Aviation Pictures: How expensive can a fifth generation thread be?

[glitterboy2098]

given that soviet air doctrine downplayed dogfighting in favor of ground control guided interception, i suspect that the MiG-25 would have been murder on most bombers, and would have been hard for western fighters to counter effectively if it avoided being sucked into a dogfight. with its speed if the initial exchange of missiles didn't take out the enemy, the MiG's would probably just put pedal to the metal to withdraw and come around for another pass once they were in safer airspace.

[Garrand]

I think Western fighters wouldn't meet it too often. Yes, a big threat to bombers, though I suspect the same thing could have been done on a less ambitious platform in the end.

Damon.

[Kidd]

Wasn't the Mig-25's speed and range more for patrolling the very, very large airspace?

[Colt Ward]

Perhaps, but when the balloon goes up it allows them to be vectored by the STRAVKA (or whatever the regional airspace commands were called) to intercept targets, letting them quickly go from place to place as well as reload & get back to damaging the bomber streams.

Post WWII jet fighter & bomber doctrines are interesting b/c the senior officers made their careers with props and 'learned' the lessons of the WWII air campaigns.

[Liam's Ghost]

Amusingly topical youtube video on the MiG-25 released today

[Daryk]

Liam: interesting, but that particular channel seems suspect to me (and not just based on the production quality and newness).  At the very least (and within the scope of Rule 4), I can say they certainly didn't read Roger Hesketh's book about Operation FORTITUDE (one of their other videos).  It's a great book, and worth the slog it can be to read.

[Liam's Ghost]

Liam: interesting, but that particular channel seems suspect to me (and not just based on the production quality and newness).  At the very least (and within the scope of Rule 4), I can say they certainly didn't read Roger Hesketh's book about Operation FORTITUDE (one of their other videos).  It's a great book, and worth the slog it can be to read.

Honestly, the channel does get a bit iffy at times, which was actually some of the appeal at first. Goofy channels that go for a spooky conspiratorial feel are entertaining for me. I also used to like to read my Grandmother's old collection of UFO magazines for the same reason.

[worktroll]

Fun clip - seeing the plane deserted at Morohino (sp?) was soo sad.

But the frequent use of incorrect plane images - "Japanese airforce scrambled two Phantoms", while showing two F-111, did jar.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Murphy's Dice...that thing probably has only two throttle settings: "Landing" and "Hold My Beer". :o

Challenge accepted.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

That looks like something from Outlaw Star.

[truetanker]

More like this really.

TT

[Bren]

Challenge accepted.

Ahh so that seems to be where the 'Star Stiletto' came from ...

[chanman]

Well, the A-5 was a carrier-based, long-range, supersonic nuclear bomber, not a fighter. A definite case of "Chancellor, we are for the big!".

And while the A-5 and Mig-25 were rough contemporaries (Vigilante '58, Foxbat '64), it's more about covergent evolution - having a highish-mach airframe dictates a pointy nose, and the top-forward intakes with intake ramps are features of many other such airplanes, from the F-15 to Concorde and the Tu-22. Heck, the Valkyrie has them, but on their sides!

Shoulder-mounted wings allowed for ordnance or fuel to be carried under the wings - the Vigilante originally carried a droptank under each wing, while the Foxbat mounted four of those telephone-pole Acrids. Also allows keeping the landing gear shorter, unlike the Hustler.

Now the Vigilante was operational before the Foxbat took first flight, but the Foxbat was the child of a long evolutionary process starting with the Ye-150 and Ye-152 (think Mig-21 on ALL THE STEROIDS), and the Ye-155 (direct ancestor of the Foxbat) had things like wingtip fuel tanks and canards, which the A-5 never had. Plus IMHO the Foxbat is a beefy, brutal design built around those massive and tempermental Tumansky engines, while the Vigilante was a long, lean design based around the weapons "bay" located between the pair of J-79s.

But then, like Buran, knowing something can be done one way does concentrate the mind, without the need for detailed espionage.

