Russians transporting su24 on its own landing gear
Posted by Reprexain@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 354 comments
Posted by Reprexain@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 354 comments
Mike__O@reddit
That's most of an Su-34, not 24
ecniv_o@reddit
That's wild -- I didn't know it was so large! But having scale here really helps
Mike__O@reddit
Flankers are huge. F-15s and F-22s aren't particularly small either, but Flankers are bigger than both.
Terrh@reddit
The f15/su27 are just massive.
It makes their performance all the more impressive Imo.
They are roughly the same footprint as an average sized house. Or 5 semi trailers parked side by side.
And it can beat the space shuttle to 50,000' from a stop and go Mach 2.5+
Just wild.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
I was quite surprised at how SMALL the SR-71 is, first time I got close to one (displayed outside a museum near San Diego)
BlatantConservative@reddit
Yeah Udvar Hazy in DC has a SR-71 displayed right in front of a Space Shuttle and it's the first thing you see when you walk into the main hangar.
A big part of what makes the visual so shocking is how much the Space Shuttle dwarfs the Blackbird.
GiorgioG@reddit
Was just there for the first time this past weekend. The Shuttle and the SR-71 are amazing in person. The blackbird still looks like it's from the future...and it's first flight was over 60 years ago.
50percentvanilla@reddit
i was shocked with the size of the space shuttle also. but i didn’t find the sr71 exactly small tho. for a mach 3+ airplane its pretty massive
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
I'm SO pissed I got Covid a few years ago when I was on my way to Udvar-Hazy. Still haven't been there.
Bane8080@reddit
There's both in the Air Force Museum in Ohio. I'm not sure I'd call it small at over 100 feet long. Though neither are anywhere near the size of the XB-70 Valkyrie that's there.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
My "standard" airplane is the Convair 990, which is 140 feet long. It was my father's daily driver at NASA for many years.
wetwater@reddit
That's and the X-15. Both much smaller than I thought, as was the F-104. The B-29 was much larger than I imagined and at first from a distance I thought it had to be a later derivative, but nope, the genuine article.
The XB-70? I never imagined being so large. It was breathtaking seeing it for the first time with a bunch of other experimental planes just casually parked under it.
Soft_Hand_1971@reddit
The B 36 is a big boi...
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Somewhere I have an old video of dad doing preflight on a 104. Looks not much bigger than the Cherokee I flew.
But looks faster, natch.
Boostedbird23@reddit
In their defense, their only payload was a camera system. Otherwise, it was fuel and engines and control surfaces for Mach 3.2 operation. I remember reading how little thrust they actually needed to sustain that speed at Angels 60+
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
Their main payload was fuel.
Xivios@reddit
Yeah, they'd take on 50,000lb of fuel during the air-to-air refueling after takeoff - this is pretty close to the weight of a loaded CRJ200 airliner.
kosmonavt-alyosha@reddit
And you know what you need to haul all that fuel? More fuel!
Big_OOOO@reddit
I got a fevah … and the only medicine is . . . MORE FUEL
SugarBeefs@reddit
On an 80.000 pound total fuel capacity, handily outweighing the empty weight of the aircraft itself.
The whole thing really was just two honking big engines and all fuel tank.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
You're forgetting the heaviest payload of the Blackbird.
Cool. Tons and tons of Cool.
pvera@reddit
And the 12-yr old RSO in the back seat.
Mediocre_Maximus@reddit
I thought you were gonna say "the balls of the pilots"
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
This is a family-friendly thread 😁
Starfire013@reddit
Well, those are kiiiinda required to have families. I’d say they’re pretty family-friendly.
Danitoba94@reddit
I admire your logic.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Good point 🤔
tenems@reddit
Pilot mounted dual ballast: heavy
WhoRoger@reddit
But cool stuff has less energy and therefore less mass, based on E=mc².
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Not in this case. In this case, the Cool is, when in operation and therefore at its Coolest, also very Hot.
cant_take_the_skies@reddit
Such an amazing plane. Even at 80k feet or whatever ridiculous altitude they were at, where the air is almost non-existent, there was still enough friction with the air to heat the skin of the plane up to 500 degrees.
Boostedbird23@reddit
Was it friction? Or was it adiabatic heating from supersonic operation?
cant_take_the_skies@reddit
The article I read said friction, altho I admit I'm not a fluid dynamics or materials expert so I just accepted their explanation
Ok-Answer-6951@reddit
I have seen an SR-71 at the air and space museum ( udvar-hazy by dulles) small is not the word I would choose....
ttystikk@reddit
It can't be too big and still punch that kind of a hole in the sky.
Concorde was a similar design ethos, only in airliner gauge.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Concorde is tiny inside. 2x2 seating, although comfy soft "leather" seats. I could only stand up in the aisle, and I'm only 5'8".
The first item in my profile submissions includes a shot my father took, looking into the cockpit from aft of the flight engineer position. I think it's 001 but I'm not sure. He was a pilot for US certification.
ttystikk@reddit
It was a beautiful plane, the like of which we may never see again.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Very. After a lifetime of flying pretty much everything, it was my father's favorite. Beautiful, and very well-behaved.
ttystikk@reddit
A man of excellent taste.
BatmanButFromCork@reddit
That’s a A-12 not a SR-71
classicalySarcastic@reddit
In fairness it is a reconnaissance plane. Two massive engines with a relatively small fuselage.
billthecat71@reddit
The plane out in front of the air museum in San Diego in Balboa Park is an A-12. It looks similar, but is smaller than the SR-71.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
Thanks!
Helpinmontana@reddit
It’s funny that the airframe between the fuselage and the engines appears to be only 4” tall when you look at it from eye level
Automaticman01@reddit
The F14 was a monster, too. I remember being shocked when I saw one at an airshow as a kid.
tenems@reddit
For even more context, the F14 length is just ~8ft shorter (one Abraham Lincoln with hat)
mjdau@reddit
Americans will do anything to avoid using the metric system.
SevenBansDeep@reddit
Damn, the f-14 was 189 Big Macs long!
Brother-Algea@reddit
How many Danny DeVitos is that?
NekrotismFalafel@reddit
The f-14 is more known for its girth
Was at least a couple of flurgs.
Ok-Answer-6951@reddit
The what?!?
Danitoba94@reddit
Goddamn right.
SLAM1195@reddit
I like to use my M16A2 as a meter stick 🦅
Calm-Internet-8983@reddit
People will always exaggerate the size of their planes by measuring in Abraham Lincolns and hoping the other guy assumes it's with hat
GrynaiTaip@reddit
I've seen a Flanker at an air show, it really is massive. There was also a Saab Gripen, which is tiny.
50percentvanilla@reddit
brazil bought some grippens. they look like a baby fighter, but pretty capable tho
totalyrespecatbleguy@reddit
An F15 is about the same size as a world war 2 B17 bomber
NekrotismFalafel@reddit
Heavy fighters. They're coming back. 6th Gen* air dominance fighters will be big boys that can go fast get high and shoot lots of missiles.
Blothorn@reddit
I got to climb into an F-15 cockpit as a teen—it felt like you could fit a tennis court on the wings.
levelzerogyro@reddit
The first time I saw a B-17 it was parked next to a F-15, and my grandfather who flew B-17G's with 100th Bomber Group(and was shot down over Munster on his 28th combat flight, 12/13 planes that went on that raid did not return, two more and he earned his way home) was astounded that the same plane that carried him and 9 of his friends, was basically about the same size as the F-15C we were standing next to.
I_had_the_Lasagna@reddit
Pretty sure the f15 has a similar if not larger payload capacity too
Basis-Some@reddit
More like an F15 is only a little more than a B17 payload away from being able to carry a B17.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
My father, in his role as a pilot at NASA, once tried to "requisition" a retired "Streak Eagle" F-15. Supposedly to use for "rapid response high altitude air sampling", which was sorta semi-legitimate if you didn't look too closely.
Of course, having that hot-rod in his fleet had nothing to do with the request. Of course not. How could you think that?
Chadstronomer@reddit
Well to be fair the shuttle is carrying enough fuel to put itself in low earth orbit
Binford6200@reddit
F16 vs su34. Didn't knew this
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1g2g91l/heres_a_size_comparison_of_the_f16_left_and_su34/
Su34 and b17 have same length but different wingspan
beastrabban@reddit
Su34s have a sleeping cabin and a bathroom
Clickclickdoh@reddit
No, they don't. This is one of those stupid internet rumors that simply won't die.
Does anyone ever Google, "SU-34 cockpit"?
Raguleader@reddit
They actually have a three-bedroom apartment back there.
cgn-38@reddit
You are right, that is one WW2 era cockpit. Just watched the video.
Carribean-Diver@reddit
[ Rule 34 has entered the chat ]
andorraliechtenstein@reddit
a sleeping cabin: - They can lay down their head and torso on the entry hatch and fit their legs between the seats.
a bathroom - a relief tube , to urinate into.
a kitchen - a can heater
cgn-38@reddit
Just watched the video someone posted on the cockpit of the thing.
Not even a can heater. Just a slot for a thermos on the rear bulkhead.
Also no relief tube. Just a jug with a funnel on top to pee in.
I am fucking amazed it has air conditioning. Seems incongruous.
Thebraincellisorange@reddit
just about every plane since the 60's has air conditioning.
the pilots would get cooked in the cockpit without it.
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
And a kitchen!
well_shoothed@reddit
Just looked this up, and a rough size comparison is like a Miata vs a Ford Expedition.
Thebraincellisorange@reddit
the F16 is smol. like the Mig29.
Migs are the light fighters, Sukhoi are massive
mashtato@reddit
Holy fuck.
jtshinn@reddit
The guys that fly those must be very small.
Carribean-Diver@reddit
Both of those are a lot smaller than I thought they would be.
Sivalon@reddit
Looking at my model airplanes right now, this is correct.
Louisvanderwright@reddit
What I want to know is why do Flankers have the pee pee between their engines? Seems like an odd design feature.
Mike__O@reddit
Part of their RWR system I believe
WealthQueasy2233@reddit
if the platypus qualifies as a flanker, it's by far the largest of them
Drachen1065@reddit
The US Air Force museum has an Su27 side by side with a Mig29.
The 29 is like half the size of the Su27. Even the F111 nearby looks tiny.
blindfoldedbadgers@reddit
And Fullbacks - like this - are even bigger still
Individual_Raccoon36@reddit
the su34 has a tiny on board kitchen and toilet
acpoweradapter@reddit
I saw an F15 in person once when my mom went on a flight at an event, and it was amazing how big they actually are.
remuspilot@reddit
Modern fighters are the size of a B-17.
jpharber@reddit
Yeah the F-16 is the only modern fighter jet that’s actually about the size you pictured in your head.
PastTomorrows@reddit
If it helps, western jet fighters basically come in 2 size classes.
There's the 15m/50ft class: F16, F35, Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen.
Then there's the 20m/65ft class: F15, F14, F22, F4.
Within a class they'll look about the same size on the ground, but the latter will look visibly bigger than the former.
In between, you have the original F18 (the super Hornet is really pushing into the 20m class).
That's for the western world.
Soviet/Russian ones tend to be halfway into the bigger category. So the Mig 23 and 29 are about the size of an F18. And the Su 27 is just as much bigger than the F15.
