Romanian Supersonic Fighter projects

[overscan (PaulMM)]

IAR-95, IAR-S from late 1970s onward

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

more

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

more

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

still more

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

still going

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

and finally

Source

• National Institute for Aerospace Research http://incas.ro/english/index_eng.html

 

[tomcat1974]

Those projects failed to materialize because we didn had an engine for it. We where dealing with UK for RR Spey and with Chaine for the Mig 21 engines that China reverse engineerer , but no avail . All the designes where close to flyable prototype stage.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I believe the R-29-300 was also considered at one point as an engine? Seems a bit big, however.

 

[tomcat1974]

Not Likely... The main thing was to produced the engine locally under a licence. During that period we whene not in good relation with USSR. It was the perioad of temporal approach with Western Powers and China.

 

[Deino]

and finally

Source

• National Institute for Aerospace Research http://incas.ro/english/index_eng.html

Any idea if there were connections to the FC-1 project and / or the Russian model.41 ??

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I don't believe so, other than the obvious F-16 influence on all designs.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

we know IAR-101 was developed from IAR-95,but what are the IAR-91 and IAR-2000 ?.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

why no one answer me, the IAR-91 and IAR-2000 are mentioned in
www.geocities.com/Pentagon/barracks/5297/romanian.html
but when I serearch I discover that:
IAR-91 and IAR-92 were a supersonic fighters projects,and IAR-90
was a business jet project,but I don't find IAR-2000.

 

[RoAF]

hesham,
IAR-90 was indeed a bizjet project
IAR-91 was an attack aircraft project, dropped in favour of the IAR-93
IAR-92 AFAIK didn't exist, or maybe it was the designation for a variant of the IAR-91
IAR-95 and IAR-S are variants of the same project (supersonic fighter)
IAR-101 should have been a turboprop trainer

and IAR-2000 are mentioned in
www.geocities.com/Pentagon/barracks/5297/romanian.html

Forget about that site, it's completely useless.

 

[hesham]

Thanks RoAF,GOOD INFORMATIONS

 

[Kim Margosein]

So, it seems what it takes to design fighter aircraft in Romania is some some F-16 and Phantom kits and a couple boxes of Milliput.

Kim M

 

[Deino]

I just found some new illustrations of the IAR-95 ... (http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/slide_8_255_2126.html)

Deino

 

[royabulgaf]

Any chance of a three-view of the IAR-S?

 

[lancer21]

Another variation ("003"- found it on an arab site ), plus a different angle for the "05" project...

(Imo the coolest one is the twin-engine, twin finned one ...its like Mig-25 and an F-15 had a baby! )

 

[Eagle2009]

No wonder people thought there was some link between this jet and the Chinese FC-1 lol..

 

[Triton]

Artist's impression of IAR-95 Spey.

Source:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?176030-Why-polictians-suck-%28cool-photos%29/page7

 

[lancer21]

Couple more pics i found , here:

Poze IAR 95

sursa: libertatea

rumaniamilitary.wordpress.com

 

[lancer21]

Especially these are new to me

 

[niki]

Hi everyone,

I am intervening here at the kind request of my friend Thomas Müller (Cheers, Thomas!) who, mislead by my nationality, approached me with the request for insider information on Romania’s supersonic fighter projects. Little did Thomas know that in this little corner of the world one should always expect the exact opposite regardless of what the subject matter might be :-[ .
What I mean in this case is that about a long expired and on top of that fruitless effort (i.e. the work on the IAR-95) there is as good as no information available, but about the current state of defense matters in this country one could easily find out what the fighter jocks will have for lunch tomorrow – err, I suppose THAT qualifies as a defense matter, right!? ;D

Anyway, fact is that there were few (if any!) written records kept from a time of political suppression, when fear was the order of the day. So here we are, knowing nothing about anything, having no memoirs and no [known] archives to turn to. It is in this context that I searched the Internet and stumbled on a blog run by a gentleman who appears to be a Romanian [aeronautical] engineer living for a long time now in Germany:

http://la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.ro

“Neamtu’ tiganu’” means as much as “German gipsy” which might have something to do with the fact that the gentleman moved from here to there (gipsies are apparently supposed to do that a lot!?), or perhaps it has even something to do with his surname, “Neamtu” being a not uncommon occurrence as far as Romanian family names are concerned…
On this particular blog there are a couple of entries on the IAR-93, the IAR-99 but also on the IAR-95. Since the blog is written in Romanian, I contacted the author in the comments section of an article mentioning the IAR-99 asking if he has anything on the ’95 written down in German or English. I am the “anonymous” from Bucharest signing as Niki Gheorghe:

