More info:
MS stands for Maritime Strike
TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
71–80 of 121 posts
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#72put it on Pawn Stars
...yeah, sure, let me just call my buddy who used to be a mechanic for Tupolev.Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#73"The plane was manufactured in 1987 and has been flown 454 hours and 24 Minutes of the estimated 5000 hours it is capable off." Anyone know why there is a 5000 hour limit?
They are probably referring to the engines. Engines are rated in hours.
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#74"The airplane is not ready to fly. It is necessary to make a technical service and prolongation of the data limit." Guessing something got lost in translation. In any case. as aircraft maintenance isn't my area, any idea how viable/costly it is to get airworthy? Could you even get spare parts anymore?
I volunteered for an Air Force museum and even non-operational/replica parts were expensive and hard to find for aircraft. I would imagine getting this certified/flyable would cost nearly as much as the purchase price when the dust settles.
Seems like a 3d printing niche opportunity.
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#75obvious question, is there a picture of the tail with the plane number?
Than sometimes you can pull up the air flight history
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#76a good rule of thumb for warbirds is that however much it costs you to buy it is about how much it will cost you per year afterwards to keep it flying.
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
I volunteered for an Air Force museum and even non-operational/replica parts were expensive and hard to find for aircraft. I would imagine getting this certified/flyable would cost nearly as much as the purchase price when the dust settles.
Seems like a 3d printing niche opportunity.
[deleted]
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have something that helps you search Google Maps or are you just good at doing it manually?
I was hoping you'd ask! It was luck. I had noticed signs of a civilian airport in the background of one of the pictures. When I looked at Nikolayev on Google Maps (I was wondering how close to Crimea these ports mentioned in the eBay auction are) I noticed the airport and zoomed in.
In other words you found one TU-95 soviet bomber out of the 500+ built. And you know it is the same plane... why?
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I volunteered for an Air Force museum and even non-operational/replica parts were expensive and hard to find for aircraft. I would imagine getting this certified/flyable would cost nearly as much as the purchase price when the dust settles.
Seems like a 3d printing niche opportunity.
Not really. It would NEVER be certified for US commercial operations as the US FAA does not have a reciprocal airworthyness agreement with the Soviets[1]. FAA certification - required for commercial use (but not experimental, which is how old warbirds are generally operated these days) would take years and probably $100M+, fi the FAA would ever even consider it.
[1] Ironically, we DO have such an agreement with Poland, so in some cases (but not the TU-95), aircraft built in Poland have a path towards approval for US ops that those built elsewhere in the USSR wouldn't have.
Re: TU-95MS – Soviet Bomber
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Used to. There used to be slaves, but it does not mean that it's acceptable to enslave people now. While slavery and saying "the Ukraine" is not the same, the latter shows the clear lack of geopolitical knowledge.
I understand the point, and I think it is good to correct people when they refer to Ukraine incorrectly. However, comparing a (typically accidental) prepended word to slavery makes me recoil from your argument. I think it is similar to "Reductio ad Hitlerum"[1]. People who refer to the current country as "The Ukraine" are incorrect, but saying that they are implicitly supporting the history of that name is overreachi…
I don't think most westerners even associate anything particularly problematic with a prepended "the". It's used in "the Netherlands" for similar historical reasons; like the Ukraine, the Netherlands was a descriptive term for a certain region before it was a sovereign state (the Ukraine meaning the borderlands, and the Netherlands meaning the low countries). Whether it's retained or not when the region became a sovereign state seems more or less arbitrary.