Anyway, I have the impression from your reply that you`re saying that Boyd became famous in the USAF because of “winning a bet only”, that he was a kind of jerk?

Quite the opposite. Boyd was one of the most influential tacticians and theorists of his or any other time, particularly for those of us who were his contemporaries.

Your ‘cut and paste’ quote is very close to the text in Coram’s book. If you took it from there, then you must have read the author’s explanation of Boyd’s maneuver. Could it be that you failed to mention that because that explanation doesn’t fit your argument?

As i keep searching for any clue to your request, perhaps you could endulge me with my request?

I’m waiting for the original poster to provide those details.

Did you have a request?

I also find it amusing that all those western pilots and press dismissed the Flankers manouvreability as just ‘airshow stunts’…….

Yet when the F-22 comes along (years later) and does the same thing – they are suddenly ‘legitimate combat maneouvres’.

Can you provide a reference that shows ‘western pilots’ describing this ‘cobra’ as a ‘legitimate combat maneuver’?

Here are some interesting TAC evaluation:

“ADC Evaluated the F-106 and found its radar capable of acquisition and that radar snap-up attack with all aspect armament should be used to exploit MiG-21 lack of fire control. The F-106 could use better acceleration to get beyond MiG-21 speed limit if not in an advantageous position. The F-106 should use missiles then close in to gun kill position. It was the consensus of ADC that the U.S. needed to expedite procurement of cannon for F-106, and replacement of its canopy bar with clear pane. It was concluded that the F-106 shouldn’t attempt a slow speed turning contest?? and should keep its speed from 400-450 KCAS during patrol and engagement.

The TAC evaluation of the F-5A revealed that within performance limits, the F-5 had considerable capability to engage the MiG-21. The F-5 had performance advantage below 15,000 feet, however the MiG-21 had higher Mach capability at higher altitude. Overall turn comparison was about equal and level acceleration was equal in military power, MiG-21 had a slight advantage in afterburner. They had comparable fire control systems. The F-5 controlled the tactical engagement effectively and if defensive separation was necessary, the F-5 could exceed the MiG-21 airspeed limit below 15,000 ft. The F-5 could closely simulate the MiG-21 up to Mach 1.2 for combat crew training in ACM, dissimilar aircraft engagements.

The USN evaluation of the F-8E found that the MiG-21 could out turn the F-8 in a close-in fight.Zoom performance was comparable below 25,000 ft and on station time was also comparable. Large size and prominent smoke trail was a disadvantage. The F-8E was capable of exceeding the MiG-21 speed limit at low altitude. Acceleration performance was better than the MiG-21 at low and medium altitudes below 1.2 Mach“

I’m not an expert, but even I can find some parts difficult to understand…how about you ?

Were those parts the ones in italics?

I have to wonder what model of the MiG-21 was used for comparison.

AK, you can download it from rapidshare as a free user, presuming the file isn’t massive it shouldn’t take that long.

Thanks…I’ve tried several times but the download isn’t coming through on my end.

For the original question…use of weapons release tables is very specific…entry parameters include type of aircraft and weapon, aircraft configuration (flap position, for example), dive angle, release altitude and speed, number of weapons to be released, etc.

I am looking for the Mk83 table and the rockets too for the F104G ( well I guess that all zipper versions have the same tables…)

Diego

I need more info. The ballistics tables cover a wide range of release speeds and altitudes.

I have a doubt about old sights. They calculate the depresion in mils. But, are the mils a universal unit of measure?

Imagine that I have the sight depresion in mils for a F4C, dropping a MK82 at a 30º dive and 450 knots over a target a 0 ft MSL, and a setting for the sight of 121 mils; could I use the same settings in mils for another plane, like a F104 or a F105? ( i guess than the rest of the serttings are the same, because a Mk82 is always a Mk82, and it once dropped it flies always the same pattern)

Thank you!

A ‘mil’ is a universal unit of measurement…it’s a measurement of angle, and about 17 mils equal one degree.

A ‘mil setting’, however, is not going to be the same for different aircraft using the same release parameters and weapon. The settings may be reasonably close, but that is strictly coincidental as the computation of that angle also takes into account factors unique to the design of the individual aircraft. These other factors include line of sight relationships as measured from both the cockpit and the location of the weapon when mounted on the aircraft.