And then there's the Su 34, which is basically the next size. This thing is huge.
BrianWantsTruth@reddit
Back in the day at Airventure I got to walk around most of the famous fighters, including F-14, F-4, F-15, etc.
I agree, the F-16 is tiny by comparison, and indeed is about the size you’d assume. The cockpit/canopy is like tightly wrapped around the seat.
The rest are massive. I have a picture somewhere of someone standing on the fuselage of the F-4 near the vertical stabilizer and it makes the guy look tiny.
While not small, the A-10 felt close to the size I would have assumed as well.
majorlier@reddit
Probably because of all those photos of it's gun and VW beetle
Boostedbird23@reddit
And remember, A-10 can carry about double the payload as the B-17.
Xav_NZ@reddit
The Rafale and Gripen are of comparable size to the F-16 , The F-35 is also about the size most people imagine it to be.
jpharber@reddit
Never seen a Rafale or Griffen in the flesh.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen an F-35 IRL on the ground either now that I think about it.
notfromchicago@reddit
F-117 as well.
I know it's not really a fighter.
jpharber@reddit
The F-117 might actually be smaller than I was expecting it’d be
CallOfCorgithulhu@reddit
Even they are probably bigger than people expect from a plane that only has one engine and holds one (or two) person(s). They sure aren't Cub tiny.
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
I sat in the cockpit of an A-4. It was a good fit for me, at 5'7" and 150 pounds.
Hemides@reddit
HAL Tejas has entered the chat.
Thebraincellisorange@reddit
The big ones that qualify for fighter/bomber.
the fighters like the F16/MiG29 are smol
Boostedbird23@reddit
... And carry about the same payload
IRoadIRunner@reddit
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/F15_Eagle_02May2009.jpg
Mannginger@reddit
😲
Danitoba94@reddit
Oh yeah russian fighters, 4th gen & onwards, are fucking huge. Primarily because, for reasons i fail to fathom, they have never adopted the concept of mid-air refueling. And design planes that can hold a lot of fuel, and stay in the air for longer.
ArsErratia@reddit
The one that always gets me is submarines.
They're a full-scale office block that can hit 50 mph and if it were right behind you it would be quieter than a whisper.
brianwski@reddit
The longest submarines are around 600 feet, which is crazy to be sure. But I'm still amazed our species produces aircraft carriers that are 1,122 feet long and move at almost 40mph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUYbtPW8Yv0
I've always assumed in a conflict between 1st world countries, those things would be sunk by intercontinental ballistic missiles. Target acquisition isn't exactly difficult for a 100,000 ton displacement monstrosity floating on the ocean so by definition it cannot hide, or even get shade.
Ohhhh, an internet search turned up the longest boat of "Seawise Giant" at 1,505 feet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawise_Giant That's a football field longer than the Empire State building laying on it's side in the water.
Graingy@reddit
The first world countries would be unlikely to fight (unless the US starts shit). First and second is more likely.
brianwski@reddit
I worry a lot about the Taiwan situation. If and when China invades and takes over Taiwan, that will be an unstable day/week. Taiwan might be perceived to be too strategic (economically) to just allow China to take them over, which might mean "really bad things happen next".
For the life of me I don't understand why Taiwan isn't recognized as a country by the UN, but literally every last person on earth understands it meets the definition of a country in every way, shape, and form. I also don't understand why China can't just trade with Taiwan like everybody else or steal their manufacturing capabilities and just compete and do it themselves. But for some bizarre reason China says they already own Taiwan and the only possible justification for that kind of lunatic claim is so that they can invade in the future because "it belongs to them anyway".
I hope China puts off the invasion for another 5 or 10 years. The longer the better.
Graingy@reddit
China isn’t first world, at least not by original definition.
brianwski@reddit
I may have not used the correct term. I just meant a nation where they aren't savages throwing rocks that bounce off USA tanks, LOL.
China has around 400 nuclear ICBMs that can reach the USA from mainland China (and it is estimated 1,000 by 2030 in just 5 more years). So if they take the first 200 of them (keeping the remaining 200 in reserve) and lob them at aircraft carriers that is 20 ICBMs coming in at 15,000 mph at the same time to each one carrier.
I have a really hard time imagining that will go well for the aircraft carriers. But to be clear, I'm not exactly privy to the most super secret counter measures the USA has up it's sleeve. Maybe they have things that can stop 20 incoming projectiles travelling at Mach 23 all at the same time, who knows?
Graingy@reddit
Goodness man it’s the 21st century. People don’t talk like that anymore.
Impossible-Winner478@reddit
It's still a target that's moving and can maneuver, with a bunch of little ships that can shoot your missiles down first.
Carriers aren't showing up until mop up duty tume anyways.
Long range bombers, cruise missiles, and submarines are gonna be the first ones to the fight
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
That's how Google user to do office space expansion in the early days in Mountain View
covex_d@reddit
SUs are classified as heavy fighters.
danscava@reddit
That's what she said
Appropriate_Chart_87@reddit
Su-24- of 34
playstatijonas@reddit
The wings are 5 each
NarrMaster@reddit
This threw me off because I pronounce the "Su" as "Sue", and not "S U"
Cauvinus@reddit
I believe that’s the correct pronunciation as far as I know. Likewise with Ka-52 for “Kamov” and Mi-8 etc.
talhahtaco@reddit
The fact that they shortened it to mi is funny, considering his last name was only 4 letters long in Russian and 3 in English (Миль/Mil)
Cauvinus@reddit
Agreed. And then they took two last names, Mikoyan and Gurevich, and chose three letters.