IAR 99 La TV, Saturday, December 7, 2013
http://la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.ro/2013/12/iar-99-la-tv.html#comment-form

Here’s what the gentleman replied:

neamtu tiganu, December 9, 2013 at 10:57 AM

“[…] This blog is just a hobby of mine as I keep it only for my own pleasure and I have no intention in publishing anything in German or English. If you care, you can use any material from this blog mentioning [or not] where you got your information from.
Anyway, I would be very glad if more information on Romanian aviation would be made available for anyone interested so, depending on the amount of spare time I have, I’d be willing to help in translating what has already been published on my blog.”

Then he added:

neamtu tiganu, December 11, 2013 at 12:51 PM

“I’d just like to mention that everything I have written so far has been done trying to keep honest, not to add from imagination or to distort facts. However, since memory is such an extremely relative matter, sometimes while engaged in conversation with former colleagues of mine we seem to have different recollections about things we’ve gone through together. Therefore I would advise everyone to be rather skeptical and as far as possible to try and corroborate facts, as they say, from “three different sources”.


So, there you have it. I promised Thomas to go through the material and translate it, even if he didn’t insist on it. He also hinted to this site here and since the author has given his ‘go ahead’, I shall try over the next couple of weeks to provide everyone interested with this man’s recollections (and those of others, as shall be seen). Nothing fancy, just a slice of Cold War memories… over a glass of beer.

Cheers,
Niki

 

[kaiserbill]

That sounds great, Niki.

 

[niki]

Thank you for your interest, Bill!

So, here I am with the first part. I tried to translate things as clearly as possible and without screwing the English language too much up - hard to do when lacking practice, mind you :-\
There are four parts (entries on the blog) dedicated to the IAR-95, so three more to go...

Cheers,
Niki


IAR-95 (1), Saturday, January 8, 2011

http://la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.ro/2011/01/iar-95-1.html

Preface

It happens to everybody: at a certain age you will be asking yourself what on earth you have been doing with your life!? What have you achieved? There are the obvious “classic” goals like building/ buying a house, raising a kid or planting a tree. Swell! But is it enough? Especially men seem to have a high regard for professional achievements.
After moving to Germany, I designed a display base for a giant wheel acting as a memorial for miners, which still stands in the centre of the city and of which I feel very proud of each time I walk past it. Success is very much dependent on each and everyone’s fortune of being a part of important projects. I was fortunate enough, in Germany and Romania as well, working on the IAR-93, IAR-99 and a tiny bit on the IAR-95. I have already written about the IAR-99 and I shall sometime write about the IAR-93 and about my work in Germany.
Now, however, here is something about the IAR-95. A former colleague and one of my very best friends – we’ve know each other for a lifetime – engineer Simion Tataru is the author of the following article.

******************

The Supersonic Jetfighter –
A Bridge Too Far For The Romanians

by Simion Tataru


Right after the maiden flight of the IAR-93 prototype, which took place on October 31, 1974, the staff at IMFCA (INCREST) – today’s INCAS (National Institute for Aerospace Research "Elie Carafoli") in Bucharest – came up with the idea of designing a completely new aircraft, this time a supersonic one.

Being denied the possibility of building an already existing plane under license, but considering the experience gained developing the IAR-93, the “supersonic” project was tackled confidently and in earnest right from the beginning. The plan was initially to come up with a design sporting top of the range characteristics (speed, range, maneuverability, climbing speed, weapons load, etc.) at least comparable to those of the F-4 Phantom but coming as near as possible to those of the F-15. The new plane was to be powered by two RR Spey [military] engines.
Engineer Dumitru Badea was appointed to head the small design team set up within the Institute in 1974 tasked with developing the supersonic jet, designated IAR-95.

In the early stages there were actually two engine choices considered: besides the RR Spey RB 168 Mk.202 with afterburner, the Chinese WS-9 (itself a license built RR Spey RB 168 Mk.202) came also in question. Finally, however, neither option worked out since the ambition was for the new jet to be able to reach Mach 2.5 - the afterburning RB 168 Mk.202 wasn’t even making it to Mach 2… The British were known for being ready to supply only slightly outdated jet engines to communist partners, engines with less thrust and worse fuel consumption figures, as was the case with the VIPER 632-41 equipping on the IAR-93 and IAR-99.

