Way OT (was RE: OT somewhat. China, our aircraft, delays.)

Mark Green wrote: Based on published data I make the wing loading of the Fishbed as around 77 lb/sq ft at max gross; at max gross the Aires-II comes in at 107 lb/sq ft. If anything the Aires-II should be more stable in turbulence. There's a bunch of problems with the Chinese claim that the EP-3 made a sudden roll and thus caused the contact: - The photo evidence of the damage isn't consistent with running into another airplane. The prop tips are munched, but the props are still attached to the gearboxes and the gearboxes and engines didn't depart the airframe. The damage is more consistent with colliding with birds -- or debris. - The radome is missing. I'm at a loss to explain how the radome got ripped off the aircraft by contact on the wing -- especially given that the fuselage forward of the wing root doesn't appear damaged. It looks more like the Fishbed was trying to bump the Aries (which essentially consists of passing under the Aires with a delta of about +200 knots and pulling vertical) and wasn't up to the task. The empennage collided with the radome, peeled the radome and part of the empennage off and the Aires in turn plowed through the debris field. Like saying that _he_ gave the downed pilot permission to bail out? Since when does wing give lead permission to do anything (the usual job of wing is to tuck in tight, shut up and listen to guard) -- or was the surviving pilot lead, in which case what was the wingman doing in a position where the only way he could collide with the Aires would have been if the Aires went into Beta thrust? -- Chris Kennedy chris(a)mainecoon.com http://www.mainecoon.com PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97