Wings of the red star - The Mig 23 1/5

[adamcrookedsmile]

that cruciform tail of the MiG 23 looks so cool in the air. I like the whole look of the Flogger, it looks like a lot of speed.

[lucky7980]

może ktoś zna wersję po polsku ..Dzięki jak coś>:)

[technograd]

The CAGI worker, towing that fuselage at 7:51 is funny (on a respectful way) :) .

[3nasacova]

Something I learned recently that some people might find interesting is that, and I forget exactly why, Sopwith changed its name to Vickers

[jimbeauxtexas]

LMAO this was supposed to be about soviet advances in swing wing technology. Long story short, the Soviets stole all of the initial technology made planes for years and did not win a dog fight with the Airforce, Navy oe Marines after the Korean war and here in 2011 their jets still haven't

[fulcrumize]

fucking jerk! Why did he saying Mig was a threat to NATO ? Arent the NATO was a threat to Russia ?

[monsterzeroJr]

"Wings of Brezhnev" would be a more appropriate title.

[stevemasters7]

why do the american always steal british aviation technology and say its there's?

[brentsrx7]

THE F111 WAS THE FIRST FIGHTER WITH SWING WINGS, THIS SERIES OF DOCUMENTARIES IS POORLY RESEARCHED. THIS WAS A COPY.

[ManfredZaturek]

@brentsrx7

The F-111 was intented to be a naval interceptor and an Air Force low altitude penetrator but it became an interdictor and tactical strike aircraft instead. It even served as a recce and ecm aircraft but never as a fighter. There were too many problems during its development as a fighter.

[brentsrx7]

@ManfredZaturek It went into service with a sidewinder and 20mm cannon air to air defense package as an option, but was rarely used. But I agree that that history channel is being history channel again. Like the f15, most of its missions are tactical bomb, it rarely encounters aircraft.

[ManfredZaturek]

@brentsrx7

That'a what I meant by the remark about the original interceptor version. It was definitely never used in action as an interceptor despite the original idea, especially not as a naval aircraft. The Eagle has served for many years as an able air defense fighter and later as a tactical strike aircraft in the form of the F-15E.

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 F-111 is not a fighter! It is a tactical bomber and ground-attack aircraft. You are poorly researched :)))

Old Discovery documentaries are like old Hollywood historic movies! Very honest, objective and perfect.

Today whatever "history" movie Hollywood makes has nothing to do with real events. And Discovery military shows are full of biased propaganda and lies! It is very pity to see such degradation in informing of US citizens.

[brentsrx7]

@BitnikGr How does history channel doing a bad job equate to it all being propaganda? In fact the f111 was designed as a fighter bomber, it could carry sidewinders and a 20 mm cannon for air to air combat. That is accurate, but just like the f15, the overwhelming majority of its missions were tactical bombing missions. Its not "lies", you have simply not researched the subject enough to know you sound like an idiot. They have to make a show summarizing the facts in a short 30 min, chill.

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 Ability to carry 2 Sidewinders and a 20mm cannon is called "self-defense" in the world of aviation.

Every ground attack aircraft and every attack helicopter carries at least close-range missiles and a cannon. It does make it a fighter. Fighter is intend to fight other fighters and it must have at least 4-8 pylons for medium and long range air-to-air missiles.

SU-24 is a perfect example of a copy of F-111 if you wish, but not the MiG-23. Not even close.

[brentsrx7]

@BitnikGr omg.... Is that military designation is it?...."Self Defense", your silly. It carried the sidewinders for air to air combat, making it a fighter bomber, if you could get your head out of your ass for a moment, the Australian air force use them a patrol fighters even today. The soviets obviously copied the technology, its obvious, even if they mistook the f111's role, they still ripped it off like they ripped off the Concorde, 707, shuttle, b1b, f-15, h21, B29, harrier, ext ext

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 Yes it is a military term. Ground attack, tactical bombers, attack helicopters carry 2 short-range missiles for "self-defense" in aerial combat. These types of planes are not intended to engage other flying targets... they try to avoid them if it is possible. If it is the first time you hear this term, then it is not my problem, right? :)

Soviets didn't mistook anyone's role. They wanted a fighter, they made a fighter. The latest MiG-23MLD was equal in dogfight to the earliest F-16A..

