Re:Best modern jet fighter

[Icarus]

> F-15C. Unchallenged combat record.
>
> How much combat has the SU-27/37 seen?
>
> Call me when they get some actual experience.
>
>
Just FYI 2 Su 27's from Lipetsk (a Russian "Top gun" school) flew to Langley
air force base where they competed against F-15's. If think it was in 1992.
but what was surprising for some was the fact that the Sukhoi proved to be
better in almost every aspect-there was only one test in which F-15 barely
managed to beat Su 27...Pilot skill??? I agree with those who say that it
plays important role, because it really does... Somehow, I doubt the
Americans would send rookies to compete against Russian pilots, those who
flew in these F-15's probably had lots of experience. I know that Sukhoi's
were operated by Lipetsk school instructors... Anyway, Americans always
relied on hi-tech electronics whereas Russians relied on
super-maneuvreability. Heck, even the Pentagon stated that the new
generation fighter should be capable of doing some of those maneuvres-in
this case Pugachev's cobra...Su 27 the rest of it's "family" except the IB
version are capable of doing it without trust vectoring (Su 37 can do even
more becuse of trust vect.)-I would bet that the F-35 won't be able to do it
even with trust vectoring. (And no, F-18 can't pull off a true Cobra)Why?
Most of Russian fighter classes since 80's are aerodynamicly stable (Ok,
some of them not on every axis)-they tend to rise by themselves where US
fighters tend to fall and need good FBW systems-F 22 would be almost
unflyable without one. When is a US fighter going to be able to do a
Somersault? Some will say those are only things for airshows but in dogfight
they could mean a difference... Not to mention the Su 27's EOS system which
enables him a stealthy detection without the use of radar...some will say
"So what, it covers only 15 km depending on the weather conditions". True,
yet you could detect F-117 with it. Let's face it, stealth may seem a good
idea but it's worth only in BVR fight, planes will always leave IR trails no
matter how invisible they are for radar, not to mention there are ground
systems which can detect stealth planes (they aren't based on doppler effect
as radars are). Besides, I reckon the R-27 and R-77 sound familiar to you,
both excellent in close and BVR fight (although I heard a rumor that one
R-77 missile missed a drone target and hit a civilian airplane, yet this one
is unconfirmed)...Super maneuvreability+R-27 (or some of it's
equivalents)+off boresight capability could pose a serious threat even if an
average pilot flew the plane...Btw...anyone remember that Le Bourget crash
showing K-36 efficiency, I doubt Martin Baker seats are as good as the
"Zvezda" (Ok, probably close, yet not as good)... All in all, I wouldn't be
surprised to see Su kick ass of any US fighter...Just one thing for the
end-the first air to air kill of the Gulf War is believed to be a US F-18
shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25 on 17 January 1991. Yeah, the Israeli F-15's
shot down 3 MiG-25's but MiG-25 was capable of doing damage and getting out
of there fast-at 2,8 Mach US fighters could just watch in the Iraqi case
(AIM 120's couldn't do the job)...What I was trying to say the whole time is
that Russian fighters (I'm talkin about Suhkoi's) may or may not be so
perfect, but you sure can't just underestimate them and start shouting US
Air force has the best planes and pilots in the whole wide world...it
hasn't-you all know how the excercise with India went on and I don't have to
explain what it means...

[Ragnar]

"Icarus" > wrote in message
...
> > F-15C. Unchallenged combat record.
> >
> > How much combat has the SU-27/37 seen?
> >
> > Call me when they get some actual experience.
> >
> >
> Just FYI 2 Su 27's from Lipetsk (a Russian "Top gun" school) flew to
Langley
> air force base where they competed against F-15's. If think it was in
1992.
> but what was surprising for some was the fact that the Sukhoi proved to be
> better in almost every aspect-there was only one test in which F-15 barely
> managed to beat Su 27...Pilot skill???

Yes, a nice air show demonstration. Whats the COMBAT record of the Su-27
again?

