It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
You can't very well have an enemy if they are still fighting with sticks and you have gunpowder. You have to allow your technology to be given so that you can have an actual war. Israel is the friend of the U.S. and is doing everything exactly as they should. Saddam was/is a friend of the U.S. and he did exactly what he was asked to do. Order through Choas. Total control through War. Problem - Reaction - Solution. Populus Vult Decipi. Does anyone seriously believe that the U.S. could not have taken out Saddam without bombing the hell out of the civilians? Does anyone believe that the U.S. could not take out Kim Jong? They need him just like the needed Saddam. Just like the new game show on Comedy Central. It's all just Distraction. While all the masses are fighting over their sense of nationalistic pride the leaders are molding the world to the way they want. There is a resolution somewhere that states you can't take out heads of state. They need them protected. Against popular belief, there are not a large amount of evil people willing to sell-out whole populations of their countrymen for money. These people are a valuable resource and must be protected. Of course, such a resolution cannot stop the CIA from taking out democratically elected officials and replacing them with tyrannical regimes. At this point, you would think they would change up the game plan a bit. It's just so passe. Divide and Conquer. Problem - Reaction - Solution. It's getting old. But hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it right. If these ancient techniques didn't work for thousands of years they would be forced to change it up. If anything I wish people would wake up just so they change their techniques. I'm getting bored out of my mind watching this mickey mouse parade.
Originally posted by emile
ok,if so, why don't you say the Janese F-2 copies from Jaguar, the soviet Tu-4 copies from B-29,
Originally posted by Fenix F 308
Tu 64 - morre correctly, Tu 10 is real boomber named "68" Tu-2 with other engine...
The 'aircraft 64' strategic bomber was to have been called Tu-10 in service, when it was abandoned the designation was re-allocated to a Tu-2 variant. This sort of thing happended fairly often in the USSR, the Su-17 is a case in point
Myasischev at this time have Pr 202/302 only Breadboard model. Tu with 64 at this time have some more it include much=> (Technical decisions ) + expireance. But you mast kow that Myasishev don't have at this time nothin manufacture (absolutly nothin) of corse this project can't have nothin'g chance. Tu at this time have evrything , and he can star to made some detail of it. So you not wright on this sugestions, about Me 202/302.
Tupolev was the master and Myasischev the student, after a while Myasischev was given his own design bureau. All they did was design and engineer the projects, building them was the job of the state aircraft factories, any factory could build any design whether it be from Tupolev, Myasischev, Sukhoi, Mikoyan or anybody.
Ok tu 85 has absolutly new wing (they made wing looks like 64).
Tu 85 was shot down aircraft (it dont using). And tu 95 have again new wing (and modernized fuselage), but I must said that on this aircraft was using more experians from tu 16.. and other progect. Tu 95 has no attitude to tu 4. it's look like compare the Boeing 707 and the Boeing 777
Just because the Tu-95 has swept wings doesn't mean it was closer to the 707 than the Tu-4. Aerodynamically and technologically, yes, but I am speaking of the evolutionary design process applied by Tupolev to his Tu-4 to make it ever bigger, longer ranged and faster. Remove the wings from a Tu-95 and replace them with the wings of a Tu-85 and you have a Tu-85, make it smaller and a bit more old-fashioned and you have a Tu-80, smaller still and back you go eventually to the Tu-4, its an unbroken lineage. The fuselage section of the Tu-95 is still today closer to the B-29 than any other type, the last vestiges of its design that remain.
The Tu-80 was a scaled up Tu-4 with a separate stepped canopy, in the Tu-85 it was further scaled up and when fitted with swept flying surfaces and turboprop engines the Tu-85 became the Tu-95,