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 Try that with F-111 against any fighter...

They still ripped off what? F-111? Where from they had it? Or maybe they had F-15? Or harrier?

Don't be silly. Similar goals lead to similar designs. F-1 cars are all very look alike right? Despite there are at least 8-10 different manufacturing companies in every season, which incorporate different technical solutions in engines, transmission, suspension, but all cars are very similar outwardly.

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 ... Also, in this particular documentary, it is described that Soviets tried both solutions. Variable geometry after half of the wing (Sukhoi) and variable geometry from the wingroot. The second one was better. They chose it after comparison and not because Americans did it that way. Yes, Soviets had reverse engineered some stuff, which noones denies actually, but that doesn't mean that everything was copied.

CIA are not sheep too. USA have stolen many military secrets as well.

[alieu156]

@brentsrx7 Actually everyone copies good ideas off each other. You're not going to handicap your military just because you're too proud to incorporate a foreign design. Ever wonder why the Mig-15 and F-86 look so similar? They're both based on a german design from WW2. Airbus and Boeing planes look very similar, are they just copies too? The F-15 is actually a copy of the Mig-25. It's nothing new, the gladius sword used by the Romans was copied from a sword used by the Ibero-Celts.

[1bearcatf8f]

@alieu156 The F-15 isnt a copy of the MiG-25.There 2 completely different aircraft.There equal in speed.But the F-15 is designed for air suppiority,The MiG-25 is designed for intercepting,and recon.The F-15 was designed to counter the Mig-25 wich is has done in the gulf war.

[brentsrx7]

@alieu156 Dude, the Mig-25 and f-15 are completely different in every conceivable aspect. Yes, the US knew the Russians built a fancy new plane. They knew nothing else. Assuming its capabilities and combat role, they designed an aircraft from scratch, using American developed tech and know how. Soviet designs were often blatant copies of western fighters often through espionage. The F15 is a multi role interceptor, the Mig-25 goes fast as was designed and built for reconnaissance.

[killman369547]

@brentsrx7 the mig 25 was actually built as an intercepter to counter the threat posed by the b58 hustler and the xb 70 valkyrie but since the xb 70 was cancelled and downgraded and the b58 being phases out they were modified for reconaissance some were sent to egypt painted in egyptian markings but were owned by us and flown by us either way why would we build a mach 3+ plane strictly for recon when we have satillites to do that?

[brentsrx7]

@killman369547 Yes it was, I didn't have space to elaborate, so I summed up the difference between the aircraft's capabilities, I should have said "used" for reconnaissance. We didn't have good enough satellites at the time, so we used SR-71's, u2's, ext.

[alieu156]

@brentsrx7 They had pictures of it didn't they? And is it just a coincidence that the F-15 looks incredibly similar to the Mig-25 even though no previous American fighter had this layout? You're just too proud to admit the truth, it's a common flaw among Americans, you're too brainwashed to believe that everything American is the best in the world that if you admitted that's not true, you're whole world would come crashing down. Give one example of a "blatantly" copied Soviet fighter.

[brentsrx7]

@alieu156 You are very misinformed, its time to step beyond the iron curtain and read into the technological developments the rest of the world has achieved without the reclusive, backward, soviet union. Its difficult to mention soviet fighters that were not copies, or that were not designed to meet an existing western fighter utilizing captured technology/ espionage. The mig 25 owes allot of its shape to American designs. Hence the twin engine, and overall shape as seen on a5 vigilante.

[brentsrx7]

@alieu156 I am not too proud, I just leaned how to read and research a subject before commenting, so not to look like an intolerant and poorly educated asshole.

[alieu156]

@brentsrx7 Lol, I am not poorly educated I'm actually in my final year in college training as an aircraft engineer. I'm still waiting for an example...

