You’ve got most of them there.
9.11 Early MiG-29 configuration with smaller wing
9.15E MiG-29ME Export version of M
9.17V MiG-29OVT SMT with vector nozzles
9.41 MiG-29MTK SMT based naval version
9.47 MIG-29MTK SMT based 2 seat trainer version
The MiG-25 was mainly made from high-temperature steels (80%), titanium (8%) and high temp aluminium. It used 5kg of pure silver to line the engine bays…
Melting point of such steels is around 1480 deg C.
Melting point of titanium is about 1800 deg C.
Melting point of aluminium is about 650 deg C.
Titanium is more resistant to high temperatures than steel, but steel is a hell of a lot better than aluminium in this respect. Steel also is much easier and cheaper to produce than titanium. The A-12/SR-71 series are certainly amazing, but they are tough to build, tough to maintain, and expensive.
A titanium MiG-25 would not have been any faster than the steel one, because the limiting factor was the engines. Rather than the advanced engine of the A-12/SR-71, it has a very simple low pressure ratio turbojet.
A titanium MiG-25 would have been lighter, probably a bit more agile, but cost would have been very high.
I was only 6 when Maggie Thatcher was elected but I remember it being on the TV quite clearly. My parents were not amused…
What part of “unofficial designation” did you miss, Gary?
IF the Russian airforce had ordered the “MiG-35”, they might have called it MiG-29BM, MiG-29Bis, MiG-33, or whatever. The point is, the designation wasn’t made by Mikoyan, but by the airforce. Given that we are asking what the designation of the 1.42 would have been IN SERVICE, you cannot reasonably claim it would have been MiG-37 because -33 and -35 were taken, because these designations were never officially given out, and if the MFI project had continued then there would have been no need for the “MiG-35” design anyway.
The MiG-29M as MiG-33, and the advanced MiG-29 derivative as MiG-35, are both unofficial designations by the Mikoyan OKB that postdate the fall of the USSR. The official designation of the MiG-29M is still “MiG-29M”. I guess it is possible that if the MiG-29M had entered production as the MiG-33 for export purposes, that the Russian airforce would have skipped the designation, but given their stubborn insistence on calling the “Fullback” Su-34 “Su-27IB” somehow I doubt it.
I simply don’t believe this.
The MiG-29M was called MiG-29M. The next free designation was MiG-33, and thats what the 1.42 would have been.
Short Snort vectored thrust from the engine over the wing to produce a fighter with runway requirements of only a few hundred feet. The concept employed ducts and ports that diverted engine exhaust out spanwise along the top of the wing. The approach generated tremendous amounts of lift at very low speeds. The ducting, however, was very heavy, and ultimately proved impossible to incorporate in a high-performance supersonic fighter.
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1998/articles/apr_98/apr_98_p.html
Thats “Short Snort”, not “Sneaky Pete”- Sneaky Pete was a stealthy tailless delta.
Here’s the Boeing VFX design, it has dorsal intakes.
The swing wing design I am pretty sure is a General Dynamics design undertaken in the ADF program. I think the picture below is a closely related design, retaining the twin podded engines, while the design below that is clearly smaller, single engined and ancestral to the eventual F-16. I know these two are General Dynamics for sure, I’ve scanned them from an article 🙂
The first two are pics of the Boeing LWF contender.
The next three are General Dynamics studies from the mid/late 60s conducted under the FX and ADF (predecessor to LWF) programs.
There was a strong German section who favoured a lightweight, 25,000lb fighter in the ND102 mould. Don’t forget the Germans were after a pure air superiority aircraft at the time. The ND102 design was notable for using two non-afterburning PW1120 engines of about 13,000lb thrust each, and was supposed to reach speeds as high as Mach 2.
The ACA was a UK-German-Italian program, merging MBB’s TKF90 and BAe’s work on P106, P110 and earlier projects like ECF/ECA.
The EAP was SUPPOSED to be a demonstrator for this design, but Germany pulled out and hence the tail/rear fuselage, which was supposed to be designed by MBB, was replaced with a single Tornado tail.
MBB TKF90
Bae P110
BAe P106
Northrop-Dornier ND102
Well that was the discussion we had with Flogger on the CDF forums, I think…