In a note sent by the Institute to the Ministry of Defense on August 30, 1976 concerning the progress made on the project, it reads:

“Project IAR-95 is now in its third year running;
- preliminary research: January 1974 – December 1975
- concept definition: January 1976 – December 1978
- detailed design: January 1979 – December 1982.”

In June 1980, Air Force Command agreed to the design characteristics and these in turn were approved by the Acquisition Committee within the MoD: the IAR-95’s performances were to rival those of the newly fielded jet fighters at that time. However, by 1982 the heads of the Institute are said to have been displeased with the way the project was progressing and this was soon passed to engineer Constantin Rosca which brought new live to the whole enterprise and smoothened out the working relationships between all departments concerned.
The airplane structure, the primary and secondary flight control elements, the hydraulics, the fuel, oxygen, electric and air conditioning systems as well as the avionics were designed. Static, dynamic and fatigue calculations and analysis were performed. Aerodynamics and flight characteristics were also analyzed on paper after which at least three models were built and tried out in the subsonic and Mach 3 wind tunnel(s).

At that time there was a Yugoslavian – Romanian Cooperation Committee in existence and on two occasions that the Committee met (in July 1981 at Timisoara and in January 1982 at Belgrad), there were some discussions regarding a possible joint venture for the design and production of a supersonic jet fighter. The Romanians by now envisaged the soviet R-29-300 PE engine that powered the MiG-23 and which according to calculations should have pushed the IAR-S to Mach 2.
Yugoslavia on the other hand looked at various options in the West (France, Great Britain, the US) which were unattainable to the Romanians finding themselves under an embargo. Preliminary design studies were exchanged between the two sides but finally, not being able to reach an agreement regarding the engine choice and some performance characteristics (top speed, especially), nothing came out of the intention of working together.

Enter the negotiations with the soviets over the possible license production of the R-29-300 engine…
At a meeting on December 23, 1982, the request for license production of the R-29-300 in Romania was forwarded by the Ministry of the Machine Building Industry (MICM), through the National Center of the Romanian Aeronautic Industry (CNIAR), to the Engineering Section of the State Committee for Economic Relations of the USSR (GIU/ GSK). Talks were held between May 16 and 20, 1983 and a final decision postponed until after the two sides had a chance at looking at each other’s proposals. In the end the soviets were not at all ready to concede to such an agreement, stalling at first, then asking for a ridiculous high price and finally claiming that “there is no need whatsoever for you to build a supersonic fighter as long as we do that ourselves and you are more than welcome to buy whatever you need straight from us”.
It is for this reason that a new task was assigned to the Institute, namely to begin the research into building an indigenous suitable jet engine. Neither the engines nor the planes were to make it off the assembly lines…

]As the airframe design was complete, somebody decided to actually build a prototype powered by the R-29-300 PE taken directly of a MiG-23 in service with the Romanian Air Force. That would have been the IAR-95ME and the shop was to be set up in Bucharest at the ROMAERO aviation plant.
On March 20, 1984 the Acquisition Committee within the MoD approved the changes to the design characteristics of Product IAR-95, agreeing to the R-29-300 be used as the new power plant. By the middle of 1984 all preliminary work was completed and the final aerodynamic configuration defined. As such, the aircraft should have theoretically attained all targets set, as far as performance was concerned. Maneuverability was even expected to be much better than that of the MiG-23MF.

 

[lancer21]

Many thanks Niki for these articles, yes i know Neamtu Tiganu's blog, it's a true gold mine for info on IAR-93/99 and the IAR-95. Can you perhaps try to convince him to join this forum, maybe he would be willing to share more information or anecdotes or anything concerning his past work, especially the IAR-95 and various variants, maybe he will have mercy of us and make an approximate drawing of that canard project, he mentioned about an initial canard project called IAR-95E2 with an under-fuselage intake, and he also mentioned that he saw (he SAW!!!) the 1:1 mock-up of the IAR-95. If the devil want my soul in exchange for just ONE picture of this 1:1 mock-up, it's for sale let's talk mr. Satan!