[brentsrx7]

@alieu156 I just gave you one

[alieu156]

@brentsrx7 What example, the A-5? It looks nothing like the Mig-25, the only similarity is the air intakes.

[schwarzess999]

@alieu156 google the Tu-4.

A ''blatantly copied'' soviet aircraft.

Get the facts right please.

[alieu156]

@schwarzess999 That's not a fighter.

[schwarzess999]

@alieu156 Thats beside the point, the point is that Sovet aircraft designers actually had to copy american designs to make sure that their airforce was competent enough against the americans.

Do you think the Tu-160 was just by coincidence, similiar to the B-1...?

[alieu156]

@schwarzess999 Do you think it's a coincidence that the F-15 and the Mig-25 look so similar, especially given that the F-15 was developed in response to the Mig-25. It works both ways, it's true that Soviet aircraft design was behind the US in the immediate postwar period, hence the Tu-4, but to say that it was like that for the whole cold war is incorrect. How did the Soviets get both the first satellite and man into space if their technology was so inferior? I suppose they copied that too...

[schwarzess999]

@alieu156 tell you what.

Lets's thank the nazis for jets and rockets! LOL.

But seriously, they were the true pioneers in jet technology, Me-262 etc. Not to mention the V-2 rocket too.

[alieu156]

@schwarzess999 It's true, the Germans invented a lot of important technologies during WW2. I think Germany is always good when it comes to engineering. Even today their cars are probably the best in the world, even just home appliances like washing machines etc.

[apodrez]

@alieu156 not really. They both share large boxy airframes, big delta-esque wings, and a large payload. In fact i think the only differences between the airframes of a Mig-25 and the A-5C bomber is that the A-5 is more slender leading to a reduced MTOW (being flown off carriers dictated this) and it has 2 tails. As well as of course the payload which was 4,200 lbs (one mk 27 nuclear bomb and 2 mk84 500 lb bombs) vs the mig 25's 4x R-40R or T missiles (3,900 lbs)

[brentsrx7]

@BitnikGr THE AUSTRALIANS USE THEM AS INTERCEPTOR AND PATROL AIRCRAFT, ARMED WITH AIM120'S AND THE 20MM CANNON. YOUR A DUMBASS.

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 Aussies used for interception only one particular version - the F-111C. MiG-23 also had a version dedicated to ground attack. Exception of a rule only proves the rule. Ground attack abilities of F-14/15/22 are secondary role. They are not pure multirole fighters like F-16/18. Same shit with bomber version of MiG-23 or interceptor version of F-111. You can take your truck and go for shopping if you haven't money for decent family car, but this won't make a truck suited for role of ...

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 ... family car. Same goes to AU. F-14, MiG-25/31 are perfect interceptors. F-111 is slower than MiGs, and not as good as F-14. So it is the worst interceptor comparing to these examples. But they hadn't any other choice, hadn't they? Since I don't have pure interceptor design, but I need an interceptor... I take the fastest vehicle I have and I put Amraams on it and I assign interceptor role to it. But in no case we should call it interceptor!

Insulting others doesn't add credibility

[brentsrx7]

@BitnikGr I said it is poorly researched, that pertains to many aspects of the documentary. They obviously over focused on its roll as a fighter. But the dates and rationale for various innovations of swing wing tech, is mostly accurate.

[brentsrx7]

@BitnikGr Honestly, a lot about even the most ridiculous Hollywood war movies have a lot to do with our history, but considering you assume people believe these to perfectly reflect history like a documentary shows me your not worth my time, goodbye.

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 When I refer to great history movies of Hollywood, I mean movies like "Spartacus", "Cleopatra", "Last days of Pompey". Where do you see "your" history? History movies must be accurate. Education system in many countries today is worse than ever and many people start "learning" from movies. They don't read books, and they don't like "boring" documentaries. Entertainment and amusement educate them. "300", "Troya", "Perl Harbor" are far away from history. But some dump daddy and mummy...

[BitnikGr]

@brentsrx7 ... will explain history to their kids like they saw it in movies.