10art1@reddit
I think that was moreso done for the pun (Миг)
facw00@reddit
I've always said the letters, but that's probably wrong, after all, no one says M I G. Thought nothing of it until I listened to an audiobook which said "sue". Clearly I don't get to talk about fighter jets with people enough in real life.
frostN0VA@reddit
Yeah in Russian you pronounce it as a word rather than separate letters.
SU as in super
MIG as in amigo
KA as in alaska
And so on.
ASlowDebauchery@reddit
Given MiG and SU stand for Mikoyan-Gurevich and Sukhoi (all last names of the firm's founders), I would think they're pronounced as Mieg and Sue respectively.
epsilona01@reddit
Looks like a chicken without feathers.
mohawk990@reddit
Looks fine to me. I do t think they’ll exceed any design capabilities, especially with that military tractor. Better watch out for low clearance though.
NGTTwo@reddit
Looking forward to seeing this Russian bird show up on /r/11foot8.
MookieFlav@reddit
I would imagine plane tires are more expensive than truck tires and are not formulated for long mileage wear and tear, but assuming it's a short trip it's probably a pretty effective way to transport. Now if it had to go hundreds of miles it'd probably be pretty stupid.
planko13@reddit
They are also inflated to like 200+ psi. They are destroying that highway.
Also, plane tires will overheat it you run them at rated load indefinitely. They are designed to only operate for short cycles. Lucky for them, this plane looks like it had some weight reduction done.
Flagon15@reddit
The plane is also extremely light in that state, especially without the wings, so pressure and friction should be pretty minimal.
Ocelitus@reddit
And they are going to use old tires for this and put new ones on when they get to where it will fly from.
We had a MiG-23 come in years ago. Ground assumed it was going somewhere it wasn't, so it taxied a bit before getting over to us. Shortly after parking, both mains deflated. Pilot told us it was a safety feature after heat buildup and that he had spares.
PerpetualBard4@reddit
The mains deflating when overheated is common on most aircraft, there’s little rubber plugs in the wheel that melt when overheated to prevent the tire from exploding
kriger33@reddit
Looking at where the engine nozzles typically extend to on a Su-34, this looks like the engines are likely removed also.
Flagon15@reddit
I'm not completely sure, the hole in the back should be the point where the vertical stabilizers end and horizontal stabs pivot around, the nozzles start a bit behind them, so here it looks like the engines are mounted. The tail thing between the engines is just extremely long on the Su-34 for some reason.
kriger33@reddit
That's it's APU (between the exhaust)
Flagon15@reddit
I know, but it's weirdly protruding compared to other Flanker variants. It was originally supposed to be a radar, but even the Su-57 and Su-47 had them much closer to the fuselage while still having radars there, the best reason I could come up with is that they use it to balance out the extra weight in the nose, which still sounds like a weird way of doing it.
kriger33@reddit
The Su-47 had space for radars but never had operational equipment in either the nose nor tail boom. So basically only a sales pitch.
The Su-57 does have cheek and wing edge sensors but the tail is countermeasure dispensers and drag chute.
Flagon15@reddit
True for the Su-47, but the tail still had to be designed as if it was fitted with a radar, so no external changes would be made, and there's definitely antenna on the Su-57, the end is painted differently probably because it's radio-transparent, it has warning labels, etc. The only question is wether or not it has tracking capabilities or is it just an AESA antenna meant for electronic warfare, and given how long they've been wanting a rear looking radar, I'd assume they went with it this time.
Sivalon@reddit
Good point, probably been drained of most if not all fluids too.
tsrich@reddit
This is Russia so maybe not
Madness_Reigns@reddit
Fluids got drained and resold.
gefahr@reddit
Or drank.
Orcapa@reddit
I swear I read something years and years ago abut Russians drinking the deicing fluid or windhield washer fluid from their jets (if such a thing exists).
Tusitleal@reddit
aircraft use alcohol to cool avionics or straight up the cockpit. Russians particularly were into sweating it out so they'd conserve ethanol to mix with water and drink when they land and everyone gets to get drunk off the planes supply. Lots of fun footage of it online. From that one famous soviet bomber that liked to eject people into the ground.
gefahr@reddit
I recall hearing something like this too, that's what prompted my comment.
VikRiggs@reddit
That and how shit roads in Russia are.
__Becquerel@reddit
This is the slowest those wheels have ever rolled
galvanized_steelies@reddit
Not so much an issue with the wheel speed, but aircraft are designed to be pushed along by the engines with no bend load on the gear. Pushing and pulling on the NLG like that for presumably a day or more at highway speeds would put some serious wear on the NLG and its mounting hardware, not to mention the poor shear bolt on the tow bar.
Then again, this is Russia, can’t be damaged or worn if you don’t inspect it, the pilot is meant to go out, not necessarily come back.
planko13@reddit
Tires are also inflated to like 200+ psi. they are destroying that highway.
ThePfaffanater@reddit
With most planes this would probably be correct but I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians just designed the plane with this in mind similar to how they just got around cleaning runways by adding the grated intake diverters on those jets. Russian engineering is funny like that
1989-Gavril-MD70@reddit
Literally the Japanese Empire c. 1940s
StrawberryGloomy2049@reddit
To me this just shows the rot from within Russian society. It’s normal. You have a $36 multimillion dollar fighter jet that is not easily replace able should be treated as such. You could use a $150k machine (a proper carrier) to do it right.
Nope…send it. Not that I am complaining. I am sure there will be a video just like this that shows up, but the plane is a total loss.
chickenCabbage@reddit
God I hate those tractors
RecipeDisastrous859@reddit
Whatever the reason is, they obviously couldnt fly it which would be lots easier
FlexorCarpiUlnaris@reddit
well the wings fell off for starters
balbok7721@reddit
30Mils for a plane but this is where savings need to be made. This is just another example of Russias ineptitude
Jack-White9@reddit
That's from 2019 (or older).
