I’m sure the forum thread “were Russian and Western aerospace ever equals?” on F-16.net is a very unbiased thread of talented historians who have a solid understanding of the air force doctrines of both sides of the cold war, and who can deftly, effortlessly separate themselves from any nationalistic biases in their writings
1 Like
Also a good example of the double standard of logic applied here
The MiG-31 has such a radar because it has to in order to function effectively in the period and role it was intended for, and because that role was of such strategic importance that the immense funds to get a system so ahead of its time working reliably weren’t too hard to swallow. The immense effort and talent poured into the creation of such a system did not necessarily arise from some inhuman superiority of Soviet engineers, but rather it arose from such a system being correctly identified as needed and being funded in addition to a competent military-scientific development apparatus in the relevant fields.
Everyone I’ve talked about the Foxhound with understands this easily. But online, you talk about the F-14, and from word go it’s a magic plane made tom cruise himself that completely vanquished Soviet aircraft’s viability by being decades ahead of its time on account of being designed with extra freedom and democracy. While the reason for the plane’s sophistication in certain fields (and cost) were derived from necessary characteristics of a competent interceptor for the role assigned to the plane in the case of both of these, people suddenly become intransient and belligerent when you imply that the F-14 was essentially required to be what it was in order to fulfill its most basic mission parameters, that its high characteristics in certain aspects was anything but the result of the superiority of Western minds to what they consider others
you are comparing two different classes of aircraft.A carrier-based fighter and an interceptor fighter whose main element is large Mach numbers
Specifically talking about the radars and how they’re perceived online. Both are necessarily equipped with expensive, extremely cutting edge and powerful radars for their time that were still competitive decades later, but when the discussion is regarding the F-14, there’s a tendency to imply that the radar, rather than being incredibly expensive, heavy, and being the result of a gigantic scientific and industrial effort to produce it, was instead just better because “America is awesome and better than those stupid commie planes”, while you’d be hard pressed to find an inverse case of extreme Soviet nationalists making claims about the inferiority of the West’s tactical fighter radars in the way US nationalists always talk about the F-14 particularly in relation to Soviet tactical fighters of the early 70s
well, at the time of the appearance of the F-14, the USSR really had no answer.The MiG-31 took off after 5 years.
the ratio to / d does not correspond to reality
youll never guess what country used the F-14 the most in combat
I think its unsurprising its underperforming considering they corrected the weight without adjusting the flight model accordingly, im guessing you have your bug report in the works?
This reality is in your sick imagination (Again, only Western data)…There are no wars that consist of duels of planes or tanks…This is the common work of all branches of the armed forces … List of aircraft losses of the Vietnam War - Wikipedia (turbopages.org)
At the bottom of the site is a fairly complete list of Vietnam’s aerial victories … «Фантом» против МиГа: противостояние во вьетнамском небе (topwar.ru)
All sources are not Russian…
1 Like
Plane was underperforming in slow speed rate even before the weight increase.
Yes, but I don’t know if they’ll accept it with only one test… knowing how this usually goes they certainly won’t accept the part where I calculate what actually sustained turn time would be without a test getting values close to them (the problem with this is that it’s very hard at least without a stick to keep speed and altitude very consistent).
I think its a good idea to mention their answer to the previous report of being “correct in their own testing” and then mentioning how they increased the weight without adjusting. So even if your testing isnt the best it still has strong backing from a logical perspective
More F-4 lost of AAMs counted as losses from SAM. And it’s small part of this Polish casino advertisement
at least the MiG-25 has a different ratio, about 6 of them were shot down, not 8. At the same time, he himself shot down about 11 aircraft.2 F-15s were also shot down in aerial combat.One exactly the wreckage of the Israeli F-15 is in the museum of the 2nd indirectly US Air Force aircraft.The phantom has negative statistics, not positive as here.About the MiG-21 is also funny
2 Likes
MiG-29 rate test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNPqnrilstw
23.1 seconds, 15.58 deg/sec. ~200kt
MiG-29 sustained G at 200kt : 3.2 G
Horizontal component of this G force = Gy = sqrt(G^2-1) = 2.93G
Degree/seconds for a given speed and G force = (180/π) * (Gy*9.81) / (Speed in m/s) .
In our case it would be 16.62 deg sec.
With this deg sec projected sustained turn time at 200kt sea level should be 21.66 seconds.
Removed previous post/calculations as they contained some errors and this test is more accurate than the one posted before
and we also live in a world of pink ponies and green elephants
open the original source, The practical aerodynamics of the MiG-29 is better indicated there
I’m wondering if the German manual is accurate as I’ve heard they reduced performance of the motor to enhance the mean time between failures.
Thanks for laughing, but I’m not going to discuss this crazy picture with you
1 Like
why do this if it says lies
1 Like
@BBCRF and @SlowHandClap
if you need to discuss a picture, politics or F-15 kill to death ratios go in another thread, write here if you want to discuss something about the MiG29
4 Likes