Great example of history movie is the "Odyssey" directed by Konchalovsky in the USA. Compare it to Hollywood "Troya". Both movies are based on works of ancient Greek writer "Homer". Compare work of Konchalovsky where he sticks strictly to the script of Homer (even dogs were chosen to be exactly like in Mediterranean region) and Hollywood "Troya" full of mistakes and many modern political bullshits.

[dominic970]

7:50 lmao i thought that was a guy on a segway 4 a mintue xD

[phadil]

@HeildemKrieg you're mistaken Russian engine TBO is 1000 hours that's true. but F/A-18 engine are 3000 hours.

[jvarela965]

MiG-23s were one of the nicest looking Fighters ever. Light years better looking than hideous MiG-21. Sill looks modern today. We had a Cuban pilot defect in one here in Florida about 20 yrs ago.

[pencon61]

@jvarela965 Mig 21 looks awesome

[phadil]

@HeildemKrieg in terms of build quality, Russian workmanship are inferior to the Americans. you see, my country operate both SU-30 and F/A-18 and we know this for certain because we've experiance it ourselves. materials use in Russian engine are of less quality then the american engine. The reason why Russian jet can operate in a rough field is because they have protection mechanism like the retractable cover over the inlet.

[Iffy350]

I love the intro.

[Lemev]

WTF! The F-111 main landing gear door looks like a big speed brake!!!! (4:52)

[YourFatClownAss]

Oh for fook sake with all the angle details!!!

[ramoer]

man that F-111 Aardvark was a fugly plane

[stuntmanmike37]

@ramoer What the fuck are you talking about? The Aardvark is one of the sickest planes ever built!

[Antifaith29]

@ramoer yup it was. We called them the Pig here because of it. Still, they were amazing at what they did.

[yoertuber]

FOR ME THE PASHTUN ROCKS!!!!

[Hohnersuhail]

Herrhivemind is extremely wrong in calling the Holy Quran retarded and Allah as tin god.

Arabs are traditionally indisciplined and that is one reason why they lost the aerial war.Flying vertically while being chased by enemy missiles or planes was one of the horrendous mistakes the Iraqi idiots often committed.Moreover,they couldn't fight the war in which they were okay.The Iraqis fought the way US forces did and since they were not adept at it,the Iraqis lost.

[HerrHIVEMIND]

So lets set the record straight: The way the iraqi's or ANY arab nation conducts war against the Amerikans is not how the Soviets would have.

Yes the iraqi's had russian equipment. They also had no discipline and payed little attention in training or learning about anything other than their retarded religious book and their tin god.

When you have whole armies spending more time learning about religion and less time learning about war ---- they lose. period.

[l2eallllllllyyy]

@HerrHIVEMIND The Arab nations also only had only about one, ill-maintained and second/third-generation MiG for every ten aircraft (fourth/fifth-generation) that the U.S. could send their way. The Iraqi MiG inventory was typically comprised of technologically diluted export models, lacking advanced Soviet technologies and even (for the most part) beyond-visual-range capability; even their MiG-29 being armed for within-visual-range only. Their "export" radars simply could not overcome jamming.

[xUSSRx]

Glorian Soviet amy

[MafiaGENGTEAM1970]

UNDERSTAND !!!!!!! ALL DUMMIY. LEARN WITH TWO EYE BALL And EAR.

[m3phisto666]

Everything made in Soviet Russia looks bad-ass to a degree of "You don't want to fuck with this"

[ADELIN90]

how is the name of the narrator

[Ronbo710]

@ADELIN90 That is Peter Ustinov.

[patrikasLTL]

There were NATO rehearsals in 1986.

results:

Soviet tanks at the English channel 2 weeks with NATO leading the first assault.

Soviet tanks at the English channel 6 days with WP leading the first assault.

[Dogmeat1950]

@patrikasLTL what you type made no sense whatever you typed lol.

