FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 1012.PDF
(g> Iliffe Transport Publications Ltd Above is the supersonic multi-purpose derivative of the Yak-25, with estimated span and length (without nose probe, not depicted in the drawing) of 47ft 6in and 60ft and gross weight of 40,0001b; to the right is the Kamov convertiplane, with estimated rotor diameter and fuselage length of 60ft and 75ft and a gross weight of 30,0001b RUSSIAN REVELATIONS . . . fitted they are in the large fairings between the outboard enginesand ends of the wing proper. The latter carries conventional flaps and ailerons, and although relatively thin should contain some10,000gal of fuel. There is probably similar tankage in the fuse- lage, which has a weapons bay amidships, pressurized cabin for-wards, long dorsal spine and area-rule bulge aft of the wing. There is no evidence of armament. This is not a supersonic-cruise aero-plane, and its lift/drag ratio at maximum speed is not greater than five, so it is certainly not a supersonic airliner in its present form. "Another wonder plane is approaching; it is a hypersonic (Russianmnogozvukovov) interceptor..." Described by another Russian commentator as being "capable ofmore than three times the speed of sound," this flashing performer appears to be the handiwork of Sukhoi. Two examples wereapparently displayed, differing in small details: and the actual aircraft drawn on page 110 was illustrated in our issue of July 6.As we commented at that time, this aircraft may well be the E-66, although it is undoubtedly twin-engined. The intake centrebody suggests that the M3 claim is justified,the length of fuselage ahead of the wing is remarkable, and there are two ventral fins. One of the examples carried air-to-air guidedweapons with the configuration shown in the drawing; and it is significant that the length of each missile is of the order of 15ft 6 in.It is this aircraft/missile combination which was described by one Russian commentator as being "armed to destroy any modernaircraft, whatever its speed and altitude." The U-2 really seems to have rankled. "A flying machine of unusual appearance appears, leaving behind a trail of orange-coloured flame . . ."With a shattering blast, this vanished vertically into the sky, but not before cameras had shown it to be almost identical to the jato-boosted fighter pictured last week (page 99). In fact, the only difference apart from the rocket appears to be an increase in the size of the dorsal spine aft of the canopy. "" We now see the most powerful vertical take-off machine in the world, designed by Kamov . . ."Less ungainly than it may appear to be, this box of engineering and aerodynamic problems flew so well that one is led to concludethat its development has already reached an advanced stage. One American journal says that it is powered by lvchenko 4,000 h.p.turboprops; and this may well be the case, although there is no direct evidence. Although the fuselage is reminiscent of that of theAn-24, it is an entirely new, unpressurized, design. Passenger capacity is certainly at least 50, and one may expect to see specialarrangements for heavy freight and vehicles in later versions. Each rotor appears to resemble that of the Mi-4, on a slightlyreduced scale. Top forward speed is probably in excess of 200kt. Several other new types of aircraft were seen for the first time onJuly 9. One was the crane version of the giant Mi-6 helicopter, an entirely logical development illustrated in our July 13 issue. OnJuly 20 we published an indifferent photograph of the quartet of jet-propelled flying boats of the Russian Navy. They appear to beof wholly new design, which some have ascribed to Beriev, with a swept wing carrying floats integral with the tips (like the MartinP6M) and having boxes for two or four large turbojets beneath the roots. Even this unlikely aircraft, with its typically Russian tailturret, appears to be in operational service. A Russian photograph of Bounder. This illustration was prepared from a print of much better quality than that which we repro- duced in our issue of July 13, and reveals a number of significant de- tails incorporated in the drawing on page 110
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
