SC Tiger Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 On 7/23/2018 at 10:52 PM, tous said: Eric, identify the aircraft, please. Not American. Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master Had to use Google Image search. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Soldiers and keekats: Â Â 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, tous said: The MiG-25 was the reason for the F-15. MACH 3+ ( 1800 knots ) at 60,000 feet in a line interceptor. Remarkable aircraft. Imagine the thermal problems they had to solve in the late 1960s with 1960s materials. I think the aircraft is mostly steel. Funny, since Russia has some really big Titanium deposits (according to the BGH anyway). As I understand it the west thought that thing was basically the 1960s version of the F22. Not stealth but utterly badass. Unbeatable. Scared the guys with stars on their shoulders, and their bosses who have to win elections. We built stuff that could counter it (or what we THOUGHT it could do), then we got ahold of one and were pretty much underwhelmed. IIRC the engines could only last one trip above Mach 3. Then they had to be changed. Not sure if they had to be rebuilt or were completely trashed. Edited July 25, 2018 by SC Tiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 8 hours ago, tous said: But, that was the strategic role of the interceptor in the 1960s, no? Intercept and destroy the other guy's bombers before they could turn your cities into huge, smoking holes. Even the American aircraft of that era, mainly the entire century series, were intended to be pure interceptors of Soviet bombers, thus the tactic was get there fast and high enough to destroy the big, lumbering targets. Remember, this was the era of high-altitude strategic bombing. It is fortunate that the American aircraft turned out to be more versatile and could adapt to other roles. The MiG-25 satisfied the pure interceptor role. Yes, it ran out of gas early, and was a slow pig at low altitude, but the PVO would have had them deployed not far from the expected bomber routes, so they didn't need fly 1,500 miles, but they did need to get to altitude and to the targets quickly. The MiG-25 was also designed and deployed before cruise missiles. NB the Soviets never really were very good at air-to-air refueling. Indeed.  But, before Belenko, "common knowledge" about the Bat's capabilities in the West were thought to be more frightening....whether this was real, or used to bolster more dollars for more whizzbang for us, who knows? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie-pete Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie-pete Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Czervik Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 23 minutes ago, willie-pete said: Love how his belt has "General Lemay" on it. Not "Curtis Lemay." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie-pete Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 (edited) As if no one would recognize him out of uniform.   I would call him the first " Cold Warrior "  He was a good General to his men as I have heard, but woe betide anyone that messed up " To Err Is Human, To Forgive is Not Current SAC Policy"     Edited July 25, 2018 by willie-pete 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geko45 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 (edited) Not as glamorous as many, but this is where my own humble contribution to Cold War victory was realized (that was before they upgraded the engines as shown on the model below). Â Edited July 25, 2018 by Geko45 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 On ‎7‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 10:54 PM, tous said: The first thing we did, change the Lucas 6-volt, positive ground electric system. That Rolls Royce Pegasus turbofan was a marvelous engine. I always had to read the sticker in the engine compartment a second time. "Warning. Positive Earth!" XKE. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tous Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 4 hours ago, SC Tiger said: I think the aircraft is mostly steel. Funny, since Russia has some really big Titanium deposits (according to the BGH anyway). There is a substantial difference between having titanium ore and being able to form, mill and join precision titanium parts. Remember, that aircraft was designed and built in the 1960s. I never had much affection for the Mig-25 or MiG-27. American aircraft are all smooth, lovely curves while Soviet aircraft were all straight lines and ugly angles. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Eric Posted July 25, 2018 Author Administrators Share Posted July 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, tous said: There is a substantial difference between having titanium ore and being able to form, mill and join precision titanium parts. Remember, that aircraft was designed and built in the 1960s. I never had much affection for the Mig-25 or MiG-27. American aircraft are all smooth, lovely curves while Soviet aircraft were all straight lines and ugly angles. Kinda like their women. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Tiger Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, Eric said: Kinda like their women. Voice of experience? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Eric Posted July 25, 2018 Author Administrators Share Posted July 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, SC Tiger said: Voice of experience? No, just years of watching the Olympics, growing up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geko45 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, tous said: I never had much affection for the MiG-25 As compared to the SR-71, certainly a completely different design philosophy. But it was the second fastest plane of its time and it shared another dubious distinction with the Blackbird. Both could accelerate to the point of destruction. Top speed was not limited to what the aircraft could actually do, but rather what it could withstand. Edited July 25, 2018 by Geko45 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tous Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 (edited) Indeed, but keep in mind that the Soviets relied on captured German engineers for much of their aircraft design in the 1950s and 1960s and the Soviets prized utility over aesthetics and innovation. Mikoyan and Gurevich were likely very talented, but held back by primitive resources, no funding and a less-skilled workforce. We had German designers and engineers as well, but we had great American minds and the freedom to innovate that the Soviets didn't.  I can assure you that my and aricraver's superluminal space plane will be beautifully curvy. Edited July 25, 2018 by tous 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geko45 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 Our Germans were better than their Germans. ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted July 25, 2018 Share Posted July 25, 2018 48 minutes ago, tous said: There is a substantial difference between having titanium ore and being able to form, mill and join precision titanium parts. Remember, that aircraft was designed and built in the 1960s. I never had much affection for the Mig-25 or MiG-27. American aircraft are all smooth, lovely curves while Soviet aircraft were all straight lines and ugly angles. I saw a documentary that showed a closeup of the heads of rivets standing proud of the surface of the fuselage on Soviet Mach 1 + fighters. This, on a high speed fighter...…… Fit and finish were missing. Made up for by brute force. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted July 26, 2018 Share Posted July 26, 2018 The Blackhawks are getting a new cockpit, all digital. http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/07/24/black-hawk-army-helicopters-get-futuristic-new-cockpit.html  . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Eric Posted July 26, 2018 Author Administrators Share Posted July 26, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tous Posted July 26, 2018 Share Posted July 26, 2018 That's just ugly. No wonder it lost the ACF selection. Boeing should stick to big aircraft or merging with companies that know how to make fighters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Eric Posted July 26, 2018 Author Administrators Share Posted July 26, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now