[ketsan]

@patrikasLTL And those same war games were used to predict massive coalition casualties in the first gulf war. Didn't quite happen like that though. By 1986 NATO's technological superiority was such that numerical superiority was becoming kinda meaningless.

[patrikasLTL]

@ketsan

Yeah, the only problem with gulf war was that iraqis did not fight after 1 month of aerial bombardament which led to total logistics, supply, command & control and morale breakdown + they did not use chemical weapons like predicted. Soviets were still one step ahead in technology by that time, and would not sit in their bunkers and wait for nato to give a free kick, they had a massive modern arsenal SAMs, Migs, T-80U tanks. Gorbachev has destroyed the soviet navy.. and the country..

[ketsan]

@patrikasLTL You forget that the reason they were sitting in their bunkers is because Iraqi air defences where annhilated in the first few hours and movement out of those bunkers was even more suicidal than staying in them. The Iraqi air defence system was a carbon copy of the Soviet system; NATO would have quickly won air superiority and anything stupid enough to be rolling around the north german plain with a red star on it would have been destroyed.

[HerrHIVEMIND]

@ketsan

Carbon copy. You mean a penciled copy. Iraq bought arms from russia that were not up to par. they bought stripped versions of russian equipment because they could buy it in BULK. They had FEW radar and SAM systems that werent stripped and usually kept all their high tech soviet toys out of sight.

And the way Arab soldiers spend more time praying to their god and studying the koran instead of training in combat or learning to be disciplined in a fight.

[l2eallllllllyyy]

@ketsan Germany had the same delusions about "technological" superiority prior to 1945, but they was still saturated by overwhelming allied (and particularly Soviet)numbers. The fact that the Tiger was an immensely more powerful machine, capable of dominating the battlefield with single units destroying in excess of thirty enemies on many occassions, was irrelevant; the relentless advance of expendable Shermans and T-34 forcing many to be abandoned, bleeding them dry.

[oyongski1]

@l2eallllllllyyy "Germany had the same delusions about "technological" superiority prior to 1945, but they was still saturated by overwhelming allied (and particularly Soviet)numbers. xxx"

You were right about how quantity won over quality in WW2. But that was 60+ years ago. Meanwhile new political and technological realities, and yes, MAD, will ensure that an all-out conventional war between the world powers will NOT happen anymore.

[Zlatko2009]

Good for the Soviets. They have a lot of accomplishments to be proud of. After the Soviet Union fell, the Ukranians, Belorussians, Russians, Kazakhs..etc etc could all be proud of their Soviet roots. My people (Yugoslavs), all tend to despise their pasts, meanwhile, we all have so much to be proud of.

[FelixG9]

how old is this video?

[hectiky]

"and even then they needed help... " Needed help in WW2? That war was massive. Everyone need help. The US didn't join till halfway through. I'm sorry, bet letting comments like that slide encourages ignorance.

[jvarela965]

MiG 21 and 23 were the Israeli Air Force favorite target practice. New Sukhois are better

[MarkoParabucki]

@jvarela965 I doubt that even MiG-29 or Su-27 (and it's variants), flown by Syrians, would fare much better against IAF F-15's & F-16's. It's not the machine that's the problem, it's got to do with much higher standards of pilot training IAF has.

Another thing worth noting is that USSR had a tendency to export, as fraternal aid, weapons which were often stripped down to bare essentials (lack of look down-shoot down radar on MiG-23's)... Check 'monkey model' for more info.

[HerrHIVEMIND]

@MarkoParabucki /agree. Anytime you have a culture or civilization or government or military w/e that devotes nearly ALL of its time worshipping and praying to some god and debating the koran and its teachings instead of training its armed forces you get crappy pilots in aircraft or machinery that has great potential. :| MiG's and Sukhois are PERFECT matches to battle against American and Euro aircraft but the pilot quality in most islamic countries is downright AWFUL

[FXThug]

@HerrHIVEMIND your an idiot, NATO aircraft are much more high tech. Not to mention like 4x more epxnsive.