>Anyway, Americans always
> relied on hi-tech electronics whereas Russians relied on
> super-maneuvreability.

Yet the F-15 has a 120-0 kill record, mostly against Soviet airplanes.
Hmmmm. . . .

>When is a US fighter going to be able to do a
> Somersault? Some will say those are only things for airshows but in
dogfight
> they could mean a difference...

Please, detail the difference for us.

> Btw...anyone remember that Le Bourget crash
> showing K-36 efficiency, I doubt Martin Baker seats are as good as the
> "Zvezda" (Ok, probably close, yet not as good)...

Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
shot down in droves.

> Just one thing for the end-the first air to air kill of the Gulf War is
believed to >be a US F-18 shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25 on 17 January 1991.

I note it wasn't an F-15.

> Yeah, the Israeli F-15's
> shot down 3 MiG-25's but MiG-25 was capable of doing damage and getting
out
> of there fast-at 2,8 Mach

I see the F-15s shot down 3 MiG-25s. How many F-15s did the Mig-25s shoot
down? Oh, whats that? ZERO, you say. Hmmmm . . . . .

>What I was trying to say the whole time is
> that Russian fighters (I'm talkin about Suhkoi's) may or may not be so
> perfect, but you sure can't just underestimate them and start shouting US
> Air force has the best planes and pilots in the whole wide world

I never said that. I said the best modern fighter is the F-15, based on its
unchallenged combat record.

[Urban Fredriksson]

In article >, Ragnar > wrote:

>Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
>almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
>shot down in droves.

Is it? How do you then explain why US ejection seats have
become better while the aircraft have become better?

Also think about how well it didn't work to not give
pilots parachutes to prevent less then excellent
performance?
--
Urban Fredriksson http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/
There is always a yet unknown alternative.

[Ragnar]

"Urban Fredriksson" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Ragnar >
wrote:
>
> >Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
> >almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
> >shot down in droves.
>
> Is it? How do you then explain why US ejection seats have
> become better while the aircraft have become better?

Don't get sarcasm, do we?

[Icarus]

> Yes, a nice air show demonstration. Whats the COMBAT record of the Su-27
> again?

That was a dogfight simulation between Su 27 and F-15...if those had been
real missiles and not a simulated ones F-15 would have ended up in flames.

> Yet the F-15 has a 120-0 kill record, mostly against Soviet airplanes.
> Hmmmm. . . .

FYI a Yugoslavian MiG 29 shot down one F-15...so much for unchallenged
record-nothing is perfect, it all depends on pilot...In 99% of cases, Soviet
airplanes were never flown by Soviet/Russian pilots but by pilots who often
lacked proper training...Not even the Soviet instructors could make a
difference and get through to these pilots-as you probably know, Soviets
gave their planes to every country with similar regime-that doesn't mean
they were flown by proper people (and I won't even mention how poorly those
planes were taken care of)...Different cultures give different pilots-NATO
conducted research which showed that different countries had different
accident percentages-it had a lot to do with pilot skill...Norwegian pilots
are somewhat different than the US ones, same thing is for Russian/Chinese
etc...

> Please, detail the difference for us.

I'm sure you know how to use google, you'll probably find some mpeg's of
Somersault and other maneuvres yourself... If not, here is a good link to
start with:
http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAP.html

> Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
> almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
> shot down in droves.

I guess safety and human lives mean nothing to you...

> I note it wasn't an F-15.
> I see the F-15s shot down 3 MiG-25s. How many F-15s did the Mig-25s shoot
> down? Oh, whats that? ZERO, you say. Hmmmm . .

FYI-MiG 25 was primarily a Soviet version of SR 71, it isn't a
fighter...there were some versions that had been used as interceptors
however it was MiG 31 that was built for that specific role, not the MiG
25... I had chosen to compare MiG 25 and F-15 (and they actually can't be
compared-recon./fighter) only to show nothing is perfect and
invunerable...you somehow missed the point...Once again, my bet is on the Su
27 family, not the MiG's.