UNDR08@reddit
I think a lot of people don’t realize how massive these airplanes are.
I mean, even a “small” nimble fighter like the F-16 is still a very large airplane.
hammr25@reddit
The actual size of drones is also mind boggling.
carter2ooo@reddit
Was on a rotation in a European country and my PL pulled me aside bc he knew I liked aircraft. I’m not too familiar with drones but he took me to a hangar and there was a drone in there. It was a smaller one too, and I surprised how big it was. Also got to see some MiG-29s on a different rotation and they were giant
condomneedler@reddit
My first time seeing a predator in person 🤯
They were 3x bigger than I imagined.
QuaintAlex126@reddit
The way old prop aircraft like the F6F Hellcat or TBM/F Avenger are described and depicted make you think they’re tiny little things. I was very surprised when I saw them for the first time at the Lexington museum. Hard to image Predators are around the same size too.
PerpetualBard4@reddit
The TBF is massive, but the B-25 is one of the few planes that is smaller than one would think. When I saw them next to each other for the first time it finally clicked why they picked the Mitchell for the Doolittle raid. They’re almost the same size.
Oxytropidoceras@reddit
My favorite was seeing the A-4 at Lexington. It was the only one which was genuinely smaller than I expected, but it was also so ridiculously tall.
BlatantConservative@reddit
Reaper drones have wings so long they cross over both sides of most runways.
saarlac@reddit
For me it was the sr71. I imagined it to be much larger than it is.
pr1ntscreen@reddit
The MQ-1 Predator is about as long (15 meter) as the smallboi Saab 39 Gripen. Wider wingspan also.
There's also way more Predators than Gripens produced, which is insane in and of itself.
HebridesNutsLmao@reddit
r/nocontext
Intelligent_League_1@reddit
The RQ-4 is huge
polird@reddit
Same wingspan as a 737
gefahr@reddit
Whoa.
HumpyPocock@reddit
Global Hawk is a CHONKER
RQ-4B Global Hawk with Humans for Scale
MQ-4C Triton Brochure incl. comparison with 737-900
Note —
MQ-4C Triton has an excellent paint scheme BTW
PS — Cutaway Illustration of RQ-4B Block 40 Global Hawk
DamNamesTaken11@reddit
I used to build model airplanes as a kid that were 1/48 scale. It shocked me when I bought an A-10 Warthog and put it next to my P-47 Warthog. The A-10 is much bigger.
Same for the F-16 Viper next to my P-51D Mustang (smaller wings than Mustang but around 1.5x longer, it truly is a plane built around an engine.)
THEREAPER8593@reddit
The F5 is also still really big and that thing was tiny by jet standards
Have_Donut@reddit
Yep. Most fighters are close to the size of WWII medium bombers.
_2055_@reddit
We also need to take into account that this plane probably does not have any fuel which contributes to its tall height. In reality, the aircraft though still huge, isn’t exactly that huge when fuelled.
campbrs@reddit
I saw an F-104 at the Denver Air Force museum and was amazed at how small it was compared to other aircraft on display- i think an F-4
PerpetualBard4@reddit
To be fair, the Starfighter has stumpy little wings but is a long boi, basically a glorified cowling for the engine with a cockpit and control surfaces bolted k ,and the Phantom is just massive.
BaldingThor@reddit
I can’t remember when or where, but a while ago I saw my first fighter jet in person, a RAAF F/A-18.
I knew they were big aircraft, but bloody hell they’re massive!
Kradgger@reddit
The Mustang was already bigger than the 109, not to mention the Jug. Then jet engines came around and size just went wild. i respect the F-16 for being as skinny as possible, but god damn, it still dwarfs any single engine prop fighter it flies alongside.
matreo987@reddit
plus the su34 (this is not a 24) is generally just a massive airplane. “fullback” is a pretty fitting reporting name.
Stale_Water1@reddit
The F-16 surprised me by how big it was. On the inverse, the F-15 isn’t as big as I had imagined.
PixelAstro@reddit
The F-16 was about as big in person as I expected it to be, the F-35 and F-22 seemed bigger than I thought they’d be.
ImpossibleLeek7908@reddit
I'm 5' and F-16 is the smallest jet I could load munitions comfortably, but it's still massive.
onlyslightlybiased@reddit
I visited the raf museum in London last year and I remember feeling incredibly dumb just looking at something like a later spitfire and being like, huh, that's actually quite large, I was not expecting this.
The standing under a vulcan and thinking how the fuck is this so maneuverable.
Ocelitus@reddit
I put some Challenger 600s next to a couple F-15s. They are about the same size.
People don't know about fuel capacity either. 2500 gallons on a MD-80 and 2500 gallons on a F-15, on the same day with the same truck, and both were going to New Orleans.
plamenv0@reddit
On the other hand, I was recently surprised by how puny a Harrier is in person
Ocelitus@reddit
Or how much fuel it pisses after shutting down.
UNDR08@reddit
Kinda squaty
joshocar@reddit
That was one of my biggest takeaways from the Air and Space museum in DC, fighter planes are massive, massive engines with a little pilot strapped to them.
champignax@reddit
And different fighters are NOT the same size.
TheBestPartylizard@reddit
Why is the ground clearance so high?
482Cargo@reddit
So you can fit more bombs under it.
482Cargo@reddit
Well, the gear is rated for much higher speed after all.
PembyVillageIdiot@reddit
Always fun experiencing military jets with common references. Never fails to amaze how large they really are!
ResourceWorker@reddit
Not just jets. There's a P51 at a museum near me, that thing is fucking huge.