 

[lancer21]

Oh and one little thing i found today, which i think it's 100% true, in another romanian blog article detailing the purchase of MiG-29s ( it gives all the cost detail to the last rouble etc.) from official documents, there is mention there about getting an extra RD-33 spare engine "for use on the improved romanian combat aircraft project" and in paranthesis it says IAR-93B. Now after jumping off my chair, i'm thinking there are two possibilities, either there was supposed to be an improved variant of IAR-93B developed with an RD-33 engine (which probably they intended to copy or something), OR it's a typo and might be for a IAR-95 variant! (we are talking about 1989).

 

[kaiserbill]

Very interesting Niki.

Thanks for the translation, and I await the next installment. ;D

 

[niki]

Hi guys,

Thanks for the feedback!
Yes, I was thinking of letting the gentleman know at the end that I eventually completed the translation and send him a link to it. I shall pass your invitation to him But, please, feel also free to drop him a line yourselves. Who knows!? More requests may result in a positive reply

Now, two remarks of my own after having gone through this next part also (I am reading this material for the first time, as I go along trying to translate it): details are quite sketchy and indeed much more questions come up following certain statements; there is indeed one Mihai Neamtu listed as one of the wind tunnel specialists involved in the project - perhaps that is our blogger!?


IAR-95 (2), Saturday, January 8, 2011

http://la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.ro/2011/01/iar-95-2.html

Based on wind tunnel testing, it was expected that the new aircraft would display a similar degree of maneuverability as some western fighters (Mirage 2000, F-16, F-20).

In June 1985 the Institute received a visit by Romanian president Nicolae Ceausescu himself and immediately afterwards it was decided it was decided that the prototype would be built at I. Av. Craiova (Craiova Aircraft Building Factory, later AVIOANE Craiova), with support from I. Av. Bacau (today AEROSTAR Bacau), I. Av. Bucuresti (today ROMAERO Bucharest), IAR Brasov (Romanian Aeronautic Industries at Brasov) and AEROFINA in Bucharest.
Despite this, only a short while later, on August 1, 1985 the “supersonic” project was suspended, also by the president’s decision – pressure from within the Warsaw Pact was apparently being made in that direction.

Around this time a couple of civil aviation project were launched, namely the AG-6 crop dusting plane and the IAR-705 medium range airliner. The AG-6 made it to the point where it was actually constructed and flown, the idea behind this program being to replace the fleet of ageing AN-2s serving around the country in support of agriculture.

As a final note I can say that the IAR-95 project was a remarkable endeavor, displaying a highly scientific and technical level, involving many researchers and designers from within INCAS, all of which brought to bear their experience gained from previously tackled aviation projects.

Here is a list of engineers/ specialists involved in the “supersonic” project:

Aerodynamics –
Ioan Sabin Constantin, Spataru Patru, Gherega Emil, Nebancea Stefan, Bogos Stefan, Taposu Iosif, Achim Iuliana

Wind tunnels –
Neamtu Mihai, Tomescu Serban, Munteanu Florin, Savu George,Trifu Octavian, Dumitrescu Lucian, Oprean Corneliu, Ivanovici Anton, Demetrescu Teodor

Flight dynamics –
HackerTiberiu, Oprisiu Cornel, Ionita Achim, Radnef Sorin, Bochis Vladimir, Peia Ioan

Flight performance –
Marinescu Alexe, Cardos Vladimir, Istratie Vasile, Dumitrescu Dan, Simionescu Lucia

Static/ Fatigue calculations –
Stere Marcel , Adam Ion , Sacagiu Dragomir , Sandulescu Nicolae , Petre Mihaela , Martin Olga, Gheorghiu Viorica, Lozici Dorin, Mihailescu Doru ,Baran Daniela Moldoveanu Maria, Ulmanu Ionut, Maxineanu Ion, Berar Cristian , Radu Gheorghe

Airframe –
Cucuianu Petru, Copaescu Alexandru, Calomfirescu Mihai, Novac Gheorghe, Condratov Dan, Tataru Simion, Dragoman Cornel, Dragoman Elena, Safciu Gheorghe, Mihailescu Paul, Benea Dorel

Flight controls –
Ivanciu Mihai, Brebene Constantin, Mircea Stefan Nicolae, OprisiuDoina, Ghemaru Magdalena, Teodorescu Stefan, Copaescu Paula, Ababei Dan, Nila Ion

