ptldM3
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,586
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
Okay CAPTAIN AMERICA lets start thing off:
The Mig-31, and SU-30 were by far the most advanced fighters/interceptors not the Mig-25 like you stated.
Lets look at your link:
First off transistors were available but vacuum tubes were prefered because of EMP waves. Mind you, this is the 1960's and 1970's we are talking about, in any case the vacuum tubes were replaced long, long ago.
If the rivets were not exposed to drag then there is no problem. Obviously you don't see ribets sticking out on newer Russian aircraft.
The Mig-25 had better visibility then the SR-71. It was also an interceptor which means a bubble canopy was not essential. Moreover, the Mig-31 has slighly better visibility esspecially with the intakes moved back, and lastly Russian aircraft have used bubble canopies for decaded--example SU-27.
This is a good thing.
Forbidden because the harder the engines were pushed the sooner they would need an overhaul, in any case pilots still flew past mach 2.8.
The Mig-25's cousin used the much improved D-30F6 engines. And no, modern Russian engines don not overheat.
Almost trippled that in the Mig-31, and modern Russian fighters have extreemly high combat radius', over 960 miles for the SU-30 class fighters and as much as 1200 miles for the SU-35.
It was still lighter then the SR-71, the problem of weight was addressed in the Mig-31 with the use of more aluminum and titanium.
The first part just says the elimination of the ejection seat was a rumor (good thing) and that the Mig-25s ejection seat holds a world record at being able to work at mach 2.67.
Another good thing
This is not a bad thing, that is damn high.
This is incorect, the Mig-25 set an altitude record of 121,000 feet, so it would be able to fly as high or higher then the SR-71.
Everything besides detecting targets past 1,640 feet is a good thing, the problem of not being able to detect targets past 1,640 was also solved, these days Russian aircraft can detect extreemly low flying aircraft and well as map ground targets.
It's was not a fighter, it was a highs speed, high altitude interceptor that relied on BVR (beyond visual Range) combat; moreover, it used its speed and altitude not its manuverability.
If we need maneuverability we will use Sukhois and Migs which are capable of 9+ G's.
This is why the Mig-31 used 16% titanium and 33% aluminum, so the problem, if you want to call it that, was solved.
So you see much of what was in the link was not bad. Moreover, you still have a fascination with degrading Russian aircraft by finding the smallest things to complain about. I could do the same with American aircraft but i'm more mature than you are.
Oviously now you know we don't.
Your fasination with pointing out negatives are like a bad stutter, so let me try to cure your stutter by looking at just some of posstives from the Mig-25/31.
The HUD displayed radar information, a moving map, and the radar control panel which was a first in any aircraft.
The aircraft came with the first PESA.
The aircraft came with a very advanced data link, that was able to coordinate attacks, assign and track multiple targets, give the pilots and ground control to ability to communicate and it anticipated deceptive maneuvers. It was also one of the first aircaft with data-link
It was able to reach a record 121,000 ft
And it was able to fly past mach 2.8
The Mig-31, and SU-30 were by far the most advanced fighters/interceptors not the Mig-25 like you stated.
Lets look at your link:
Transistor circuitry was not used but instead the Soviets relied on vacuum tubes for most of their electronics. The Soviets reasoned the vacuum tubes were less affected by EMP waves in the case of nuclear attack; were more resistant to temperature extremes and they were easy to replace in remote airfields where transistors may not be readily available if repairs were needed.
First off transistors were available but vacuum tubes were prefered because of EMP waves. Mind you, this is the 1960's and 1970's we are talking about, in any case the vacuum tubes were replaced long, long ago.
Welding was done by hand.
Rivet heads were exposed in areas not critical to parasitic aerodynamic drag.
If the rivets were not exposed to drag then there is no problem. Obviously you don't see ribets sticking out on newer Russian aircraft.
Pilot forward vision was highly obstructed.
The Mig-25 had better visibility then the SR-71. It was also an interceptor which means a bubble canopy was not essential. Moreover, the Mig-31 has slighly better visibility esspecially with the intakes moved back, and lastly Russian aircraft have used bubble canopies for decaded--example SU-27.
