Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Jure Miljevic

Members
  • Content count

    869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

396 Excellent

About Jure Miljevic

  • Rank
    Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Slovenia

Recent Profile Visitors

656 profile views
  1. Jure Miljevic

    Best ju87

    Thank you, Troy, that should solve the issue. Cheers Jure
  2. Jure Miljevic

    Best ju87

    Hello Very useful link, Tempestfan, thank you. I am following the debate with great interest, as I have built several Ju 87s, but still have (too) many of them in my stash. There is a question that is bothering me: there is Ju 87 G-2 in Hendon and I wonder if anybody of museum staff or, even better, one of us modellers measured her yet? Cheers Jure
  3. Jure Miljevic

    The Su-57 are arriving

    Hello I was actually talking about modern fighter's ability to remain undetected under combat condition. To a degree this has been achieved in certain regimes of flight against x-band radars. Not so against other ground radars, passive radar emission and radar reflection sensor networks or against airborne infra-red sensors. In supersonic flight, heat is being generated at wing and tail leading edges. Fifty years ago otherwise rear-hemisphere restricted Firestreak missile would lock on supersonic Lightning head-on. Theoretically, even the old F-14 D could detect supersonic F-22 with IR sensor, fire a Phoenix missile, which would have little difficulties locking on target, as its terminal phase of attack would start at 70000 to 80000 ft. F-22's RCS may be considerably reduced in front view, but it is far from small in plan view. Some time ago I read about a system not very aptly called secondary radar (it had nothing to do with radar transponders). It was described as a network of passive sensors which collects and analyzes all kinds of radio transmissions and reflections like those from commercial radio and TV stations and cell-phone towers. Twenty years ago such network was reportedly able to roughly track stealth fighters although it was not accurate enough for actual AA missile attack. How far the system advanced (if it has been developed at all) by today I have no idea. Yes, abilities to supercruise or to act as tactical combat director for so-called legacy fighters or fighter-bombers certainly are impressive, but what do they have to do with stealthiness? Also, all these is hardly new: primitive beginnings of airborne networking can be traced to early ground data-links sixty years ago which is about the time when supercruise also appeared. Advances of the fifth generation fighters over the fourth are thus more incremental than revolutionary. About specialized vs. multi-role aircraft ... More often than not former types end up looking for a mission and latter types are always compromises and trade-offs. Agreed, F-4 was fairly successful multi-mission aircraft. Yet her SE Asia combat experience against highly specialized North Vietnam air defences produced F-14 for US Navy and Fighter Mafia pushed through A-10 and F-16 for USAF. Early on all three types were highly specialized; today F-16 can handle almost any mission if necessary, Bombcat added some variety to otherwise narrow fleet-defence scope of F-14, but A-10 remained pure close-support aircraft until today. A cynic would remark that in piece specialized types are usually replaced by multi-role aircraft and during wars process is reversed. Finances vs. performance? I do not know. Cheers Jure
  4. Jure Miljevic

    Shavrov Sh-2

    I am sorry, Ed, I have to admit defeat. The best wartime photo of VVS Sh-2 I found is a dark silhouette in the background of two Red Army soldiers, helping their wounded comrade. As Jerzy-Wojtek said, by far the best photos are those of two Sh-2S, captured intact after their crews had been lured into and then killed in Finnish ambush. Finnish Meritoimintakoneet book gives their registrations as CCCP-X-370 and CCCP-X-217. Russian books list them under the same numbers, but without CCCP prefix. Judging by the photos, which show overpainted areas, I would say both planes were originally also marked with red stars. In Finnish service serials AV-186 and AV-187 were allocated to captured machines, but were not actually applied. AV-186 was damaged beyond repair a bit more than a month later anyway, although AV-187 (former X-370) remained in service until September 1944. Probably not very helpful, but you can see a photo of X-104 from model decal set, along with that photo I mentioned at the beginning of my post, here. Another photo of AV-187, this time floating by the shore, is published here (scroll it down almost to the bottom of the page). Cheers Jure
  5. Jure Miljevic

    Shavrov Sh-2

    Away from my sources so, for the moment, try this link: http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sww2/she2.html Will try to find more. Cheers Jure
  6. Jure Miljevic