[Ragnar]

"Icarus" > wrote in message
...
> > Yes, a nice air show demonstration. Whats the COMBAT record of the
Su-27
> > again?
>
> That was a dogfight simulation between Su 27 and F-15...if those had been
> real missiles and not a simulated ones F-15 would have ended up in flames.

Supposition not based on actual facts. What is the Su-27s ACTUAL combat
record?

> > Yet the F-15 has a 120-0 kill record, mostly against Soviet airplanes.
> > Hmmmm. . . .
>
> FYI a Yugoslavian MiG 29 shot down one F-15..

Cite?

>In 99% of cases, Soviet
> airplanes were never flown by Soviet/Russian pilots but by pilots who
often
> lacked proper training..

Really? How did they not get proper training? They went to Soviet-designed
schools, with Soviet instructors.

>Not even the Soviet instructors could make a
> difference

You do know that this doesn't make your case. If the Soviet Instructors
aren't capable of training, how can they be any good?

> > Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that
way -
> > almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
> > shot down in droves.
>
> I guess safety and human lives mean nothing to you...\

I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.

> > I note it wasn't an F-15.
> > I see the F-15s shot down 3 MiG-25s. How many F-15s did the Mig-25s
shoot
> > down? Oh, whats that? ZERO, you say. Hmmmm . .
>
> FYI-MiG 25 was primarily a Soviet version of SR 71,

Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.

> it isn't a fighter.

Its an interceptor, which is what the F-15 was also designed to be. Recce
models of the 25 came AFTER.

[John Mullen]

> I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.

> Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.

I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.

John

[WaltBJ]

ISTR the 27 and the 29 have gone against each other several times in
the Eritrea fighting some years ago - can't remember the score. Both
types were flown by mercenary pilots so skill should be rather equal.
FWIW I rate the 'cobra' as having very little combat value - unless
one is tired of living.
Walt BJ

[Ragnar]

"John Mullen" > wrote in message
...
> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
>
> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
>
> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.

Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?

[John Mullen]

"Ragnar" > wrote in message
...
>
> "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> ...
>> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
>>
>> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
>>
>> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.
>
> Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?
>

You mean my little feelings? LOL no. I have seen plenty worse manners than
yours before.

I merely observed that you and the much-missed JT seem to share a lot of
vocabulary in common.

John

[Holger Schaefer]

Ragnar wrote:

[Mig-25]
> Its an interceptor, which is what the F-15 was also designed to be. Recce
> models of the 25 came AFTER.

Well yes, an interceptor. But designed to intercept heavy bombers and
therefore for an entirely different role than the F-15, no?

H. Schaefer

[Icarus]

> >> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.

Perhaps Ragnar should have learnt to read between the lines instead of
dwelling on a single fact...the way he manages to miss the point is far
beyond anything I've seen...Not much proper arguments from his side...guess
the John Tarver school can't teach you how to be intelligent, only short
sighted...if that's the case than Mr. Ragnar is an excellent student...

Oh...almost forgot...of over five MiG 25 variants only one is classified as
an interceptor...don't bzzz off too soon, you don't want to go off half
cocked...

[Nele VII]

Ragnar wrote in message ...

<snipped generally acurrate stuff>

>Its an interceptor, which is what the F-15 was also designed to be. Recce
>models of the 25 came AFTER.

Err... yes and no, equaly distributed. According to the Deputy of the Chief
Constructor Valentin Aleksandrovich Stepanov, official history of MiG-25
design is:

- 1959, research for a FIGHTER capable to intercept A-12;
- 1960, general design solution ;
- 1961, March 10-A.I. Mikoyan reported about -starting- of the design
prototype E-155;
- 1962, Mockup commision assembled for RECONNAISSANCE version;
- 1963, December-very first prototype brought out from the factory;
- 1964, MARCH 6-first flight of the RECONNAISSANCE prototype (E-155R-1) by
Alexandar Fedotov.
- 1964, SEPTEMBER 9-first flight of the FIGHTER prototype (E-155P-1).

Now, having in mind that there were no major -aerodynamical- changes in
MiG-25P/R, the "mockup" commision, probably, mainly had to deal with
arrangement of the nose-installed equipment while the prototype was in
construction-maybe even more for the convenience of the flight test
equipment placement in the "steel" nose of R version. Both were tested for
flight performance (needed for a fighter) and modified accordingly-the
aerodynamic/mechanical flaws were the same on the both version.

The installation of "Smerch" fighter radar was known from Tu-128 "Fiddler"
and MiG YE-151/152 prototypes and I speculate it was a "no big deal" to
build a "functional" fighter prototype (or at least with ballast and test
equipment), but when the R-60 test missilet firing begun, the thrust/exaust
and assymetrical load when that huge and hevy missile(s) was fired created
flight problems. To rectify this, automatic compensation of the tail
surfaces was added on a fighter prototype-which was probably retained on
both serial fighter and recce versions (since the simmilar compensation is
needed for a bomb dropping on RB version.

So, MiG-25 was designed to be a fighter, but a -recconnaissance- prototype
flew first!

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

[Nele VII]

Icarus wrote in message ...
>> Yes, a nice air show demonstration. Whats the COMBAT record of the Su-27
>> again?
>
>That was a dogfight simulation between Su 27 and F-15...if those had been
>real missiles and not a simulated ones F-15 would have ended up in flames.
>
>> Yet the F-15 has a 120-0 kill record, mostly against Soviet airplanes.
>> Hmmmm. . . .
>
>FYI a Yugoslavian MiG 29 shot down one F-15...so much for unchallenged
>record-nothing is perfect, it all depends on pilot...In 99% of cases,
Soviet
>airplanes were never flown by Soviet/Russian pilots but by pilots who often
>lacked proper training...Not even the Soviet instructors could make a
>difference and get through to these pilots-as you probably know, Soviets
>gave their planes to every country with similar regime-that doesn't mean
>they were flown by proper people (and I won't even mention how poorly those
>planes were taken care of)...Different cultures give different pilots-NATO
>conducted research which showed that different countries had different
>accident percentages-it had a lot to do with pilot skill...Norwegian pilots
>are somewhat different than the US ones, same thing is for Russian/Chinese
>etc...

Ikarus, nemoj da lupas! Ja sam bio aktivan na yu.forum.aeronautics godinama,
znam ljude, pratim avijaciju i nisam nikad cuo da je Yu 29-tka oborila F-15!
Ko je, pobogu, bio pilot? Kako to da niko pametan nije objavio na YFA?

Sorry to everybody, native language "rubbing" on the Yu MiG29/F-15 stuff.

FWIW, there has been-uncorfirmed-rumour-about four Ethyopian Su-27 and four
Erithreyan MiG-29 "clash", ending in three to zip (or was it 2-0?) victory
for Su-27s. Reportedly, pilots were Russian (Su-27) and Ukrainian (MiG-29)
instructors/mecenaries. Weapons used: R-27s (all missed), R-73.

>
>> Please, detail the difference for us.
>

Icarus won't provide one because there isn't any and that I wrote him in
our native language.

>I'm sure you know how to use google, you'll probably find some mpeg's of
>Somersault and other maneuvres yourself... If not, here is a good link to
>start with:
>http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAP.html
>
>> Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
>> almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
>> shot down in droves.
>
>I guess safety and human lives mean nothing to you...

Icarus, if you want to make a point then look Google yourself and you will
find that K-36DM WAS evaluated by US and it has been found that it is
absolutely superior to ACES-II. Also, there was some speculation about
possible licence-production. True or not, -We'll see that in the series
production F-22 ;-) .

