MiG-21I “Analog”: “AnalogFlying test-bed for research and development of Tu-144 passenger airplane wing. Two prototypes were built. First was used to develop elevon control system for tailless aircraft. All four elevon sections were based all over wingspan. The second was tested at the Gromov Flight Research Institute. The wing leading edge was testing with sweepback of 78. In the grotto behind the cockpit and on the top of the fin special cameras were set up. In the nose and tail part of the aircraft a 290 kg remote mass balance weight was used to change the centre-of-gravity. On 18 April 1968 the maiden flight was performed by test pilot O.V.Gudkov. Till the end of 1969 140 flights were performed, the altitude of 19000 m and speed of 2120 km/h to 2,06M were reached. After completion of main test program during performing of aerobatic flying on the first prototype FRI test pilot V.Konstantinov crashed, the second prototype was handed over to Monino Air Force Museum after carrying out of tests and training of Tu-144 pilots. On the basis of an MiG-21I be ordered activities on creation armoured attack (shturmovick) an MiG-21LSH under the scheme «tailless aircraft».”
I'm sure these have been posted before but don't flame me for it.
Sukhoi T-10S/17, early preproduction Su-27 (1982):
Apart from the nice paintjob (reminiscent of the two-tone gray F-16s or something, but in blue!), is it just me or does the canopy lack the second reinforcement seen on other Flankers? I don't think that's the case but it's kind of hard to tell.
All the side profile colour artwork - both in Andrei Fomin's and Yefim Gordon's Flanker books - shows a second frame.
Plus the fact that T10-17 was the first to be built to full production standard suggests the frame was present.
I painted a frame on my 1/72 scale model of Bort Blue 17.....
But.... just found a colour side profile in an old Russian Polygon booklet - and it doesn't have the frame !!
Plus.... there's a great B&W 'overhead' photos of T10-17 in another Yefim Gordon book - and it looks like the frame is not present.
I can't find a definitive answer - and I have changed my mind - the evidence points to it not being present.
Sad day for all. Terrible tragedy...
Is there any chance that you can scan/photograph the Polygon profile (and/or the overhead photos)? I am very curious about it. I don't know if that's okay considering copyrights and what not, but perhaps in a private message?
This grainy photo (same as one of the above, but larger) seems to show it quite clearly (to my eyes):
Historical curiosities aside, I think it looks better than the double frame.