And to round off this adventure for a plane born around the same time as myself, I give you the NR-349 - a Vigilante upgraded to three J-79s, and meant to carry 6 Phoenix missiles as a dash interceptor, replacing the cancelled XF-108 Rapier (for which the Phoenixes were originally developed. The Tomcat just got the radar crammed in  & the missiles slung). Note the over-wing intakes feeding the 3rd engine. I can't help but wonder if the NR-349 was meant to emulate the Foxbat ;)

Just how much asbestos and cooling would it require to keep the middle J79 from overheating and melting out the bottom of the airframe? ???

[Colt Ward]

You know, I thought they were sort of crazy to ride a rocket fighter up . . . but THIS dude should KNOW how unstable the thing is and is still flying it?

Then again, that would be a light your pants on fire thrill ride (and yeah, that rocket might literally light your pants on fire).

[Luciora]

At least it wasn't the Viper.

https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/bachem-ba-349-b-1-natter-viper

[Ruger]

Ahh so that seems to be where the 'Star Stiletto' came from ...

Loved that thing. Had the toy and the original comics it was in. Still love that one comic which was a massive combat between virtually every type of aerial unit both GIJoe and Cobra has in their arsenals at the time.

Ruger

[Kidd]

Challenge accepted.

Reminds me of the Swordfish II from Cowboy Bebop, minus wings and oversized chin gun

or vaguely like a Colonial Viper

[Fat Guy]

You know, I thought they were sort of crazy to ride a rocket fighter up . . . but THIS dude should KNOW how unstable the thing is and is still flying it?

Then again, that would be a light your pants on fire thrill ride (and yeah, that rocket might literally light your pants on fire).

That's an unpowered glider replica constructed in the nineties.

[Sabelkatten]

From what I could find it also has quite nice flying characteristics.

[Ursus Maior]

Wasn't the Mig-25's speed and range more for patrolling the very, very large airspace?

Actually the combat radius of a MiG-25 wasn't that big, just shy of 300 km. The total range (not ferry range, though) on internal fuel was around 1,860 km or 1,000 nmi.

[I am Belch II]

Soviet Fighters were very fuel hungry. Big and thirsty for what the fighters were, and most of them didn't have in flight refueling, so that really limited their patrol range.

[grimlock1]

A-5 Vigilante. Poops nukes.

At least until the nuclear turd became a nuclear dingleberry...

[HobbesHurlbut]

You know, I thought they were sort of crazy to ride a rocket fighter up . . . but THIS dude should KNOW how unstable the thing is and is still flying it?

Then again, that would be a light your pants on fire thrill ride (and yeah, that rocket might literally light your pants on fire).

Well, the flight design was tested as a glider and a propeller driven prototype.

[Fat Guy]

One of the five Me 262 Project flyable replicas:

[HobbesHurlbut]

Challenge accepted.

Wait wait, that concept is supposed to be built around the freaking A-10's CANNON?!  :o

[Colt Ward]

To . . . literally make a flying cannon?

[HobbesHurlbut]

To . . . literally make a flying cannon?

a *fighter* built around it. THat concept echo F-16 Falcon in many of its elements.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Wait wait, that concept is supposed to be built around the freaking A-10's CANNON?!  :o

Yup.  Frankly that's how you have to build such a thing.

Here's the scary part - with that nose, cockpit setback, and the sheer lack of lift it has in the design...

LAND IT.

[grimlock1]

Yup.  Frankly that's how you have to build such a thing.

Here's the scary part - with that nose, cockpit setback, and the sheer lack of lift it has in the design...

LAND IT.

Well the good news is that the center of pressure is certainly aft of the center of mass :).  An F-16 XL wing would certainly help with the lift issues, but that raydome looks like they are trying to maintain the F-16's air to air capability.

As to the cockpit setback, I'm not saying it would be easy, but when you stack it against landing a commercial jet where you are 3 stories up or some of the notorious planes like the U2 or SR-71, it should be possible to learn.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Yeah, but how screaming fast do you have to come in on approach?  The stall speed on that can NOT be comfortably low...