>
>> I note it wasn't an F-15.
>> I see the F-15s shot down 3 MiG-25s. How many F-15s did the Mig-25s
shoot
>> down? Oh, whats that? ZERO, you say. Hmmmm . .
>
>FYI-MiG 25 was primarily a Soviet version of SR 71, it isn't a
>fighter...there were some versions that had been used as interceptors
>however it was MiG 31 that was built for that specific role, not the MiG
>25... I had chosen to compare MiG 25 and F-15 (and they actually can't be
>compared-recon./fighter) only to show nothing is perfect and
>invunerable...you somehow missed the point...Once again, my bet is on the
Su
>27 family, not the MiG's.

Icarus, there have been -rumours- about MiG-25 victory over F-15
(Syria/Israel). But your stating that MiG-25 IS NOT a fighter plane is a
pure nonsense because:

-MiG-25 is a FIGHTER but is built in a recce version as well;
-shot down an F/-18 in Sesert Storm 1 (confirmed by US sources);
-Iraqis had ACES flying MiG-25 during Iran-Iraq war-moreover, it was an
"elite" unit (accorting to Tom Cooper), shooting down everything from F-5Es
, F-4Ds to F-14As (and vice-versa, of course).

Nemoj, co'ce, da se brukas...

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

[Ragnar]

"John Mullen" > wrote in message
...
> "Ragnar" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
> >>
> >> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
> >>
> >> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.
> >
> > Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?
> >
>
> You mean my little feelings? LOL no. I have seen plenty worse manners than
> yours before.
>
> I merely observed that you and the much-missed JT seem to share a lot of
> vocabulary in common.

Except that I'm not an answer-bot like Tarver.

[Ragnar]

"Icarus" > wrote in message
...

> Oh...almost forgot...of over five MiG 25 variants only one is classified
as
> an interceptor...don't bzzz off too soon, you don't want to go off half
> cocked...

I see you failed to mention that the MiG-25 was never developed to be a
competitor of the SR-71. The first model was specifically designed to be an
interceptor. All other models were afterthoughts. And even as
afterthoughts, they were never intended nor used as competitors to the
SR-71. They didn't have the range, ceiling, speed, or sensors to compete.

Like I said before: Bzzzzzt! Wrong answer. Try again.

[Ragnar]

"Nele VII" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Ragnar wrote in message ...
>
> <snipped generally acurrate stuff>
>
> >Its an interceptor, which is what the F-15 was also designed to be.
Recce
> >models of the 25 came AFTER.
>
> Err... yes and no, equaly distributed. According to the Deputy of the
Chief
> Constructor Valentin Aleksandrovich Stepanov, official history of MiG-25
> design is:
>
> - 1959, research for a FIGHTER capable to intercept A-12;
> - 1960, general design solution ;
> - 1961, March 10-A.I. Mikoyan reported about -starting- of the design
> prototype E-155;
> - 1962, Mockup commision assembled for RECONNAISSANCE version;

Equally distributed? Your own post says different. The interceptor came
first in development.

[Icarus]

> They didn't have the range, ceiling, speed, or sensors to compete.

Well, enlight me, guess you could tell me max height and speed MiG 25 can
develop... It shouldn't pose a problem for you...

[Icarus]

> Nemoj, co'ce, da se brukas...

Ma ne mogu pustit covjeka da uporno zdvaja nad time kako je F-15 najjebeniji
avion na kugli zemaljskoj...inace, vijest da je YU 29 srusila F 15 nasao sam
na nekoj stranici, al hebi ga, ne mogu odgovarati za autenticnost-ti ces to
malo bolje znat...kod nas nisu napadali. A sto se K 36 tice znam da je vojna
stampa uvijek tvrdila kako ne postoji bolje sjedalo, tako je barem bilo pred
2 godine, ne mogu ni ja pratit svaku sitnicu... Pozdrav!

[Ragnar]

"Icarus" > wrote in message
...
> > They didn't have the range, ceiling, speed, or sensors to compete.
>
> Well, enlight me, guess you could tell me max height and speed MiG 25 can
> develop... It shouldn't pose a problem for you...