[HerrHIVEMIND]

@FXThug Youre an idiot cos I wasn't even talking about that :P Now take a picture with your shirt on and stop trying so hard :)

[FXThug]

@HerrHIVEMIND I ONLY TRY HARD ON YOUR MOM

[HerrHIVEMIND]

@FXThug DURRRR omg!

*rolls eyes*

[FXThug]

@HerrHIVEMIND THATS WHAT SHE SAID WHEN I SLAP HER WIT MY COCK

[Dogmeat1950]

@FXThug yep, always ask your self why do the richer country's always buy Western European tech or American, Reason... because it's better.

[FXThug]

@Dogmeat1950 i KNOW THAT WAT I SAID MOFO

[Ralfork]

well, let's just enjoy the documentary, shall we ?

[daburgamasta99]

As a western European I'd choose the Americans over Russia and Eastern Europe any time. I want a civilized country as an ally not barbaric and corrupted regimes.

[gosciu555]

Wow, I see you're really up to date on who is "civilized" and who is barbaric. Except not.

[rotorpilot82]

So what nation allowed the invasion of iraq solely on what a the media reported?? ONLY IN AMAERICA!!

[mobius1aic]

Sadly the US is corrupt. Our politician's are mostly assholes.

[monsterzeroJr]

And the rest of the world is not corrupt, yeah? Quit whining over nothing. Your brain can't even comprehend the level of corruption in Europe. I lived in Europe for 21 years. My brother-in-law (Polish national) was in Russia driving in his personal auto, got pulled over by a cop and asks "what's wrong" and the cop answers "nothing's wrong, just give me a few bucks and I'll let you go". That's how you deal with officials there. Europe has corruption that makes it look like f...g Serra Leone...

[mobius1aic]

I wasn't talking about the rest of the world, I was agreeing with him in his view of how ludicrous America really is. There is plenty wrong with the world, and that "shiney white beacon of light and hope" America isn't exactly without it's extreme political issues either.

[monsterzeroJr]

There are many aspects of the "shining beacon of hope": economic, political, social.

As a place to make money the legal, honest way America has indeed been a beacon of hope for generations of people. You can make a nice salary without stopping people and trying to shake them down.

The political and social problems of America are known, there's no need to go into that.

[chris2002Rocklin]

But it's not perfect, therefore you are no better than anywhere else.

WAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!

[chris2002Rocklin]

Wow.

Life everywhere is more complex than you seem capable of articulating.

Not perfect, not rotten to the core, just the best in the history of mankind so far.

But not because they are superior people, it a superior system with flawed people, but the system in general rewards the good more than anywhere else.

It is all relative, there are no absolutely perfect (morality wise) people or systems of any kind. Wait till Heaven, then you might find perfection assuming you know how to get there.

[mobius1aic]

Articulating? I think the proper word for what you were trying to say is "comprehending".

As for the US, I think we have the best "official" system of government, but yes I agree it's partially ruined by the corrupt involved.

[chris2002Rocklin]

@mobius1aic

Perhaps you fails to discern the different meaning of each word.

If one fails to comprehend, then sure, they won't be able to articulate it. Some times people do "get it" but fail to communicate clearly & effectively.

I'm not going to bother deconstruction the implication of your communication issues since attitude clearly distorts any other discernment that might be possible.

Don't try to correct people unless you are sure you are correct. It makes you look stupid.

[mobius1aic]

Well of course my attitude clearly distorts, so does yours. We have our own opinions, and different experiences. That's the whole point of forum and discussion. The issue here between us is neither of us wants to come out the loser in argument, as people naturally want the better deal.

As for the US government, just because it's theoretically the best government in the world, does not make it the best for the people.

[MWR166]

See the Yanks can't do any thing with out the Brits and some of Europe. The MIG-23 a good plane would have been used well when the USSR was beating NATO if it had gone hot.

[chris3325]

@MWR166 rest assured that if it had gone hot. US yanks along with you and everyone else would have been killed. The US had and has the best nuclear weapons program in the world. Conventional warfare means nothing in an age of ICBM's.(which are very accurate i might add.) Now of course these weapons are still useful against non-nuclear armed countries.