AverageAircraftFan@reddit
P-51 is tiny compared to something like the A-1 Skyraider and F4U Corsair even too
ruggerb0ut@reddit
The P-51 was fucking huge for the time, compared to literally every other nations fighter aircraft. It weighed twice as much as a Spitfire.
gromm93@reddit
Yes, I was similarly surprised by the aircraft on display at the Museum of Flight in Seattle.
The F4U especially is surprisingly large. The top of the prop is at least 15 feet off the ground! Probably closer to 20.
Ocelitus@reddit
Was towing one out of the hangar and the mechanic told me to watch the prop. I asked him what about the wings (which were folded up and much higher than the propeller)?
Far_Dragonfruit_1829@reddit
"How does a P-47 pilot perform evasive action?"
"Unstrap and dodge around in the cockpit."
Femveratu@reddit
In Russia, plane tow you
Jean-Claude-Can-Ham@reddit
R/idiotstowingthings
slogive1@reddit
SU 57 is huge.
SuperBwahBwah@reddit
Wow those things are a lot bigger when compared to cars
Long-Sympathy3132@reddit
Damn flankers are big
Buzz_Buzz_Buzz_@reddit
/r/ANormalDayInRussia
ShiroJPmasta@reddit
Ukrainian farmer at work
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
It's not Ukrainian its Russians aircraft. Ukraine aren't the ones needing donkeys . That award goes to russia
passengerv@reddit
It's funny that that joke went over your head in r/aviation of all places, ironic lol. The comment was referring to how Ukrainian farmers were taking russian vehicles from the battlefields with just tractors, pretty much stealing them from under the russian noses.
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
Yeh I know. I thought you were talking about just now as their using tractors for troops transportation along with the donkies lmao
Carlos_Danger21@reddit
Thanks to that farmer it's Ukraine's jet now.
ireaditalso@reddit
This driver has the opportunity to do the funniest thing
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
He would be sent straight to frontline to be meat for the meat grinder
El_mochilero@reddit
They should pull it backwards to roll back the odometer. Helps resale value.
Gin_OClock@reddit
I'm a bit dumb, do planes actually have odometers?
Sea_Mushroom9612@reddit
They have timer which records engine hours
Gin_OClock@reddit
I'm just wondering what would happen if I started driving around a small plane instead of my car. Imagine I have no intention of using it as a flying vehicle, but just a way to get around. Figuring out how far it's gone in its lifespan would just come down to operating hours regardless of ground speed?
McCheesing@reddit
Exactly this.
TMK many trucks have an engine-hours timer in addition to the odometer for this exact reason
avar@reddit
I'm pretty sure any modern car has engine hours as well, you'll just need to connect to it with software that can talk to the ECU. My 16+ year old car has engine hours.
McCheesing@reddit
I bet it does. I could track mine on my 2012 Silverado but that’s the last personal vehicle I had that had that feature.
avar@reddit
I'm saying that most likely your current vehicle has that too, it's just not something displayed on the dashboard.
Alewdguy@reddit
He agreed with you.
avar@reddit
For what it's worth I understood "that's the last personal vehicle I had that had that feature" to imply that his current vehicle doesn't have this feature.
Whereas I was pointing out that it almost definitely does, it's just not readily displayed on the dashboard.
Gin_OClock@reddit
I don't really know how to ask this properly, but if two identical planes are flown at different speeds for the same duration, does their maintenance then differ or stay the same? Does that affect wear & tear?
Oz-Batty@reddit
I don't know about your specific question, but running an engine at full thrust for longer requires earlier maintenance. This is why airlines do take-offs with lower thrust when possible, even though it might use more fuel.
Palstorken@reddit
Yes the faster one requires more maintenance
McCheesing@reddit
Uh. No.
SmPolitic@reddit
Are you saying "no, it will be on the same maintenance schedule"
Or "no, when maintenance is done, no extra work will be required"
I expect the second one is not true? Other comment mentions turbulence affecting maintenance
I'm trying to point out that "maintenance" can refer to both the work needed to be done, and the schedule to inspect to check what maintenance work needs to be done
And yeah the schedule should have enough safety margin built in that any operational differences are insignificant?
McCheesing@reddit
The original question was, “if two identical planes are flown at different speeds for the same duration, does their maintenance then differ or stay the same? Does that affect wear & tear?”
Someone answered “the faster one requires more maintenance.”
That’s not necessarily true because maintenance intervals are based on things other than aircraft speed.
NoConcentrate9116@reddit
The engine hour tachometers are calibrated for a specific rate at a specific RPM, so if you’re flying an airplane that’s very close to a required inspection you can fly slower or perform less dramatic maneuvers that don’t require high power settings and fly for a little longer or avoid busting the inspection timing.
McCheesing@reddit
TIL about the tach/hours calibration. I fly turbofans so “engine cycles” is also tracked (how many times the engine was put to TRT/GA thrust)
NoConcentrate9116@reddit
I flew turboshafts previously so yeah, similar there. But for pistons the engine tach calibrations are important to understand in concept so you know what you can or cannot do. I’ve seen people freak out getting close to a 100 hour when in reality you can typically fly a little longer on the Hobbs meter for a given tach timeline as long as you’re not doing high performance maneuvers.
McCheesing@reddit
The maintenance interval is based on flight hours, not distance flown or speed. So the maintenance would be the same.
Wear and tear will be inspected and corrected at those intervals. Wear and tear is also dependent on turbulence, etc.
gromm93@reddit
You should see the timers on forklifts.
It's all about the maintenance and the mean time before failure. For a lot of industrial equipment, the last thing you want is to wait for it to stop working before replacing it.
Airplanes too, obviously.