Air conditioning system –
Abrudan Traian, Pricop Mihai, Ionescu Mariana, Enache Nicolae, Paraschivescu Maria, Sasu Ion, Ionescu Ion

Fuel system –
Podar Viorel, Boicu Neculai, Stan Virgil, Neagu Mihai

Hydraulics –
Bencze Carol, Vasile Andrei, Teodorescu Marioara, Ilinoiu Viorica, Iacob Stelian, Balteanu Ion, Gherghe Valerica, Teodorescu Catalin, Tivig Constanta

Landing gear –
Nastase Marin, Cimpoieru Tudor, Alexandru Doina,Coman Eugen, Ulea Marcel, Ulea Camelia

Electrics and electronics –
Malcoci Mircea, Vladoiu Alexandru, Mihailescu Tiberiu, Dragota Ion, Moisoiu Sever, Vasile Stefan, Postelnicu Ion, Dobrescu Nicolae


********************

P.S. (authors note): many of those mentioned are no longer with us and many others are scattered across the globe.



@lancer21
Could you please share with us the link to the article covering the MiG-29 purchase? That's an interesting subject in itself B)
As to the extra engine being acquired, that may well be the case but crazy nevertheless [which I would categorize as "normal" given the circumstances and the people involved : ] since - going by what has been mentioned in this last piece by Simion Tataru - the project was apparently abandoned in 1985. But it wouldn't be surprising if Ceausescu changed his mind...

 

[lancer21]

Hi Niki, here's the link:
http://www.rumaniamilitary.ro/avioane-de-vanatoare-mig-23-si-mig-29-pentru-fortele-aeriene-romane-1977-1989

Yes, i'll hopefully drop mr. Neamtu a line on his blog, i used to pester him on the same subject couple of years back.

 

[niki]

Thank you for the link!

Here's the third part on the '95.
I do know some things about aircraft but apparently not enough as I ought to in order not to be in doubt about some terms used in this translation. You will all hopefully make sense of all the characteristics listed and enjoy the "fictive facts"


IAR-95 (3), Saturday, January 8, 2011

http://la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.ro/2011/01/iar-95-3.html
Introduction

IAR-S is a supersonic fighter-bomber aircraft destined to conduct CAS for the Army and the Navy, land and maritime strikes, as well as air-to-air missions. In line with this concept, the aircraft is capable of countering and destroying [on the ground and in the air] the enemy’s attack forces, transportation means and command and control structures. It is also able to perform aerial reconnaissance missions in support of our own forces.

The aircraft is to be built in two versions:

- single seat – performing the above mentioned roles and missions;
- two seat – performing the training role and retaining as far as possible the combat capabilities of the single seater.

Hi tech materials and equipment are to be used in the construction of the aircraft, according to the hi end capabilities expected of it to display. It has seven pylons/ external stores stations. The idea behind its constructive solutions is the ease of operations and maintenance – easy access to all systems requiring charging/ filling/ refueling, checking and frequent disassembling/ dismantling. Turnaround and engine changing times are to be superior to those of other aircraft currently in service with our forces.


IAR-S Characteristics

Length: 16,300 mm
Total wingspan: 10,700 mm
Wheel track: 4,200 mm
Wheel base: 5,800 mm
Height: 5,760 mm
Stationary (?) angle: 130
Surface (?): 31.85 sqm
Wings span: 9,800 mm
Root chord: 5,300 mm
Mean Aerodynamic Chord: 3,681.02 mm
Sweep angle at quarter chord: 57°53’23’’
Dihedral: 0
Wing surface: 23.91 sqm
Wing chord at tooth (?) base: 3,068.78 mm
Chord position at tooth (?) base: 3,000 mm
Wing chord at tooth (?) tip: 1,320 mm
Wing surface with tooth (?): 24.66 sqm
Tooth (?) leading edge sweep angle: 47°22’24’’
Wing profile at root: 64A – 205.5A
Wing profile at tooth (?) base: 64A – 205.5B
Wing profile at tip: 64A – 205.5C
Empty weight: 8,670 kg
Minimum landing weight: 8,790 kg
Calculated landing weight: 10,255 kg
Calculated combat weight: 11,520 kg
Normal takeoff weight: 11,538 kg
Maximum takeoff weight: 11,563 kg


Supersonic aircraft – Model Experimental*
IAR-95ME*

Introduction

IAR-95 ME is a two seat, dual control aircraft equipped with an R29-300 engine delivering 12,500 kgf of thrust, destined to conduct CAS for the Army and the Navy, land and maritime strikes, as well as air-to-air missions. In line with this concept, the aircraft is capable of countering and destroying [on the ground and in the air] the enemy’s attack forces, transportation means and command and control structures. It is also able to perform aerial reconnaissance missions in support of our own forces.