You can Google as well as I. And you made the assertion that the Mig-25 was
analagous to the SR-71. YOU prove it.

[John Mullen]

"Ragnar" > wrote in message >...
> "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Ragnar" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
>
> > >> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
> > >>
> > >> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.
> > >
> > > Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?
> > >
> >
> > You mean my little feelings? LOL no. I have seen plenty worse manners than
> > yours before.
> >
> > I merely observed that you and the much-missed JT seem to share a lot of
> > vocabulary in common.
>
> Except that I'm not an answer-bot like Tarver.

Hmm. Even that 'answer-bot' sounds like one of his phrases.

I'm afraid I will still think of you as 'son-of-Tarver' until or
unless you can come up with a more adult way of dealing with people.

:)

John

[Nele VII]

OK, al udri argumentima, brt'e... Nemo' da nagadjas... citiraj... ako treba
ucitaj svu ovu NG s pocetka godine... ako ces linkove, poslacu ti...

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

Icarus wrote in message ...
>> Nemoj, co'ce, da se brukas...
>
>Ma ne mogu pustit covjeka da uporno zdvaja nad time kako je F-15
najjebeniji
>avion na kugli zemaljskoj...inace, vijest da je YU 29 srusila F 15 nasao
sam
>na nekoj stranici, al hebi ga, ne mogu odgovarati za autenticnost-ti ces to
>malo bolje znat...kod nas nisu napadali. A sto se K 36 tice znam da je
vojna
>stampa uvijek tvrdila kako ne postoji bolje sjedalo, tako je barem bilo
pred
>2 godine, ne mogu ni ja pratit svaku sitnicu... Pozdrav!
>
>

[Ragnar]

"John Mullen" > wrote in message
om...
> "Ragnar" > wrote in message
>...
> > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > "Ragnar" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > >> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
> >
> > > >> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
> > > >>
> > > >> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.
> > > >
> > > > Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?
> > > >
> > >
> > > You mean my little feelings? LOL no. I have seen plenty worse manners
than
> > > yours before.
> > >
> > > I merely observed that you and the much-missed JT seem to share a lot
of
> > > vocabulary in common.
> >
> > Except that I'm not an answer-bot like Tarver.
>
> Hmm. Even that 'answer-bot' sounds like one of his phrases.
>
> I'm afraid I will still think of you as 'son-of-Tarver' until or
> unless you can come up with a more adult way of dealing with people.

Bite me.

[John Mullen]

"Ragnar" > wrote in message
...
>
> "John Mullen" > wrote in message
> om...
>> "Ragnar" > wrote in message
> >...
>> > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > "Ragnar" > wrote in message
>> > > ...
>> > > >
>> > > > "John Mullen" > wrote in message
>> > > > ...
>> > > >> > I guess you totally don't get sarcasm. Thanks for playing.
>> >
>> > > >> > Bzzzzz! Wrong answer. Try again.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I see you have studied at the John Tarver school of Usenet skills.
>> > > >
>> > > > Awwwwww, did his little feelings get hurt with the truth?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > You mean my little feelings? LOL no. I have seen plenty worse manners
> than
>> > > yours before.
>> > >
>> > > I merely observed that you and the much-missed JT seem to share a lot
> of
>> > > vocabulary in common.
>> >
>> > Except that I'm not an answer-bot like Tarver.
>>
>> Hmm. Even that 'answer-bot' sounds like one of his phrases.
>>
>> I'm afraid I will still think of you as 'son-of-Tarver' until or
>> unless you can come up with a more adult way of dealing with people.
>
> Bite me.
>

LOL

John

[Nele VII]

Ragnar wrote in message ...
<SNIP E-155 TIMELINE>
>Equally distributed? Your own post says different. The interceptor came
>first in development.
>
>
Ragnar, man... the thing is that the "principal solution"-that means:
general layout, engines etc was made in 1960, and was intended for a
fighter. BUT, on March 10, 1961 A.I. Mikoyan wrote a "Decision about
designing an airplane YE-155" in the BOTH versions. Note that in the West,
this would have meant that project has started in 1961.

