firebar* We can write what we want…. If even an original aerodynamic manual of your fantastic aircraft is not enough to show you the a/c limitations, no other argument will be enough.
I see that your problem is that you have only Aerodynamic Manual of the first MiG-25 which entered n 1970.
That is as you want to talk about F-16C block 50, and have only F-16A block 10 Manual.
Think about it.
firebarHuh? Did you get that off a Russian Wikipedia entry? The Raptor has officially demonstrated M1.8 without afterburner in level flight(and there have been rumors that it may even be able to hit M2 in supercruise). The top speed I’ve heard is M2.42+(and this is due to the composites/RAM coatings, and not available thrust).
The max attained in tests, without operational equipment, with shorter wing span and higher wing sweep, was 1.57 Mach.
You can not count to more than 1.4 Mach in service configuration, with much less wing sweep and far higher wing span than prototype.
There are many sources which state that it can not attain 2 M with afterburners, which is understandable, concerning its propulsion system.
I’m not even sure how to respond to your service ceiling claims. Are you saying that the Flogger regularly operated at 65K AGL or higher?
No. I said service ceiling.
firebarIf you are an engineer, why the hell do you write such a ridiculous BS????
Safe load factor would mean that the “unsurpassed interceptor” can sustain a CONSTANT 7.3g load without detrimental damage or plastic deformation…. not possible!
What I said is ABC in aeronautical engineering. Sorry if you don’t agree.
The Mig-25P is cleared to 5G at 2.5 Mach at 30t.
If it is not strong enough, I don’t know what is.
firebarI agree with Schorsch….. Firebar needs to be watched by the mods……
The F-22 Raptor capabilities are overrated greatly. It can not attain 2 Mach even in afterburner !!!
And its service ceiling is miserable compared to Mig-23, not to speak of MiG-25/31.
It has very good subsonic and transsonic capabilities, true, but over 1.7 to 1.8 Mach it losses energy rapidly thanks to its simple fixed air intakes.
It is surely not able to attain any speed or altitude record, even for American aircraft.
firebarIn 2007 all F-15A and C, all over the world, were grounded after several a/c breaked in two in simulated dogfights.
These incidents nicely show that the stated service allowed G loads, for American a/c are overrated.
After these incidents their structure have to be strengthened ( with adverse effect on weight and T/W ratio) or allowed service G have to be lowered.
The F-16 passed through the same procedure, several years ago, after grounding the fleet, because of similar accidents when wings were torn off.
firebarNo no, Mr Aeronautical Engineer, you have to understand structural dynamics and don’t get fixed on load factors. A static load of 11g applied to a Foxbat wing will break it. Period.
Is that so?
You saw that it didn’t break, but that it landed safely. Just as the F-4 did at such overloads.
Normal ultimate load testing requires the aircraft to withstand ultimate load (1.5x limit load) for 3 seconds without breaking.
Divide 11g with safety coef. of 1.5 and you will get the safe load factor for MiG-25.
You have to understand this:
When you multiply the service max allowed load factor with safety factor of 1.5 you will get the ultimate load factor, beyond which the structure breaks.
When you have the max service limit of 6.5G for F-14A and D, it means that at 9.75G overload their structure breaks.
That applies to early Tomcats also, because the F-14A Manual also states 6.5G max permissible service G load.
Don’t deceive yourself.
With no safety margin and below the weight limit, a Phantom can easily come out of an 11g situation without substantial damage or survive a 13g situation without breaking apart mid-air.
Again wrong.
Read the F-4 incident when 11 g overload almost breaked the aircraft, torn off the wing panels, bent the wings but it managed to land.
The 13G is out of the question for F-4. It almost breaked at 11 G.
firebarWe heard about 11g before. Anyways, a 4.5g aircraft should withstand a 7g load for a short time, though structural damage has to be expected.
It is well documented that MiG-25 withstood more that 11g. The wings were slightly bent but it landed safely.
This put MiG-25 structure strenght in the F-4 class , which experienced similar incident.
The F-14 would break under such overloads.
(Note that F-4C,E manual says that its max G load is 8.5, and the F-14A manual says max load is 6.5 G.)
firebarI’ve triple checked all my sources and asked some Tomcat drivers involved in GW2 – there was no Phoenix launch at a Mi-8. The only F-14 shot was an AIM-9 which shot down an Mi-8.
I posted an attachment earlier, where you can see that there was Phoenix shoot at Mi helicopter. The source: Wikipedia, 2004.
Your source or lack of one regarding the 6 shot capability seems a little dubious. You are aware the Phoenix does not require the target to be constantly illuminated and only needs mid-course guidance and is a fire and forget missile when fire within 14 miles of the target.
Of course, but the active distance is far less than 14 miles. It depends of target size, altitude, aspect,etc,etc.
In practice it was shown that the Phoenix can not cope with the real targets in real enviroment.
