Its a view from above.
Back Cockpits
The MiG-31M back cockpit is very different in layout from either, lacking the datalink control panel. Clearly it was supposed to have very different avionics overall.
In the Zaslon display each contact is numbered according to threat level, and has a line that indicates IFF status, I believe. There may also be a indication of target direction.
A better one
One British fast interceptor design was the Hawker 1134.
Here’s two designs for it;
Try “Myasishchev M-200”, might have more success!
I was likewise disappointed in the Aircraft Weapons book. Too many photos, not enough words- like a lot of recent Gordon books.
All the above are in English, and I’ll end up buying the MiG-31 one I imagine. I thought Andrei Fomin was going to write one?
Paul.
Well, MiG-25RB flight manual gives 1100km/h below 5000m, which is actually slower than that.
Boeing placed second in the LWF competition ahead of Northrop but their design was considered too close to the GD design, so the Northrop design was built as it was quite different.
Boeing TFX
Hmm there’s a thought, maybe the FC1 should be “Fishpaste”
🙂
“Flatpack” was confirmed by someone in the know, and for anyone in the UK makes perfect sense (MFI is a firm that makes flatpack furniture).
Its still easier to say “Fullback” (2 syllables) over a radio than “Su-27IB” (6-7 syllables, depending how you say it).
960-980mm, thats the diameter of the radar antenna. The radome must logically be slightly larger.
http://www.computer-museum.ru/histussr/stpc.htm has some info on airborne computers in the USSR.
The Bars (MKI Mark I and II) uses the Leninets Ts200 signal processor and Ts100/101 data processors.
The latest (MKI Mark III) version replaces the Ts100 series data processor(s) with Indian-developed ‘Vetrivale’ computers. I expect that replacement of the Ts100 with something faster is on the card later on, as this PSP is limiting the achieveable resolution in SAR mode.