This "official" decision and the fact that the recce prototype version was
built first is still causing a stirrup in many heads, since it is
paradoxical. It would had been like if in the West the "Archangel1-1"
(future A-12) was designed as a recce plane (as it was), but, for example,
YF-12 prototype has been built first (as it wasn't).

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

[TJ]

"Icarus" > wrote in message >...
> > Nemoj, co'ce, da se brukas...
>
> Ma ne mogu pustit covjeka da uporno zdvaja nad time kako je F-15 najjebeniji
> avion na kugli zemaljskoj...inace, vijest da je YU 29 srusila F 15 nasao sam
> na nekoj stranici, al hebi ga, ne mogu odgovarati za autenticnost-ti ces to
> malo bolje znat...kod nas nisu napadali. A sto se K 36 tice znam da je vojna
> stampa uvijek tvrdila kako ne postoji bolje sjedalo, tako je barem bilo pred
> 2 godine, ne mogu ni ja pratit svaku sitnicu... Pozdrav!

Icarus,
No Yugoslav pilot made any claim against NATO aircraft. Would you care
to tell me the serial of this F-15 that you claim was shot down.
Please don't bring to the newsgroup the picture of the "ANNUAL INSP
C/W" - it was a combat-jettisoned F-15 fuel tank from the MiG-29/F-15C
encounter on 26 March 1999. Both MiG-29s launched no missiles and fell
with their weapons loads (R-27 & R-73) in Bosnia.

TJ

[rottenberg]

"Nele VII" > wrote in message >...
> Icarus wrote in message ...
> >> Yes, a nice air show demonstration. Whats the COMBAT record of the Su-27
> >> again?
> >
> >That was a dogfight simulation between Su 27 and F-15...if those had been
> >real missiles and not a simulated ones F-15 would have ended up in flames.
> >
> >> Yet the F-15 has a 120-0 kill record, mostly against Soviet airplanes.
> >> Hmmmm. . . .
> >
> >FYI a Yugoslavian MiG 29 shot down one F-15...so much for unchallenged
> >record-nothing is perfect, it all depends on pilot...In 99% of cases,
> Soviet
> >airplanes were never flown by Soviet/Russian pilots but by pilots who often
> >lacked proper training...Not even the Soviet instructors could make a
> >difference and get through to these pilots-as you probably know, Soviets
> >gave their planes to every country with similar regime-that doesn't mean
> >they were flown by proper people (and I won't even mention how poorly those
> >planes were taken care of)...Different cultures give different pilots-NATO
> >conducted research which showed that different countries had different
> >accident percentages-it had a lot to do with pilot skill...Norwegian pilots
> >are somewhat different than the US ones, same thing is for Russian/Chinese
> >etc...
>
> Ikarus, nemoj da lupas! Ja sam bio aktivan na yu.forum.aeronautics godinama,
> znam ljude, pratim avijaciju i nisam nikad cuo da je Yu 29-tka oborila F-15!
> Ko je, pobogu, bio pilot? Kako to da niko pametan nije objavio na YFA?
>
> Sorry to everybody, native language "rubbing" on the Yu MiG29/F-15 stuff.
>
> FWIW, there has been-uncorfirmed-rumour-about four Ethyopian Su-27 and four
> Erithreyan MiG-29 "clash", ending in three to zip (or was it 2-0?) victory
> for Su-27s. Reportedly, pilots were Russian (Su-27) and Ukrainian (MiG-29)
> instructors/mecenaries. Weapons used: R-27s (all missed), R-73.
>
> >
> >> Please, detail the difference for us.
> >
>
> Icarus won't provide one because there isn't any and that I wrote him in
> our native language.
>
> >I'm sure you know how to use google, you'll probably find some mpeg's of
> >Somersault and other maneuvres yourself... If not, here is a good link to
> >start with:
> >http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAP.html
> >
> >> Yes, very interesting that the Soviets designed ejection seats that way -
> >> almost as if they assumed from the beginning that their planes would get
> >> shot down in droves.
> >
> >I guess safety and human lives mean nothing to you...
>
> Icarus, if you want to make a point then look Google yourself and you will
> find that K-36DM WAS evaluated by US and it has been found that it is
> absolutely superior to ACES-II. Also, there was some speculation about
> possible licence-production. True or not, -We'll see that in the series
> production F-22 ;-) .
>
> >
> >> I note it wasn't an F-15.
> >> I see the F-15s shot down 3 MiG-25s. How many F-15s did the Mig-25s
> shoot
> >> down? Oh, whats that? ZERO, you say. Hmmmm . .
> >
> >FYI-MiG 25 was primarily a Soviet version of SR 71, it isn't a
> >fighter...there were some versions that had been used as interceptors
> >however it was MiG 31 that was built for that specific role, not the MiG
> >25... I had chosen to compare MiG 25 and F-15 (and they actually can't be
> >compared-recon./fighter) only to show nothing is perfect and
> >invunerable...you somehow missed the point...Once again, my bet is on the
> Su
> >27 family, not the MiG's.
>
> Icarus, there have been -rumours- about MiG-25 victory over F-15
> (Syria/Israel). But your stating that MiG-25 IS NOT a fighter plane is a
> pure nonsense because:
>
> -MiG-25 is a FIGHTER but is built in a recce version as well;
> -shot down an F/-18 in Sesert Storm 1 (confirmed by US sources);
> -Iraqis had ACES flying MiG-25 during Iran-Iraq war-moreover, it was an
> "elite" unit (accorting to Tom Cooper), shooting down everything from F-5Es
> , F-4Ds to F-14As (and vice-versa, of course).
>
> Nemoj, co'ce, da se brukas...
>
> Nele
>
> NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