It has seven pylons/ external stores stations available to conduct its two main missions: air intercept and air interdiction.


IAR-95ME Characteristics:

Length without Pitot: 16,000 mm
Length with Pitot: 16,830 mm
Total wingspan: 9,400 mm
Wheel track: 3,080 mm
Wheel base: 6,037 mm
Height: 5,450 mm
Stationary (?) angle: 11.50
Surface (?): 27.9 sqm
Wings span: 9,300 mm
Root chord: 5,000 mm
Mean Aerodynamic Chord: 3,444.44 mm
Sweep angle at quarter chord: 38.828°
Dihedral: 0
Wing surface: 23.91 sqm
Wing chord at tooth (?) base: 3,068.78 mm
Chord position at tooth (?) base: 3,000 mm
Wing chord at tooth (?) tip: 1,320 mm
Wing surface with tooth (?): 24.66 sqm
Tooth (?) leading edge sweep angle: 47°22’24’’
Wing profile at Y=900 (?): NACA 65A 205-M/11
Wing profile at Y=900 (?): NACA 65A 205-M/13
Wing profile at Y=4050 (?): NACA 65A 205-M/12
Wing profile at Y=4650 (?): NACA 65A 205-M/14
Empty weight: 7,685 kg
Internal fuel: 3,600 kg
Normal takeoff weight (including cannon ammunition and two R-60 air-to-air missiles): 11,600 kg
Maximum takeoff weight: 15,000 kg
Maximum external stores weight: 3,400 kg
Maximum g: +9
Max. speed at high altitude: M2.0
Max speed at sea level: M1.1
Max. climbing speed: 280 m/s
Takeoff run: 600 m
Landing run: 700 m
Ceiling: 18,000 m
Max. distance: 2,800 km
Engine: R29-300
Max. thrust in afterburner: 12,500 kgf
Max. dry thrust: 8,300 kgf


The fourth and last bit is really tiny, so I hope to be able to bring it to you extremely quick.
Cheers!

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I just found some new illustrations of the IAR-95 ... (http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/slide_8_255_2126.html)

Deino

These are from AeroMagazin 08 February 2003.

 

[hesham]

Great info Niki.

 

[hesham]

From AE 74.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Final post, for completion.

IAR 95 (4)

la-neamtu-tiganu.blogspot.com

I was extremely pleasantly surprised to see how much interest my posts about Romanian planes, IAR 95 , aroused .

Some clarifications:

1. As for me, I only worked for a few months on the IAR 95 project, I remember designing the wing-fuselage junction and vertical fuselage tail. During the time I worked there was a version like F4, low wing with central plane.

2. Because I didn't really get along with the project management and I was extremely skeptical about the success of this project, I quickly went back to my childhood sweethearts IAR 99 and IAR 93, where there was still something to do and I arrived sometime, pt. a short period, even for the military variant BAC 1-11.

3. Whoever lived at that time may know that secrecy was in vogue. It even happens that those who worked on a certain project only get leaked information, so I don't know much about IAR 95 either, where you say that more than 20 years have passed.

4. I read again the information I received from my former colleagues. I am ready to swear, with all my heart, that when I worked at IAR 95, the "final" version would have been "duck", for who doesn't know something about aviation means with a tail in front. See Rafale or Grippen. At that time it was perfectly "modern", "fly by wire" and artificial stability had already appeared.

5. I think we would have managed to build a supersonic plane, but we would not have been able to equip it, and not only the engine was a problem but also the rest, we did not have a competitive radar, not even a gyroscopic platform like the world, I do not say that in 87-88 I had no sheet metal, no rivets, not even adhesives, they were under embargo, although in the west they were at the kiosk.


PS Someone is asking about arming, here are some various ante.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

IAR-95, Rumunski Supersonic- avion koji mi nismo hteli

www.mycity-military.com

 

[kocovgoce]

iar 95