[chris3325]

@MWR166 If we look at the the soviet intervention in Afghanistan and the subsequent war against the Mujahideen we find the soviets not only less capable then the US and NATO armed forces. The command structure and tactics was flawed. And soviet weapons and equipment has been shown to be no match for western weapons and equipment. The best advantage the russians have is the same advantage they had when napoleon came knocking. They are numerous.

[rotorpilot82]

I think you are forgetting about,"The Korean War", & "The Vietnam War"... and now the situation has arisen back in Afghanistan where the U.S and it allies are loosing once again.... Go Back To School You Tool!!

[94Bluefire94]

Eurasia for the Win, we dont need the USA!

[rotorpilot82]

Darn Right!! The US hasn't won a war since WW2... and even then they needed help...

[rotorpilot82]

The Yanks can't do anything by themselves cause they cannot afford it...

[xosrov2]

awful plane, crap maneuverability, poor visibility, radar and fire inaccuracy, its just another Russian poor reverse engineering and tecnology espionage, this time from F111.

[DoktorStrangelove]

Such a fantastic show. When it debuted in '93, it was a total stopdown for me; when it was on, all other activity stopped.

[JesusHChrist2000]

I wish i had his voice

[hairybeast101]

i love soviet stuff.

[eclipsed154M]

I think a man can talk about "basic rights" just if he has a connection with this country. There is no reason to talk about democrasy in Russia if you haven't been in Russia. And at least, but democrasy has little to do with the science.

[eclipsed154M]

I cann't say Russia is a generation behind, but Russia has it harder to compete with the West than it was in the 60's.

Actually, Russia was at its top in the end of 80's. Russia got a MiG-31 interceptor, Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters, Su-39 bomber and all new weapons. American aircraft became a step below new Russian fighters. We have to remember that.

Today we have a different situation, but well, lets see. Russia has a potention to improve and a history to be prade off.

[Suyamu]

The biggest problems for Russian aviation industry are yet to come - the brain drain and lack of funding during the 90ies will show delayed - right now even the Pak-Fa is probably a continuation of a Soviet project.

[eclipsed154M]

No, PAK FA project was started in 1999. Offcourse there was used some soviet experience, but most of technologies have changed. The problem you named can be observated today (not tommorow) - that's why we are talking about it.

[Suyamu]

The Pak-Fa project was revealed 1999 - it was started earlier 100% - I remember when India was supposed to partake in the project they were unhappy about the fact that they had no saying in it since most development work was already finished by Sukhoi bureau long time ago.

The problem can be observed today but I think it will be really felt only once Soviet know-how is all used up...

[GhostOfPaley]

Who cares? The F-22 was a continuation of Soviet-era American plans. Does that make it any worse of an aircraft?

[Suyamu]

no of course not - I'm expecting the Pak-Fa to be great too - I just worry about the future - the lack of funding and bad general conditions of almost a decade will be felt sooner or later - also all of old soviet engineers and scientists who for now can contribute to R&D as well as educating the next generations will die sooner or later.

[grantourismo0109]

ya but cost for f22 is way too high

probably not really ideal for anti terror warfare f18e or f15e will be enough

[theredraven]

But by the time that shows, Russia will be able to construct things like the SU-35 in large numbers and the aircraft is so good they won't have to worry about upgrading it for a long time unless fighter tactics change in such an unforseeable way as to render it obsolete.

Same thing for the US with the F-22.

[Helllboz]

prade might be, but surelly nothing to be proud of :) in means of peoples basic rights and democracy...

[Sierra688]

The Soviets did better with aircraft development in the 1960s, but at present, Russia is a generation behind.

[bumdrips]

I saw two MIG 29's splat into each other at Fairford, which was nice !

[phadil]

MIG-23 and MIG-25 were the first aircraft in the world to use a pre-recorded female voice for in-cockpit warning system. It was intended to differentiate between ground communication (usually male) and messages from internal system. soon, the west and the rest of the world follow suit.