    The Su-57 are arriving

    So, Su-57 fared hardly any better than Su-47. Pity, Su-57 kit with few Syria mission markings would make an interesting model. It seems that time (and with time I mean price tag) is just not right for pure fighter aircraft. Did early 1930's make their comeback and due to economic necessity air forces are going to purchase modern equivalents of airliner/transport/bomber hybrids like Bombay, Ju 52, S.81 and similar? Or are we back over Western Front, where fighters got all the glory, but single engined two seaters were the most important type of military aircraft by far? I agree with Jason in his assessment that Russian decided level of stealth technology today offers too little and costs too much. They rely for their safety on strategic nuclear deterrence anyway so they are probably going to keep their Su-27/-35 ... and MiG-31s as their main air defence aircraft for another decade or so. I do not think they can afford to drop stealth research altogether, though. However, another costly cold war is out of the question as it would only benefit rising superpowers like India and China. I suspect such reasoning is absent in the USA and in the rest of so called western world. Just my thoughts. Cheers Jure
  7. Jure Miljevic

    I´m looking for photos of three early Fw 190As.

    Hello Sturmovik Online a photo of Fw 190 A-3 is the second search result on the following link: https://www.google.com/search?biw=1280&bih=900&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=jI9IW-K5EISakwX2mILwCA&q=Lake+Ivan+III.%2FJG51&oq=Lake+Ivan+III.%2FJG51&gs_l=img.3...218121.218294.0.219517.2.2.0.0.0.0.113.204.1j1.2.0....0...1c..64.img..0.0.0....0.QNq0bUqxERE Otherwise the same photo was published in John Weal's book Jagdgeschwader 51 Mölders by Osprey. It seems the plane in question also had Werk Nummer on the top of the vertical tail, which is unfortunately illegible on the photo. Cheers Jure
  8. Jure Miljevic

    Zveno 'Mothership'

    Off the top of my head, apart from that Danube bridge bombing (which I believe was either the longest or the second longest viaduct in the world at the time) Zvenos had been quite busy. Among other targets they busted railway part of combined rail/road bridge over, I think, Dnjeper river. Road part remained in heavy use and Germans were reluctant to disturb motor traffic so repairs of the rail part had to wait. Railway traffic dropped and I think it was von Manstein who claimed this was the main contributing factor for German defeat at Stalingrad. While this claim is a massive stretch, it still indicates Zveno bomber's importance. Cheers Jure
  9. Jure Miljevic

    EGr-210 Bf 110's

    Chris, I am not quite certain but I believe Eduard Bf 110 C/D/E kits in 1/48 all come with the same same plastic parts, they only differ when it comes to PE parts, decals and resin parts. Cheers Jure
  10. Jure Miljevic

    NA Harvard - reference material

    Not quite there, but Dan Hagedorn's book North American NA-16, AT-6, SNJ (Warbird Tech) comes closer. Cheers Jure
  11. Jure Miljevic

    Question about 307 Sqn Beaufighter

    Enjoy your build! Cheers Jure
  12. Jure Miljevic

    Question about 307 Sqn Beaufighter

    I saw photos of VIFs with vertical receiver antennae, buried in either port or starboard wing. In the old Triada book (Beaufighter, S.328, MiG-19) there is a colour profile of X8005 with receiver in starboard wing. Of course, with that photo you mentioned there should be no doubt about its location. Cheers Jure P.S.: My apologies, colour profile of X8005 shows receiver buried in port wing, not in starboard.
  13. Jure Miljevic

    Question about 307 Sqn Beaufighter

    I would think so, arrow-head aerial is a transmitter and it works best if installed in extreme nose. Rearward bent aerials, buried in wings, are vertical receivers. Photo of this Beaufighter Mk.VIf V8442 (scroll it down to about middle of the webpage) here shows such aerial in starboard wing, along with horizontal H-letter receiver aerial, projecting from wing's leading edge. Look closely and you will also notice arrow-head transmitter aerial, projecting from the nose of the aircraft. Cheers Jure
  14. Jure Miljevic

    Boeing 787 question

    Unfortunately I would not know, PhantomBigStu, I do not have this Revell kit. Cheers Jure
  15. Jure Miljevic

    Boeing 787 question

    Check photos on this link. Pylons look white to me as do on every other photo of BA 787 I found. Cheers Jure
×