Thanks

TE flaps serve to increase lift at, usually lower to medium angles of attack (needed for TO/Land) at expense of high drag (important in combat). They increase pitch down moment, reduces max trimmed alpha and induces premature separation at hi alpha.
MiG, when flown with full aft stick, has tremendous lift and trimmed alpha and looses airspeed in seconds, faster than any other plane. TE flaps reaction time cannot cope dynamics of that aircraft’s motion. Eventual minute asymmetry of their extension causes uncommanded rolling. Limit speed is 500 km/h. Some analyst tried to explain MiG high instantaneous turns with flap extension, but that was wrong guess.
Air in BLC system is steaming, taken from compressor, but steel pipes are used to strain. LE&TE flaps certainly helped much F-104 because a/c is limited to ~ 16 deg alpha and wing has razor sharp LE, inducing flow separation at low alpha w/o LE flaps.

Martinez, Eastern pilot manuals are by definition rough with purpose to give pilot general idea of a/c ability. Usually, weight is not clearly defined. Also in that F-13 book, you can see that somebody did not divide numbers correctly (1000 km/h at 5 km and circle for 36 sec is 5g, not 5.5.) I saw a lot of other discrepancies (climb of 41 m/s at 18000m, Bis has 3 m/s at 17000), not to mention turn radiuses..
I have heard that Serbian book is based on Technical manual graphs with dot by dot conversion to unified F-4 format. (Maybe Serbs are not that stupid, remember they downed 117).
Trying to find logic in rough undefined diagrams you mentioned, is fatuous business. Of course, STR F-13 graph is from pilot’s manual. I can send you whole page.

Did you find any data for the low-speed maneuverability of the MiG-21bis(or SM,SMT) if the flap is in the 0-25 degree ‘air combat position’ ?”

Plain trailing edge flaps, I reckon, is not combat configuration as isn’t in F-15.

These diagrams are both from official manuals. But I doubt this MF graph (non-soviet) since 4.5 g at 5 km altitude with 8000 kg weight is too optimistic. There are bunch of too optimistic F-13 data and graphs. I think they are product of roughness and incompetence. Like that 5.5g at 5 km altitude, ceiling above 20 km, Cdo of 0.012…Some data&sources do not deserve wasting time. Also, I do not remember but manufactured used different limit G philosophy for F and newer models, so direct comparison is more difficult.

And what is the max angle off attack aircraft was flown, I mean true, not that local (28-33 units) ?? What was the min speed on airshows ??

Thanks for your time Ak!
Hp is short for Height pressure (altitude).

Schorsch, your k is ( Pi * aspect ratio * e ), from that you can derive e.
Guys on Thread, best wishes !

Here is a graph depicting roll rate per degree (in fact in grads [grad=0.9 degrees]) of aileron deflection in radian/second (radian ~ 57.3 degrees) as a function of Mach and altitude (Kilometers)

How about your data about that, like initial climb-rate f.e.
The deeper sense of your claim about the Israeli sources and their judgement of the MiG-19/J-6 is still missing.
From the 70s the Egyptians used theirs for the training role only or as high altitude interceptors in a secondary role.

19’s climb rate, some official long time ago, that thinks a/c has fixed climb rate, gave that figure 115 m/s (at altitude) and people are dragging that. One could check for himself, aircraft has tremendous T/W and fine L/D ratio. Induced drag, relevant in turns, is indicated by weight^.5 / span. Check 21’s and 19’s span for similar weight, not to mention T/W. Of course, dynamic thrust is relevant. Also, difference in allowed wing Cl is 30%. It is almost bare aircraft with limited equipment carrying capacity and tricky departure characteristics.

Also, if one want to get declared F-5E’s climb, he is in trouble. There is no science that can make something from nothing, nor even Israelis can do that.

Could anybody with the book provide me the zero lift drag coefficient of the Mig21 F-13?

Here is official but rather rough graph .. I do not have at hand more accurate diagram. I would say that in fact bis has Cdo about 50 % more at Mach 0.9, you can calculate for yourself L/D~8, e~0.7;

Some data about the radarless MiG-19S from OKB MiG.
empty 5172 kg
internal fuel ~1700 kg
TOW 7560 kg MTOW 8832 kg
wing loading 302.4-353.3 kg/m²
max operating limit Mach number 1.44
at s.l. Mach 0.96
max dry 51 kN
max wet 64,7 kN
climb-rate 115 m/sec
To reach some useful endurance 2 ETs of each ~600 kg fuel had to be carried.
service ceiling 17,500 m or 57,400 ft

The instant. turn-rate of the MiG-21s is higher than the MiG-19, when the sust. it is the other way around. Something confirmed by the Israeli pilots, which did not rate the MiG-19 high in agility.

Here is typical example how people that work say structural project, do not understand flight machanic, even if they are head of stuff.
Another matter is that western author usually writtes what he likes from OKB inputs.
Also, MiG-19’s speed at S.L. is written in km/h where wing stiffness is problematic. Climb is not at S.L. and useful endurance is far better than that of european fighters.
Israeli sources has one thing in mind, to serve its purpose.

Oh, those Russians…I thought that they should not be believed ??
They had problem that one bunch of people desing plane, others konstruct it and third works out how to use it ..
Thay have never realised how potent dogfighter was MiG-19 too …
And F-5…beautiful and smartly designed plane, but I wonder how it can achieve specified performances (say climb..) I think manufacturer never gave it’s wing span (or aspect ratio)…

these are not combat maneuvers, at least for today’s air combat….

but 21 is longitudinaly controllable to very high alpha, as oposed to some most modern a/c that experiences deep stall, uncontrollable pitch up…or other a/c or deltas that couldn’t be trimmed to high alpha…