McCheesing@reddit
USAF has a big ol list of “fly-to-fail” parts. I’m gonna keep my mouth shut about how I feel about that 🤣
ChartreuseBison@reddit
Basically anything with an engine that doesn't primarily go on a road uses hours.
jutct@reddit
They're terrible as ground vehicles.
Gin_OClock@reddit
Well yes
ReactionFree4214@reddit
Rush hour would be amusing, for you not other road users that are in your gun sights.
Gin_OClock@reddit
I love that my hypothetical is now armed! 😆
BenHippynet@reddit
https://youtu.be/RW4oz4YzIks?si=t8GWfMEx1pPrtqq7
Gin_OClock@reddit
Oh no! Lol I should have guessed these three would try and make/use a car that works like a plane 😂
swordfish45@reddit
As in record mileage traveled on landing gear? No.
Gin_OClock@reddit
I wonder how long it would take to wear out landing gear if you were just to drive it around, not doing takeoffs or landings
Thebraincellisorange@reddit
given how overbuilt Russian landing gear is, you could circumnavigate the earth many times and the gear would still be fine I reckon.
They build them extremely tough to land on rough/damaged airfields.
Gin_OClock@reddit
Damn, that's crazy! I should see if there's anything I can adapt to a 16 year old Subaru
McCheesing@reddit
Just pulling it around like this primarily wears the bearings and tires… brakes a little but not much. It might torque the struts but not anything actionable.
I’d ~~expect~~ hope they’d do a tire and brakes inspection at the very least before its next flight.
gromm93@reddit
From what I've heard from Russians about how Russia works, probably not, because "that's Russia for you".
Gin_OClock@reddit
New experiment: how many times can I cross Canada on a plane on the ground before the wheels fall off
loryk_zarr@reddit
The engine will record running time and track cycles of each life limited component.
AvionDrake579@reddit
The light aircraft I work on have a tachometer which records engine hours and a Hobbs meter for recording flight hours.
AnohtosAmerikanos@reddit
Okay Ferris
Slartibartfastthe3rd@reddit
Save Феррис!
BlatantConservative@reddit
Goddamn the correct phonetic way. Good job.
interwebzdotnet@reddit
I think they might want to rotate the tires when they are done too... will make for a smoother ride later.
hawkeye18@reddit
Looks like the Russians just didn't want to....
(••) ( ••)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
Reinvent the wheel.
That_Pusheen_Guy@reddit
Su-34, not Su-24 you moronic doorhinge
BeanConsumer7@reddit
They paid for the damn wheels and are gonna use the damn wheels
Kayback2@reddit
I'll honestly say this is bigger than I expected.
I know some planes a just massive. I love the Tomcat, the F-15 is a vibe.
I was always thinking this is a little bigger than a MiG-29, not like, 3 times the size.
tiny_chaotic_evil@reddit
"Drive plane to Kyiv and drop bombs", said the Russian Pilot
Montreal_Metro@reddit
Fun fact, plane landing gears, tires and other parts aren’t designed for extended road use. Enjoy.
Different-Housing544@reddit
I was looking for an actual answer like this.
Should they? Can they?
How do they normally transport them if they can't fly?
thepoddo@reddit
Not even if designed for unmaintained strips?
E2TheCustodian@reddit
They will be stronger and more resistant to impact but the bearings and rubber and etc still won’t be rated for much continuous use - even rough field landings are still only a few hundred meters to a km or so each time at worst. If this is just taking a 1-2 km trip around an airfield then yep whatever. At least that looks like a towbar so it will likely rotate the nose gear on cornering loads.
Necessary_Group4479@reddit
why doesn't the craft designed for flying drive around goodly!? why!?
sadistkarmalade@reddit
Looks like a sad bird
unstoppablehippy711@reddit
Wheels are wheels
HornyErmine@reddit
Jesus Christ jets are big
ggmerle666@reddit
Who gives a eff, launch a nuke or don't. Your performative terrorist government is exhausting. Launch one or don't, just know you'll equally be engulfed in flames.
As a parent it's so tiresome that at this point, it's like NK threats. Meanwhile most recent people care about our children and giving them a happy and prosperous life
HyFinated@reddit
If not trailer, why trailer shaped?
Ok-Piece7687@reddit
They just build things differently. Better.
Silent_Neck9930@reddit
The application of sophisticated machinery to straightforward tasks strikes me as strange, I believe this exemplifies efficiency!
MasterWhite1150@reddit
Thanks chagpt
Silent_Neck9930@reddit
It was Gemini though
Ambaryerno@reddit
There's a joke in there about the state of the Russian Air Force.
Major_Mango6002@reddit
Efficiency
casualuser52@reddit
Why don’t they just fly it there?
Miserable-Lawyer-233@reddit
That thing is massive
battlecryarms@reddit
May a a drunk Russian trucker plow into it and knock it upside down into a ditch.
JohnnyEagleClaw@reddit
That’s not what those are for 🤡😂
JapDrag@reddit
Next GTA heist be like
dbvolfan1@reddit
It amazed me that folks are allowed to apparently “pass” it on the left.
ttystikk@reddit
This seems like a very Russian thing to do.
Graingy@reddit
I mean, if it works…
Does seem like it’d be prone to very expensive mistakes, however.
qbl500@reddit
They might have some good roads!
Select_Cantaloupe_62@reddit
I assume it's just a short distance, but I'm very curious to know the "cents per mile" math on these tires. I know most of the wear is on landing but I still gotta imagine towing this thing 100+ miles at highway speeds is going to cost something, I'm just wondering how it compares to using a flatbed.
kinkysubt@reddit
That’s a set of expensive trailer tires.
SinnerProbGoingToSin@reddit
Oh how Russian of them.
