> > If I remember correctly the Russians actually put them in scheduled > service inside the USSR for a while. They were retired because they > burned too much fuel -- took a full 30 min of afterburner at full > reheat to get up to altitude and speed, and that shortened the range > too much (along with the usual Russian airplane maintenance, etc). > > The TU is pretty snaz for 1968 -- variable pitch turbofan with duct > burning reheat, and I believe variable pitch compressor first stage, > too. > > If the Ruskies could every keep their aircraft stuck together and > used rational tactics, they'd beat the pants off of us. Good thing > is that's not likely to change! The Georgians shot down at least one > Backfire bomber and a couple top of the line fighters last week. > > Peter
Peter, If *I* remember correctly the Concordski burned so much fuel b/c it had to run reheat to stay over Mach 1. If you compare the design of the wings, the Concorde was more complex and that was the reason I recall for better fuel efficiency. Of course, efficiency here is ENTIRELY relative. One story I read was that the Tu-144 was used to haul mail for the proletariat at one point. Tony Wirtel _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
