on sub optimal performance of radar sub-assemblies and non-integration check of Vympel R-77/RVV-AE BVRAAMs till July 2009, which affected the MiG-21 Bison’s BVR capability during this period and expiry of life of several R-77s in December 2010.

The self-protection jammer (SPJ) is a critical electronic warfare (EW) equipment of any combat aircraft that contributes to the success of a mission. The MoD in February 1996 had procured 92 EL/L-8222 SPJ pods (82 for the IAF and 10 for the Indian Navy) from Israel Aerospace Industries’ ELTA Systems. Out of the 82 pods, 50 costing Rs.152 crore were for the MiG-21 Bisons, which were to be delivered between December 1997 and July 1999. However, these were actually delivered between August 2000 and December 2004. It was observed in February 2011 that during series upgradation, all the 125 MiG-21bis were modified for carriage of SPJ pods. However, only 50 SPJ pods were procured. A case was initiated by IAF HQ in July 2005 to procure an additional 36 SPJ pods for the MiG-21 Bisons to cater to 70% of the MiG-21 Bison fleet and the approval of the MoD’s Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) was obtained in January 2006. However, the proposal for procurement of additional SPJ pods was not processed in view of the limited residual life of the aircraft. Thus, only 43% of the MiG-21 Bison fleet was equipped with SPJ pods, leaving the remaining aircraft vulnerable to detection by hostile airborne multi-mode radars, thereby affecting the operational capability of IAF.

What also remains unexplained is why were multi-purpose SPJ pods (that can also accommodate guided-missiles and precision-guided weapons under them) available from OEMs like SaabTech of Sweden and TERMA of Denmark were never considered for procurement. Such fitments, interestingly, were available since the mid-1990s for light-MRCAs like Saab’s JAS-39 Gripen.

As per the contract of March 1996, there was a provision for Transfer-of-Technology (ToT) for manufacture and repair/overhaul of the MiG-21 Bisons and their sub-systems by the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). However, ToT could not materialise in spite of the IAF’s efforts, as well as those of MoD and HAL. Hence, IAF HQ directed HAL in May 2003 not to pursue the ToT for manufacture of the aggregates and suggested to establish diagnostic and repair/overhaul facilities for the Kopyo radars and other sub-systems of the MiG-21 Bison on a fast-track basis by January 2008. A CAG audit observed in April 2010 that though the repair facilities for Kopyo had been established by August 2008, these facilities by March 2009 needed further instrumentation for diagnosis and testing at an additional estimated cost of Rs.4.50 crore by HAL. Further, the full complement of training on repair of LRUs of the Kopyo could not be imparted by the OEM specialists due to non-availability of sufficient population of Cat ‘D’ repairable items, since most of the repairable items had been sent to Phazotron NIIR for repairs. Hence, additional training was required to be imparted to HAL personnel by deputation from Phazotron NIIR at an estimated cost of Rs.1.80 crore.

The audit also observed by April 2010 that repair and overhaul facilities for the Kopyo set up by HAL strictly fell under the category of second-line repair, which was also being established as intermediate-level facilities in all the MiG-21 Bison operating squadrons, and full-fledged depot-level facilities had not been set up by HAL. In April 2010, IAF HQ stated that setting up of depot-level maintenance/repair/overhaul (MRO) facilities had not been considered economically viable since the present facilities were being used only for the MiG-21 Bisons, and the same would not be useful after withdrawal of these aircraft from service. The calendar life of the MiG-21 Bisons had been extended by March 2010 to up to 40 years. Due to non-availability of complete MRO facilities, 297 LRUs of the MiG-21 Bisons and 564 LRUs of the MiG-21bis were offloaded to the Russian OEMs for repair/overhaul during the period from April 2007 to November 2009, against a long=term repair agreement (LTRA) concluded in April 2007 by HAL with the Russian OEMs involving a total repair cost of US$976,593.52 (Rs.4.33 crore). The MoD stated in November 2012 that efforts made to set up MRO facilities for components of the Kopyo MMR had not been successful and instead of setting up full MRO facilities, only diagnostic and repair facilities were proposed for HAL. The MoD further stated (November 2012 and March 2014) that in the absence of MRO facilities, all LRUs and components had to be sent to various Russian OEMs for repairs.


http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2019/04/how-mo.....et-of.html






offline
  • Pridružio: 16 Jun 2010
  • Poruke: 2851
  • Gde živiš: bela crkva banat

питање за дакоту, шта је то сецкано на миговима 21 тако да ни сама фабрика не би могла поново да их наоружа? конструкција не верујем да је, јер ко би онда смео да лети на њима?

offline
  • dakota  Male
  • Stručni saradnik foruma
  • Pridružio: 12 Feb 2008
  • Poruke: 830
  • Gde živiš: Beograd

Napisano: 17 Apr 2019 20:20

Elektricna instalacija za naoruzanje koja vodi kroz okvire trupa i rebra krila, trebalo staviti novu a prethodno raznitovati avion na vise mesta, to bi i mogli, odsecene uske koji su delovi trupa a inace nosaci topa ne mogu se zavariti, ova dva tri primera na aparatima 816 , 819 i svake godine dejtonska inspekcija.

Dopuna: 17 Apr 2019 20:26

Inace ti avioni su sluzili za odrzavanje trenaza te je imalo smisla posedovati ih i kao takve.

offline
  • djox  Male
  • Legendarni građanin
  • Pridružio: 23 Nov 2010
  • Poruke: 58439

Libija,Benina AB

Ko je trenutno na forumu
 

Ukupno su 657 korisnika na forumu :: 28 registrovanih, 6 sakrivenih i 623 gosta   ::   [ Administrator ] [ Supermoderator ] [ Moderator ] :: Detaljnije

Najviše korisnika na forumu ikad bilo je 1540 - dana 15 Jul 2016 19:19

Korisnici koji su trenutno na forumu:
Korisnici trenutno na forumu: _Sale, A.R.Chafee.Jr., bulovic, Cvijo_ue, Drug pukovnik, dule10savic, Dusko Nikolin, Filodendron, FOX, jovan.simovic97, KRCO95, Kubovac, kuntalo, lav23, Marko Marković, NenadG, pein, Pippi Langstrumpf, rkekoke, saputnik plavetnila, sasa.zoric, Srki94, SsssssNOVI, trajkoni018, Voja1978, Vojkan Petrovic, vukdra, x9