Can't we just agree that you can't compare different fighters based
entirely on empirical data from individual engagements? As described,
we don't know what the comparitive pilot quality was, what the rules
of engagement were, or what combat conditions were for each side. I
just finished the Cooper Iran-Iraq book, and maybe reading it over the
course of a few months I missed the part about MiG-25's being flown by
aces (though I'm sure I would have remembered even a single F-14 being
credited to one of them; also, I do remember Cooper's description of a
Foxbat being shot down by an F-5). Also, don't confuse "elite" with
pilot expertise - we're talking about an air force largely under
direct control of Saddam Hussein (Cooper raises the issue of the lack
of autonomy for fighter pilots at least in the early phases of the
war). Being "elite" could very well have a lot to do with political
connections or simple political correctness.

[Bjørnar Bolsøy]

Any records on Nato or neutral pilots who have flown both the Eagle
and the Flanker, and their comments/views?


Regards...

[rottenberg]

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" > wrote in message >...
> Any records on Nato or neutral pilots who have flown both the Eagle
> and the Flanker, and their comments/views?
>
> Regards...

I would be surprised if they provided any comments that pointed to an
over-all superiority of one of the planes. As well know, one of a
fighter pilots most crucial skills is highlighting the advantages of
whatever plane he's flying against those of an opponent. What's not
as understood is that pilots aren't supposed to be critical of their
planes beyond the extent needed to point out their weaknesses and
learn to avoid them. In Yeager's book there's a story about fighter
pilots being invited to test fly the hot new F-100. Unsurprisingly,
these guys loved every minute of it. However, none of them paid much
attention to those areas of its flight regime that had worried Yeager
- they were only looking at what made the plane so hot.
Unfortunately, in hopes of quelling fears, NA's flight-test chief took
up one of the early Huns and flew a profile directly risking the sort
of directional instability problems Yeager warned of - only to lose
his life when the plane disintegrated.