www.militaar.net

Sa võid ju tunneli ja mudeli suurust vähendada aga see pole ikka see kui sa ka õhumolekulide suurust ei vähenda. Vähendatud mudeli poolt ja tegelikus olukorras tekkivad õhukeerised jms siiski üksjagu erinevad.

Kilo Tango kirjutas:Venelaste uute lennukite ihalus pole veel otsa saanud. Nüüd on MiG kah mõned mudelid meisterdanud. Eesmärk luua lennukikandja põhine süsteem mitmest lennukist.


https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... r-project/

1. The centerline bay ends where the main landing gear well ends.
2. This part looks like plastic.
3. Don't know how the parts are put together. The surface looks warped.
4. Truely bizarre door opening/closing mechanism.
5. Poor Ivan forgot to wipe down the surface with a wet cloth. It is really dirty here.

And because two model missiles inside, there is no way to know how deep the bay is.

People should appreciate the F-35 weapon bay more. It is designed in such a way human can stand inside manhandling the heavy weapon into place. There is space to operate the loading equipment and to service the weapon. A lot of work went into the simulation of the ground operations, via real-time motion capture and virtual reality, or physical models, to make sure everything works in such a tight space.

Comparing to the F-35 weapon bay, Checkmate's design looks crude. The Russians want to outdo the yankees so they tightly fit two super-long super-large weapons inside a single weapon bay. But once the weapon on one side is installed, how can you install the other one? How can you access the station deep inside the bay? The simple and straight doors restrict the space even more. I am sure smart engineers can find a solution to this problem, but still the simple box weapon bay is not a easy place to work inside.