InevitablePresent917@reddit
Of all the photos, drawings, descriptions, etc. I've seen of this plane, this is the clearest representation of how big it is.
UpstairsPractical870@reddit
r/idiotstowingthings
Tall-Morning@reddit
This is silly
PLS-Surveyor-US@reddit
That's going to rack up some mileage on the odo.
____megatron___@reddit
Didnt know it was so big
DookieToe2@reddit
That’s actually pretty cool. I like how Soviet fighter jets are designed to be more self-sufficient than US fighters.
Jackmino66@reddit
Just a reminder of how absolutely gigantic modern fighter jets are
sneijder@reddit
Likely designed to do this ?
m71nu@reddit
No it was designed to fly. But sanctions made access to wings difficult so they do this instead.
Nexa991@reddit
That poor SU 34 is searching for shovels with his trusted friend.
RedditZhangHao@reddit
Latest addition to the pothole detection crew
Nexa991@reddit
That is a circle of life. First you detect potholes then you make them.
totallyclips@reddit
Russia towing a state of the art Jet with a tractor at least it wasn't a donkey
privat3crunch@reddit
They see me rollin’ …
Orcapa@reddit
I wonder if they are just skidding the front landing gear when they turn.
HazardousBusiness@reddit
Hopefully they build better axles than anything else they build that typically malfunctions. Hope those aren't mobile home axles and bearings.
crosseyedweyoun@reddit
Hopefully they don't. I hope it crashes and bursts into flames.
HazardousBusiness@reddit
Agreed. I should have added /s
ninjadude4535@reddit
I almost ended up towing an H3 to a museum like this. So glad we eventually got a truck for it
RBeck@reddit
I always figured with the wings detached there would be a lot of plumbing and wires sticking out.
BuffaloOk7264@reddit
That has to be a very slow careful tow to prevent sway.
Technical-Mix-5444@reddit
That thing is BEEFY DAYUM
pandab34r@reddit
This is a great way to burn up the transmission. RWD planes are supposed to be towed on a flatbed or from the back
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
According to some random dude this is normal 😂
Aayaan_747@reddit
Su24!?! When did they release that? But srsly tho, transporting jets like that is fine lol
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
I did write it miss clicked 2 instead of 3 lol
Aayaan_747@reddit
Ah. That's okay lol.
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
I don't think we're would see an f35 rolling down the road like thet
tmotytmoty@reddit
I hope they crash
Poopy_sPaSmS@reddit
It always amazes me how big these things are.
Efficient_Sky5173@reddit
r/redneckengineering
Spudtar@reddit
If not for driving on road than why wheel shaped?
grimatonguewyrm@reddit
Da! Is best for rubber gripping strength.
tomtomclubthumb@reddit
This is a terrible idea isn't it?
GSV_SenseAmidMadness@reddit
Too bad these things don't come with some convenient way of getting from one place to another without having to be taken apart and towed down the highway.
AZMD911@reddit
Crazy!
brennons@reddit
Ima have to dig up my picture of an A-10 getting towed out of a C-5 on its mains
AlexLuna9322@reddit
We built this airplane and my GOD, we’re using it fully. -Ivan, the truck driver, maybe.
nl_Kapparrian@reddit
At least they covered the wanker.
Kerbal_Guardsman@reddit
Isnt this picture/video set ancient?
Slartibartfastthe3rd@reddit
6 Years
Loud_Surround5112@reddit
That…can’t be healthy for the wheels.
Vettepilot@reddit
Why? Aircraft get towed into and out of hangars all the time. The aircraft goes significantly faster than that tug can pull it on takeoff and landing.
Acheronian_Rose@reddit
it rolls at 100 mph+ during its take off, the wheels will be okay. the bigger concern is accidentally going under something with not enough clearance
BadWolfRU@reddit
Pilot vehicle is visible in front of the tractor, so it is probably a standard oversize cargo transport, with pre-checked and approved route
yegocego@reddit
kinda smart no?
801ms@reddit
That thing is absolutely fucking massive. Always forget how big jets actually are till I see them like this
S1075@reddit
As seen on The Aviationist in 2019.
https://theaviationist.com/2019/10/31/wait-what-what-is-a-russian-sukhoi-su-34-doing-driving-along-the-road/
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
I know it's a su34. I just miss clicked the 2, lol. Thanks for some of the funny responses, tho I do appreciate it 😂
erhue@reddit
su-34*
Reprexain@reddit (OP)
I noticed it now mate I miss cliked the 2 lol
Vysh_9@reddit
Well the wheels are to be used in some way or the another I guess
Comfortable_Pea8634@reddit
Where’s the next set of pictures where it doesn’t clear that overhead?!
Tkzeee@reddit
Yes because there is clearly not a truck right next to it going under that exact same overhead
Comfortable_Pea8634@reddit
It’s a joke… because it’s Russia and nobody would be surprised if it didn’t clear.
Tkzeee@reddit
Yes because it’s Russia, https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/s/23nElwCofF
Comfortable_Pea8634@reddit
Make no mistake, America is no different.
PizzaGeek9684@reddit
No! Very different. In America the driver would pull over, check what he hit, call his supervisor, wait until the supervisor arrived, and then need a second driver because by the time they were ready to mobilize driving hours would have expired.
In Russia they’d shrug and figure out what they hit when they got where they needed to. Then shrug and say they didn’t know how it happened
Mahmoud_doulah@reddit
It’s easier and more practical
Cookskiii@reddit
That ain’t a 24
Belzebutt@reddit
I don’t see any brake lights comrade, surely you are aware of the regulations
MightBubbly1515@reddit
That's a Su-34 !!
Look at the landing gears!!
v1rotatev2@reddit
Have you ever seen Su-24?