With huge Tumansky R-15D-300 engines the Mig was considered almost a rocket.
This is a good thing.
Pilots were forbidden to exceed Mach 2.5. There was a total of three engine instruments and the airspeed indicator was redlined at 2.8 Mach.
Forbidden because the harder the engines were pushed the sooner they would need an overhaul, in any case pilots still flew past mach 2.8.
Above Mach 2.8 the engines would overheat and burn up. The Americans had clocked a Mig-25 over Israel at Mach 3.2 in 1973. Upon landing in Egypt, the engines were totally destroyed. We did not understand that the engine destruction was inevitable.
The Mig-25's cousin used the much improved D-30F6 engines. And no, modern Russian engines don not overheat.
The combat radius is 186 miles.
Almost trippled that in the Mig-31, and modern Russian fighters have extreemly high combat radius', over 960 miles for the SU-30 class fighters and as much as 1200 miles for the SU-35.
The plane was so heavy at 64,200 pounds,
It was still lighter then the SR-71, the problem of weight was addressed in the Mig-31 with the use of more aluminum and titanium.
that according to early rumors Soviet designers had to eliminate a pilot ejection system. However this was disproved. Most MiG-25s used the KM-1 ejector seat. The last versions used an early variant of the famous K-36 seat. The speed record for the fastest successful ejection (Mach 2.67) is held by a KM-1 equipped MiG-25.
The first part just says the elimination of the ejection seat was a rumor (good thing) and that the Mig-25s ejection seat holds a world record at being able to work at mach 2.67.
Another good thing
Maximum operational altitude: Carrying two missiles, 78,740 feet (for maximum two minutes duration); carrying four missiles, 68,900 feet is maximum.
Maximum altitude of missiles: 88,588 feet.
This is not a bad thing, that is damn high.
Ability to intercept an SR-71: Belenko states the Mig-25 cannot intercept the SR-71 for several reasons: The SR-71 fly too high and too fast; the Mig cannot reach it or catch it. The missiles lack the velocity to overtake the SR-71 and in the event of a head on missile fire (The Golden BB), the Guidance system cannot adjust to the high closure rate of the SR-71.
This is incorect, the Mig-25 set an altitude record of 121,000 feet, so it would be able to fly as high or higher then the SR-71.
The Mig-25 has a jam proof radar but cannot distinguish targets below 1,640 feet due to ground clutter. The radar was so powerful it could burn through jamming signals by approaching bombers.
Everything besides detecting targets past 1,640 feet is a good thing, the problem of not being able to detect targets past 1,640 was also solved, these days Russian aircraft can detect extreemly low flying aircraft and well as map ground targets.
Maximum G load: With full fuel tanks 2.2 G's is max; with near empty fuel tanks, 5 G's is dangerous. The Mig-25 cannot turn inside a U.S. F-4 Phantom fighter!
It's was not a fighter, it was a highs speed, high altitude interceptor that relied on BVR (beyond visual Range) combat; moreover, it used its speed and altitude not its manuverability.
If we need maneuverability we will use Sukhois and Migs which are capable of 9+ G's.
The plane was made of steel alloy, not high temperature titanium, although strips of titanium was used in areas of high heat concentration.
This is why the Mig-31 used 16% titanium and 33% aluminum, so the problem, if you want to call it that, was solved.
So you see much of what was in the link was not bad. Moreover, you still have a fascination with degrading Russian aircraft by finding the smallest things to complain about. I could do the same with American aircraft but i'm more mature than you are.
If this is the way you build one of your most advanced planes ,
Why would I think this is not the same way Russia builds all its planes.
Oviously now you know we don't.
Your fasination with pointing out negatives are like a bad stutter, so let me try to cure your stutter by looking at just some of posstives from the Mig-25/31.
The HUD displayed radar information, a moving map, and the radar control panel which was a first in any aircraft.
The aircraft came with the first PESA.
The aircraft came with a very advanced data link, that was able to coordinate attacks, assign and track multiple targets, give the pilots and ground control to ability to communicate and it anticipated deceptive maneuvers. It was also one of the first aircaft with data-link
It was able to reach a record 121,000 ft
And it was able to fly past mach 2.8