Iran's fighter (split)

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-11 02:35pm

Vympel wrote:It's with some Russian help.

Compare to the MiG I-2000 concept:

CG concept art

Ugliest. MiG. Ever.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-06-11 03:05pm

Howedar wrote:Ugliest. MiG. Ever.

Good. Unlike the beautiful Su-27, our pilots won't feel sad after removing this eye sore from the skies.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-11 06:31pm

Vympel wrote: Why didn't they use their own IR driving aids?

I think they where, but the illumination was coming from rows of external lights. Active IR systems do not do well in poor weather unless you can pump out a huge amount of power.

It's been done before - in South Africa -, although they built the Cheetah D off an old Lavi with much Israeli assistance and the benefit of reverse-engineered French technology.

The Cheetah is based off the Mirage III, the supposed Lavi connection is groundless, the timeframes don't mesh very well and the designs have little in common.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-06-11 06:54pm

Excuse me, I meant K'fir.

The Cheetah is an upgrade based on the Mirage III chasis but with significant signs of evolution from the K'fir.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-11 07:07pm

Axis Kast wrote:Excuse me, I meant K'fir.

The Cheetah is an upgrade based on the Mirage III chasis but with significant signs of evolution from the K'fir.

Kind of huge difference between the two

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-11 08:15pm

You mean one of them exists?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-11 08:42pm

Howedar wrote:You mean one of them exists?

Bah, several prototypes of Lavi got built, though they flew a total of less then 100 hours. K'fir course made it into production and even got an export order from Ecuador...

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-06-12 10:45am

Axis Kast wrote:
It's been done before - in South Africa -, although they built the Cheetah D off an old Lavi with much Israeli assistance and the benefit of reverse-engineered French technology.

An old Lavi? I think you mean either Mirage or the Israeli Kfir version. The Lavi was a new fighter that is just a tech demonstrator now- I'm pretty sure it post dates the Cheetah.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-06-12 10:47am

phongn wrote: IIRC, they also only had AIM-7s on the rails, which sucked anyways

By that time AIM-7 was a respectable missile, but I doubt AIM-120 would've been any better for the job of catching FOXBAT.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-06-12 03:31pm

Vympel wrote:
phongn wrote: IIRC, they also only had AIM-7s on the rails, which sucked anyways
By that time AIM-7 was a respectable missile, but I doubt AIM-120 would've been any better for the job of catching FOXBAT.

Years ago I read in one of Clancy's nonfiction books (no idea as to it's accuracy, though) that even in ODS the probability of launch was only 0.33, nevermind pK. Sea Sparrow was a lot more reliable, though, from what I hear.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-12 03:40pm

phongn wrote: Years ago I read in one of Clancy's nonfiction books (no idea as to it's accuracy, though) that even in ODS the probability of launch was only 0.33, nevermind pK. Sea Sparrow was a lot more reliable, though, from what I hear.

Sea Sparrow is more reliable and accurate because its target illuminator isn't moving at 500 knots and life inside of a box launcher is easier then being flown around thousands of miles under a jet fighter.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-06-12 08:01pm

I know, but I didn't have any hard numbers on that.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-06-12 08:36pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Something often forgotten is that the sustained speed and range figures of the MiG-25 where real, it just happened to be a reconnaissance drone that held them. The drones began operating out of Poland at almost the exact same time the first MiG-25 units arrived.

I though they wet themselves because the Mach 3+ speed resulted in the engines totally wrecking and the pilot having the nurse to aircraft back to base. However, armed, the MiG-25P is still really damn fast. MiG-25R faster of course, because usually it'd be clean.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-12 09:02pm

Vympel wrote:
I though they wet themselves because the Mach 3+ speed resulted in the engines totally wrecking and the pilot having the nurse to aircraft back to base. However, armed, the MiG-25P is still really damn fast. MiG-25R faster of course, because usually it'd be clean.

Exceeding mach 2.8 generally did destroy the engines, when the Russians used a modified version to set several speed records the pilots had to glide home.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-12 09:09pm

Yes, that was my understanding as well. Goddamn worthless Soviet metallurgists.

(is son of metallurgist)

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-06-12 09:21pm

Howedar wrote:Yes, that was my understanding as well. Goddamn worthless Soviet metallurgists.

It's pretty hard to make an engine that can sustain that level and not be wrecked when you're using technology from pretty much the 1960s.

(is son of metallurgist)[/quote]

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-06-12 09:24pm

Vympel wrote:
It's pretty hard to make an engine that can sustain that level and not be wrecked when you're using technology from pretty much the 1960s.

(is son of metallurgist)

[/quote]

NUCLEAR RAMJETS! I WANT MY NUCLEAR RAMJETS!

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-06-12 09:27pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Vympel wrote:
It's pretty hard to make an engine that can sustain that level and not be wrecked when you're using technology from pretty much the 1960s.
NUCLEAR RAMJETS! I WANT MY NUCLEAR RAMJETS!

What about a nuclear pulse jet?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-06-12 10:37pm

Mmm, project Pluto.

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-06-13 02:43am

phongn wrote:Mmm, project Pluto.

Saw that one on the Discovery channel. The thing would fly as long as the fuel rods were good...