http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/watch-these-migs-operate-from-a-grass-field-like-its-no-1697990135

pretty interesting stuff about Migs’ ability to operate off basic grass fields, allowing them operate from a huge number of forward bases I would think

I notice in that video that none of those Hungarian MiG-21s were carrying any kind of payload what so ever, when taking off and landing on that field. I’d imagine this rough-field capability was only to be used in emergencies, flight diversions, etc, and when flying light?

On 03-Jun-1986, six MiG-31s have performed a coordinated trap on an SR-71 over the Barents Sea and achieved multiple lock-ons. This interception has effectively stopped further SR-71 recon missions over the Soviet Union.

Proves nothing, just because a missile radar system gets a lock-on, doesn’t mean that the missile will ever hit the target – otherwise most anti-aircraft missile systems would have achieved 100 PK rates.

On 03-Jun-1986, six MiG-31s have performed a coordinated trap on an SR-71 over the Barents Sea and achieved multiple lock-ons.

But they never attempted a shoot-down – why did they bother? Must be good for training.

This interception has effectively stopped further SR-71 recon missions over the Soviet Union.

There were never any SR-71 overflights intended anyway – banned by international treaty.

And you still have not answered the question – why the F-14 and f-4 can’t shoot down a MiG-25RB – but MiG-25/31 can certainly shoot down a SR-71 flying up to Mach 1 faster than the MiG-25 recce?

That is pretty much the same question that comes to my mind when allied losses during the Gulf War are discussed. Whatever plane was lost was automatically attributed to SAM or AAA. Even in case of Scott Speicher’s Hornet it took years to claim a Foxbat kill.

That’s a different war altogether – why mention it?

F-104 did not have any meaningful speed advantage over its adversaries (especially the MiG-21).

Yes, both aircraft had top speeds, when clean of around mach 2+. Actually carrying useful payloads, and for useful ranges I’d guess that the Starfighter had the advantage. Wasn’t the F-104 the faster climber?

1)
During Iran-Iraq war we lost a three MIG-25s all of them shot down by SAM and we didn’t lost any MIG-25 in aerial combat, all these allegations Iranian F-5,F-4 and F-14 vs Iraqi MIG-25’s false claims, none of Iraqi MIG-25s were allowed to fly lower than 21 Km with Mach 1+ in combat mission and they turn back with Mach 2+, in reconnaissance missions the travel and back with Mach 2+ which make both duties impossible to intercept, Iraqi MIG-25’s used in indiscriminate shelling to targets deep Iranian territory.

A MiG-25RB flying at ‘Mach 2+’ would certainly be a difficult target to intercept – but perhaps it’s quite possible with an F-14? Why do people in Iraq believe it was shot down by SAM missile and not by an Iranian AF F-14? Which type of SAM missile do the Iraqis claim shot down the MiG-25RBs?

An armed F-15A does fly faster than Mach 2. In interceptor configuration with 4 Sparrows, top speed is Mach 2.2 in pursuit mode. That is for a standard day, in cold North American or European skies, surely some more is possible.

But armed with Sparrow missiles only, without Sidewinders, and without drop tanks?

Come to think of it, I read recently that the top permissable speed of a fully armed and fuel-tanked air-superiority F-15C was mach 1.78. What’s the top speed of a similarly configured F-16 (as opposed to a clean F-16)?

And now we go to the S-62 from:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236424[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]236425[/ATTACH]
Japan

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236426[/ATTACH]
Philippines

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236427[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]236428[/ATTACH]
Thailand

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236429[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]236430[/ATTACH]
USA – USCG (not a small country but just to make it a complete picture)

This is one real cool thread – keep the photos coming!:eagerness:

I’ve always considered the Sikorsky S-62 an interesting curiosity, strange but attractive machine.

US military want a bomber in the first place, and the F-35 fits that bill. For A2A they will use other types.

I’m sure the F-35 will be successful in the A2A role, for the usual reasons that American supplied aircraft have been successful in that role for the last 75 years or so.