Swing Wings: Yea or Neah?

"breyfogle"

The swing wing mechanism adds ALOT of weight, the smaller the airframe the
larger the percentage weight gain. On both F14s and F111s the tradeoff to
optimum performance was considered acceptable in order to acheive both good
high speed performance (usually requiring a small wing) and good low speed
landing performance (large wing).

I'd think that low-level high-speed performance was also an
important design consideration. Or, at least, it was found
useful for the low-level penetration missions that became the
primary tasks of F-111 and B-1B during the cold war.

MiG-23 is an interesting case. It's a relatively light
fighter with swing wings. Any comments on why MiG chose
such a design? Hardly just for STOL, although the Soviets
valued rough&short strip ability much more than the US
(MiG-29 perhaps as a prime exampole). Btw, 23 is very
fast on the deck, fastest of them all, I think.

I'd suspect that the design considerations behind MiG-23/27
could have been rather similar to those of the somewhat
heavier interceptor/strike Tornado.

M *@*.* wrote in message ...
"breyfogle"

MiG-23 is an interesting case. It's a relatively light
fighter with swing wings. Any comments on why MiG chose
such a design? Hardly just for STOL, although the Soviets
valued rough&short strip ability much more than the US
(MiG-29 perhaps as a prime exampole). Btw, 23 is very
fast on the deck, fastest of them all, I think.

Fast AND agile. Syrian 23M and ML models were better to fo fight or chase
with F-16 at the deck. Medium sweep gave good 16 degrees/sec sustained (ML
excellent 18 degrees, MLD has a lower medium sweep and can go to 19 with
less buffeting) turn rate with missiles onboard- remember R-23/24 are HUGE
missiles, and R-60 M(?) are carried in quartet on ML! If it turned against
them, they would sweep back the wings, increase wing loading and went to a
low-level smooth high-speed ride, while Israeli pilots (F-16A, F-15A) were
banging their helmets on canopies due to gusts of Golan. MiG-23 has no
ailerons, it uses wing spoilers and stabilators for roll that is quite
snappy-just like one of Tornado.

I'd suspect that the design considerations behind MiG-23/27
could have been rather similar to those of the somewhat
heavier interceptor/strike Tornado.

Well, Tornado -looks- heavier, but it actually of the simmilar size. It has
higher wing loading and less powerful engine(s), especially when compared to
MiG-23 MLD with Tumanskii R-35 engine (modified, lightened,
dorabu'tanyj-"reworked"). Tornado has also quite poor T/W ratio for a
dogfigter-remember picture of Tornado escorting Tu-95 Bear at altitude with
wings swept forward and one burner lit!

MiG-23ML is a good fighter. It has just been piloted by poor airmen. It can
also takeoff and land with full sweep and is used in Russian "Aggressor"
squadron (MLA/MLD, the first one being interceptor) simulating various US
adversaries like Kfir C1 with clipped canards (US "F-21") had emulated
MiG-23S (export version, MiG-21 avionics). MLD at medium sweep sometimes
emulates F-15 in dogfigts, having simmilar horizontal performance (cut
strakes and reduced sweep did the trick)! MiG-29U emulates F-16A.


--

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

Nele VII wrote:
Fast AND agile. Syrian 23M and ML models were better to fo fight or chase
with F-16 at the deck. Medium sweep gave good 16 degrees/sec sustained (ML
excellent 18 degrees, MLD has a lower medium sweep and can go to 19 with
less buffeting) turn rate with missiles onboard- remember R-23/24 are HUGE
missiles, and R-60 M(?) are carried in quartet on ML! If it turned against
them, they would sweep back the wings, increase wing loading and went to a
low-level smooth high-speed ride, while Israeli pilots (F-16A, F-15A) were
banging their helmets on canopies due to gusts of Golan. MiG-23 has no
ailerons, it uses wing spoilers and stabilators for roll that is quite
snappy-just like one of Tornado.

There were drawbacks to the Flogger, though. Or at least so we
were briefed. I personally never turned 'n burned against one, but
the guys who did said it was so. The wing sweep mechanism on
the MiG-23 was limited to only 2.5G, at which piit it locked up.
If you put the press on a Flogger, you could drive him out of his
optimum wing angle very quickly. If he was never able to unload
to 2.5G or less, he could not change his wing angle and you had
your kill.

Also, you mention HUGE missiles... let's just imagine the bleed
rate if you start an angles fight carrying all that drag.

Due credit to Ed, a lot of guys would not bother to slow down for
the angles fight anyway.


Jeff

Jeff Crowell wrote in message ...
Nele VII wrote:
Fast AND agile. Syrian 23M and ML models were better to fo fight or chase
with F-16 at the deck. Medium sweep gave good 16 degrees/sec sustained
(ML
excellent 18 degrees, MLD has a lower medium sweep and can go to 19 with
less buffeting) turn rate with missiles onboard- remember R-23/24 are
HUGE
missiles, and R-60 M(?) are carried in quartet on ML! If it turned
against
them, they would sweep back the wings, increase wing loading and went to
a
low-level smooth high-speed ride, while Israeli pilots (F-16A, F-15A)
were
banging their helmets on canopies due to gusts of Golan. MiG-23 has no
ailerons, it uses wing spoilers and stabilators for roll that is quite
snappy-just like one of Tornado.

There were drawbacks to the Flogger, though. Or at least so we
were briefed. I personally never turned 'n burned against one, but
the guys who did said it was so. The wing sweep mechanism on
the MiG-23 was limited to only 2.5G, at which piit it locked up.
If you put the press on a Flogger, you could drive him out of his
optimum wing angle very quickly. If he was never able to unload
to 2.5G or less, he could not change his wing angle and you had
your kill.

Also, you mention HUGE missiles... let's just imagine the bleed
rate if you start an angles fight carrying all that drag.

Due credit to Ed, a lot of guys would not bother to slow down for
the angles fight anyway.


Jeff


Hm. I am not a pilot, but I know this-there's no aircraft without the
drawback. You can't roll F-15 a couple 360'es w/out some loading, or one
will be "punished" with inertia-roll coupling (interestingly, MiG-21 shares
the same "drawback", but not to the same amount). You MUST NOT roll an F-4
with it (more or less). You can't slow down the f-111 with full wing sweep
without loosing it... shall I go on? It is all up to the driver. If You have
a fruitcake in the cockpit, it does not matter what he/she flies!

Honestly, I thought that there's much lower g limit on '23 sweep change; I
also don't know how fast it can change the wingsweep (MLD migh be better
than M/MF/ML?).

My bottom line is that MiG-23 is not a bad airplane, but was prone to be
piloted by bad pilots...

--

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA