NZFF

Bombing Sortie out of Whenuapai - random shots

Man id hate to see that designer try and make a car ,,is that the same guy who designed the LADA ,love the time of day in your shots dude looking really good ive always stayed away from night and dawn shots myself as i can never tell if they are light enough for the crt users ,you have done it justice

Nice Shots

Thanks guys - the TU-22 is a pig to fly too! The 2nd shot is a bit dark but that is bacause the engines are smoking so much.

Choice collection , That 22 , Damm nice , really suits the 21 escort Some wicked vids on Utube about Tupolev type

Nice shots dude

you have to admire the soviets for their designs

Like that formation shot #8, Naki.
That's a good-looking MiG too, when it's not trailing a multicoloured Dunce's Cap (??!!)
As to the Blinder (One of the few times a NATO reporting name is particularly apt) reminds me of what we drew in the back of our homework diaries as schoolkids.
What was the equivalent Western aircraft of the day?

The -21 looks like it is being propelled by some giant cartoon spring!

Charl wrote:

QUOTE(Charl @ Sep 20 2007, 08:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Like that formation shot #8, Naki.
That's a good-looking MiG too, when it's not trailing a multicoloured Dunce's Cap (??!!)
As to the Blinder (One of the few times a NATO reporting name is particularly apt) reminds me of what we drew in the back of our homework diaries as schoolkids.
What was the equivalent Western aircraft of the day?

Well after the TU22 was made a newer design called the TU22M (NATO codenamed-Backfire) the closest western aircraft design was the F111 or the Tornado at the time. There was also the XB70A supersonic bomber design which was considered similar at the time to the Russian supersonic bomber Bounder. Later on the west came up with the B1A which is very similar to the Backfire but with the 4 engines which the Soviets replied with the TU160 Blackjack bomber. There was alot of copying by both sides back then in aircraft design and features.

Arrr The Myasishchev M50 , Keep thinkin of the THUNDERBIRDS and the Tracey family , ... I would put the Sukhoi Su24 as the western 111/Tornado counterpart The 70 is a totally different philosphy , Mach3 sustained 77 thousand , there was a russian copy .. or not but this caused devolpment of the Mig25 , but that also had alot with the YF12 released to press and all in 1964 approved by Prez Lydon Johnstone , this off course turned into the SR71 , the XB70 was after first hull layed already in question .. pity

Yea the afterburner affect of the Mig is pretty stink.

Closest Western equivalent of the TU-22? - B-58 Hustler (probably a bit early) or Mirage 1V?

MMM the 58 would be something i'd like to try , MirageIV heck .. funny no British in the equation from this period , Vulcan /Victor maybe .... but nothing in preformance .

...quite possibly, there was no Western equivalent.
This was a truly 'orrible aircraft.
Quotes from Wiki:
"...had a tendency to pitch up and strike its tail on landing"
"The undercarriage sometimes collapsed with serious consequences, particularly when carrying a fueled missile"
No kidding: Ivan we haff just boarded a live missile...!
"Tu-22 was exceptionally unpopular with both ground personnel and flight crews, who on certain occasions in the 1960s refused to fly it["
'Nuff said, I think the Yanks were flying B-36's and the B-52 was about to enter service.
No real need to compete with the Blinder, then.

Also thinking was tending toward the Miracle of the Missile, rather than tactical bombing

Charl wrote:

QUOTE(Charl @ Sep 21 2007, 06:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...quite possibly, there was no Western equivalent.
This was a truly 'orrible aircraft.
Quotes from Wiki:
"...had a tendency to pitch up and strike its tail on landing"
"The undercarriage sometimes collapsed with serious consequences, particularly when carrying a fueled missile"
No kidding: Ivan we haff just boarded a live missile...!
"Tu-22 was exceptionally unpopular with both ground personnel and flight crews, who on certain occasions in the 1960s refused to fly it["
'Nuff said, I think the Yanks were flying B-36's and the B-52 was about to enter service.
No real need to compete with the Blinder, then.

Also thinking was tending toward the Miracle of the Missile, rather than tactical bombing

Arrr the 50's and 60's , The Cold War , the combatants , the types , today i'm still flying the 36 and 52 with even today the 70 , 40 mins from NZCH to NZAA , but then to look at the TU22/M50 , the boiler plate planes to best even the Su17 were a work out , Arr those Russian's ..... Crazy Ivan's . The US B 58's were a handful on landing well over 250 mph with high AOA and not without incident .
Mirage 4 .. Well Charl this is a beast .. so very French , the famed Mirage3 design .. wonder if same thought possible idea in defunct 4000 series ? but todays aircraft are so many ways better thought out rather than the fear off not having .

Interesting stuff Charl

As Subs17 indicated above there was two TU-22s - well one was the TU-22M (the Blinder & the Backfire) which makes things confusing - they were completely different aircarft.

I believe the M-50 was also a pig to fly and service as well - orginally the Yanks thought the M-50 was nuclear powered!

Naki wrote:

QUOTE(Naki @ Sep 21 2007, 10:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting stuff CharlAs Subs17 indicated above there was two TU-22s - well one was the TU-22M (the Blinder & the Backfire) which makes things confusing - they were completely different aircarft.I believe the M-50 was also a pig to fly and service as well - orginally the Yanks thought the M-50 was nuclear powered!

They did test an aircraft with nuclear propulsion but it fell through as there was too much weight for sheilding the reactor so crews did die from exposure to radiation. I think some of the TU22Ms are still flying but the TU160 is their main aircraft now.

Ian Warren wrote:

QUOTE(Ian Warren @ Sep 21 2007, 04:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Arrr The Myasishchev M50 , Keep thinkin of the THUNDERBIRDS and the Tracey family , ... I would put the Sukhoi Su24 as the western 111/Tornado counterpart The 70 is a totally different philosphy , Mach3 sustained 77 thousand , there was a russian copy .. or not but this caused devolpment of the Mig25 , but that also had alot with the YF12 released to press and all in 1964 approved by Prez Lydon Johnstone , this off course turned into the SR71 , the XB70 was after first hull layed already in question .. pity

Yeah I sort of look at the XB70 and the M50 as being similar as they were both quite fast but too expensive and were both scrapped. XB70 is closer to a concorde in shape. The SU24 didn't arrive on the scene until the 80s so it wasn't compared to the F111 until quite a while later in the early/mid 80s aircraft recognition books often had the Binder and Backfire compared to the F111 from certain profiles as part of their tests.

Loving the Russians- where did you get that tu22 from?

I have to say, I'm quite surprised to see how massive the Blinder actually is, you really put its scale into perspective in shots 6 - 9 flying in formation with the 21!

Trolly wrote:

QUOTE(Trolly @ Sep 17 2007, 04:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Loving the Russians- where did you get that tu22 from?
I have to say, I'm quite surprised to see how massive the Blinder actually is, you really put its scale into perspective in shots 6 - 9 flying in formation with the 21!

It is by gum, look at my highly accurate scale drawing of it next to the Hustler:

They both carried 4 tonnes or so of bomb, and each had a cannon!
Can't remember which end the B58's poked out of, I did have a 1:72 Revell plastic model but it's now broken. (Like, 30 years ago...and the gun would've gone first)

Hey Charl , Have an idea .. I have the 22 , i'll get the 58 tonight , be a good compare bitta X multiplay to compare size