F-14A’s specified speed is Mach 2.34 in LEVEL flight, 2.4 was attained in testing however this was limited to 2.25 in service. F-14D is limited to 1.88 because of the dual chin pod.
Do you have F-14A Manual? You will see that it is limited to 1.9 Mach also, just as the F-14D Manual say.
This has nothing to do with pods. The Tomcats could pass Mach 2 only in shallow dive.
If you bothered to do any research you’d find that Boyd was in the AIR FORCE and was not a Topgun instructor.
You are right, but this doesnt change what I said. His oppinion as top American test pilot, concerning F-14, was very, very low.
Consider this F-14A and D vices:
-It can not pull more that 5 G in roll.
-It can not fire sidewinder with slats extended.
And that is not all.
firebarFor the benefit of the others.
What does R.A. Belyakov the general designer claim?
p 362 MiG-23S/23-11
Max speed in clean configuration (72° sweep), 2405 km/h or Mach 2.27 at 12800 m (1298 kt at 42000 feet); max speed with four R-3S missiles (72° sweep) 2100 km/h or Mach 1.98 (1133 kt); max operating Mach number, 2.27;
p 374 MiG-23MLD/23-12
Max speed in clean configuration (72° sweep), 2500 km/h or Mach 2.3
No, no, Sens. You are wrong again.
You obviously have no MiG-23 Manual.
The Manual say 2.35 Mach with 2x R-24 underwing missiles.
As for your quotes, if you read more carefuly, you will see that these are not Belyakov’s claims, but from French author of the book.
firebarAll the pictures released are of MiG-23MS uhmm but they want to keep the secret pictures of the super secret MiG-23ML that clint Eastwood flew and stole from Beliask, the MiG-23ML Firefox uhmm a good excuse, there is no reason why an old picture can not be realesed when we are in 2008 and the real modern super fighter russia is building is the PAK FA.
Sure. It is well known that the Libyans has downgraded MiGs-23MS, with less capable radars, missiles and engines. That was the a/c which americans shoot down in 1989.
The Russian standard MiG-23MLD with all aspect R-60M and R-24 will give F-16 or F-15 a hard time.
The Tomcat F-14A is considered an easy meat, being underpowered with its 0.82 combat T/W ratio versus 1.01 T/W for MiG-23MLD.
Not to mention F-14’s relatively high by-pass ratio engines, totaly unacceptable for a fighter, as with higher altitudes it losses its thrust rapidly, so that at medium heights the difference in T/W ratio is even higher.
firebarThe MIG-25P has max speed of 3000 km/h (2.83M) with 4 missiles.
The Russians count max speed of their combat a/c, with underwing missiles.
For MIG-23, it is 2.35 M with 2x R-24.
For MIG-21, it is 2.1 M with 2xR13.
For YAK-28P, it is 1.75 M (1860 km/h) with 2 R-98 missiles. Etc.
firebarDid you ever ask yourself why the Foxbat never got any speed records of Mach 3.2 if it could go that fast?
The answer is the same as for TU-114 or Be-12, or some other russian record breaking aircraft.
The TU-114 took closed circuit speed record, for tuboprops, of 880 km/h, in 60-es, but never attempted speed record in streight line, which it could have took it easily. WHY?
In service, the TU-95 has 910 km/h max speed.
We now have fanny situation that the streight line speed record ,for turboprop a/c, holds P-3 Orion with mere 803 km/h, set in early 70-es.
Obviously the Russians never wanted the streight line turboprop record. Why?
The same facts apply to Be-12. It set all speed records, for amphibians, over closed circuits. But never attempted streight line record.
Russians never attempted streight line records because they did not want to show the true capabilities of their a/c, intended for service use.
Why no Mig-25 has got any combat kills while cruising at 80,000 feet and Mach 3+?
What do you think how the F-18, in Iraq 1991, got killed? In spite of AWACSes and EC-135 jammers?
firebarWhat happens if you take a MiG-25 beyond the Mach limit?
you ruin the engine
What ruined engines ?
The Indian Air Force knows nothing about that. The Belyakov, OKB MiG chief designer says that this is not true.
It is common hoax spread by John Barron by his book.
firebarA proof of great supersonic maneuverability of MiG-25:
-2605 km/h speed over 100 km closed circuit. (It is circle of 16 km radius)
This will not be beaten by western a/c for a long, long time.
Note that the best American record is 2237 km/h (specially prepared F-4).
firebarI couldn’t find any information about Soviet flown MiG-25BMs and MiG-27s involvement in Iran-Iraq war. Were there independent confirmations of the engagements/kills of Soviet flown aircraft by Iranian fighters, or are these claims based only on personal accounts of Iranian pilots?
The informations of Iraq-Iran air battles are very suspicious. We only have claims, not confirmations.
But Aviation Week has published that the kill ratio was about 2:1 in Iraqis advantage.
Sign In