[debilinc]

on discovery, one us army pilot said, that the voice of woman was acting calm to the pilot when in trouble

[snowboredsnj]

@phadil .... that is the extent of their innovation? Or was that just one of the more interesting tid bits of info u came across?

[phadil]

@snowboredsnj Just some nice info i came across.

[BitnikGr]

@phadil There is another explanation to why female voice was chosen for that role.

Psychologically a soldier receives another man's voice as an order. Pilots work under huge stress and giving them orders would make stress even bigger making them to decide to follow the order or to disobey it. It is a conflict in pilot's mind who has higher authority. However, a female's voice is received by pilot's brain as a notice and as a suggestion. Final decision is his and pilot's stress is reduced.

[TheJAG1990]

its obvious that russian and US technology is very different, if you compare MIGS and US fighters you can tell, the russian aircraft are much more basic and simple, a mig can suck a rock into the intake on an airfield and survive, a US plane sucks a bird into the engine and everything goes to shit. our stuff is way more technologically advanced, whereas Soviet aircraft were much more robust and simple

[Mechanoid40]

Su-27 have status of best combat plane of XX century & #1 export combat plane

[TheJAG1990]

I didnt say russian aircraft sucked ;) but an F-15 can see and shoot down an SU27 from a long ways away. not that it matters since russia doesnt really maintain its armed forces very well

[OpelGTC]

A MiG-31 can fire a missile against an F-15 from 250km,until the F-15 is hit,the MiG is landing safely at the home-airbase.

[phadil]

Not really. in terms of radar power, F-15 has a slight advantage in their AESA. but the AMRAAM C barely able to reach even half of the range the F-15 can detect it's target. SU-27 can carry RVV-AE with better range and better speed. Plus, the new NIIP N011 Bars offer almost the same advantage that AESA have.

[spritz0]

Ever see the video of the Mig-29 at the Paris Air Show that sucked in a bird??

[PastorWinthrop]

birds are this gay animal. I not think.. america.. nor russia. to like birds. I don't like birds.

stupid animals.

[phadil]

@TheJAG1990 Not really. Russian engines are known to be very vulnerable to foreign object damage.

[cr9527]

funny how they praise soviets crafts even after saying they heavily relied on duplicating american designs lol.

[KataPrime]

There shouldn't be anything wrong with basing your design on something someone else came up with. The Soviets didn't start mass producing American planes, did they ? The looked at a good design, admitted it was indeed good, humbled themselves, used said design to better their air forces and for that, they deserve praise. People are always building on what came before and that's how civilisation advances.

[KataPrime]

The "Soviets"...sorry for the typo

[KataPrime]

The "Soviets looked..." is what i meant to write. Argh ! I'm full of typos tonight, lol

[cr9527]

im not saying anything wrong with it, its just funny how he praises the soviets for a copied copy of an american plane =P

[zoomotorpool]

The thing that he praised is the advancement, not just simply copy and build, the thing that Japan did in the past and PRC in the days that has just passed. Now they are "copying and improving."

[cr9527]

Japan, maybe

China... I havent seen something they've came up with that improved beyond that of the US

[Nephilim145]

we got our stealth technology from calculations russians did on how radio waves reflect off a given surface. The Marines based their amphibious warfare tactics off the british invasion of turkey in WW1. The Springfield rifle was damn near a direct copy of the German Mauser. Everybody got their jet fighter idea from the germans/british. Everybody copies everybody it just depends on how well u do it.

[cr9527]

granted we copied a few things too, but who made it first? who did all that most successfully?

[Nephilim145]

yes we may have done it more successfuly but u have to also understand that before WW2 Russia was still in the feudalistic era. Stalin comes to power and Russia goes from the Feudal era to the industrial and space age in a matter of 30 or so years. So I mean they missed some essential steps aling the way. Yes the west may have done it better we had a substantial lead on them given the circumstances.

[actisac]

mig-23 is the oldest aircraft of the future

[paulyfromdawley]

love wings of the red star :)