GoPro MiG-31s

[+MigBuster]

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3oyS2RZg6Y 

[Snailman]

 When they will release this game? Graphics are awesome)))

 

 

Edit.. Nah.. Stary's clouds are better :D

Edited December 6, 2013 by Snailman

[Nesher]

nice.. but lacks in action IMHO.. ^_^

[MAKO69]

The MIG-31 is a big beast in the world of stealth.

[Vampyre]

The MIG-31 is a big beast in the world of stealth.

 Well, in its defense, it is a dedicated interceptor and most large aircraft (bombers, transports, et cetera) it is intended to intercept are not stealthy at all. Of course, it does have a far better chance of detecting stealth aircraft than other interceptors due to it's very large and powerful radar so that is a plus for the platform as well.

[+streakeagle]

MiG-25s and MiG-31s look way cool and distinctly Russian no matter how well they do/don't perform in combat 

[MAKO69]

They still are MIGs and MIGs are meant to be pounded.

[+SayethWhaaaa]

Some pure Russian muscle right there. Comparing this to most contemporary fighters today is like comparing some 1970s V-8 muscle to a wimpy hatchback.

[+JediMaster]

Yeah, the Foxes weren't worried about bomber radars seeing them. They were up there as missile carriers to take out incoming bombers as far away from home as they could manage.

 

They were never designed to go after fighters, and didn't want to...they were bomber hunters! Aside from the 25RB, of course, which likewise wanted to avoid fighters.

[Snailman]

Yeah, the Foxes weren't worried about bomber radars seeing them. They were up there as missile carriers to take out incoming bombers as far away from home as they could manage.

 

They were never designed to go after fighters, and didn't want to...they were bomber hunters! Aside from the 25RB, of course, which likewise wanted to avoid fighters.

 

Yep... they are defensive fighters with long range high speed and altitude. Add to that they can carry the latest missiles. Cooperating with air defence network and satellites.

 

and I think the stealth technology while useful, it is much overrated. Radar is just one method of detection.. and is not necessary to use the on board radar on the defensive

[+JediMaster]

The problem is people think of stealth the wrong way.

 

Stealth does not mean "invisible and undetected, and once you are it's useless." It means being harder to detect. Once you are, you're hard to track. Once you are, you're harder to engage. Once you are, you're harder to defeat.

 

If all those add up to you being able to destroy your adversary before he can destroy you, it doesn't matter when he saw you, it doesn't matter how he saw you, because he's gone and you're still there.

 

No one has ever argued against ECM, saying it's not useful. Stealth is no more than passive ECM, passive as in "no work required" as opposed to chaff which still requires being ejected even if it uses no power. To rely on it solely is just as foolhardy as flying blindly into the face of the enemy and assuming your ECM will protect you.

 

Of course, most people don't know about that because while stealth isn't classified, many of the other technologies that 5th gen aircraft use are. So all they see is "stealth = high price for no more ability"...but that's wrong.

[Snailman]

Thanks for the accurate answer!! Yes I used to say similarly. In early times planes were not even painted... camouflage paint is also a similar thing.

Also there is a difference between full-stealth and a "reduced detection". Stealth fighter and stealthy fighter )))

 

Btw, why the F-117 was scrapped? (    Hell it was not even close to look like an aircraft, but still...

 

(The engineers said to the soviet scientist Petr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev, who invented stealth theory: - It is good and useful.. but such aircraft cannot fly... )

[MAKO69]

Thanks for the accurate answer!! Yes I used to say similarly. In early times planes were not even painted... camouflage paint is also a similar thing.

Also there is a difference between full-stealth and a "reduced detection". Stealth fighter and stealthy fighter )))

 

Btw, why the F-117 was scrapped? (    Hell it was not even close to look like an aircraft, but still...

 

(The engineers said to the soviet scientist Petr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev, who invented stealth theory: - It is good and useful.. but such aircraft cannot fly... )

The F-117 was 1st gen stealth that was built back in the late 1970's and early 80's using new construction materials and methods. The F-117 made it to frontline service in 1983 and retired in 2008. There maybe some airframes at AMARC not sure, maybe someone else could answer that. Its war load sucks compared to the B-2 which came online afterward in 1997 and proved the F-117 obsolete the day it entered frontline service. Not to mention the maintenance involved with the 1st gen stealth plane was a major pain in the kock. Defense analysts 45 hrs of maintenance per 1 hour of flight for 2 bombs , when the B-2 is about 100-120hrs with a bomb load of 16-80. The F-35 was also suppose to be online or closer to being online when the F-117 was retired. Out of the 60 or so built they went through 2 wars and several other military actions. Common sense when you use your war machines during a time of war or conflicts the lifespan of such machine becomes considerably shorter. Example if not for the Vietnam war the F-8 Crusader was slated for a major upgrade that never happened due to airframes being timed or trapped out, and the F-105 was to serve into the mid 1990's with upgrades. Hope this answers your question why the plane was "scrapped", or retired to AMARC.

[+MigBuster]

Operationally many reasons to ditch them - Aviationintel.com had a video of an F-117A flying over Nellis in 2010 - so although not conclusive they could have kept a few around for testing.

 

 

Like any technology Stealth coating, material and shaping is developing and evolving as time goes on - its certainly not sitting there waiting for radars to catch up.

 

 

 

 

The engineers said to the soviet scientist Petr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev, who invented stealth theory: - It is good and useful.. but such aircraft cannot fly...

 

They were right at the time perhaps - the F-117A certainly wouldn't fly to well without Fly By Wire ( it's unstable in all 3 axis) - same goes for the B-2/ F-35/ F-22

Edited December 12, 2013 by MigBuster

[Snailman]

Thanks for the answers guys... It is completely understandable. Its a very old design actually, I still remember when I was only in high-school and it was already flying wonder machine.

Why I asked about scrapping because I heard that all airframes were destroyed... Even though my genre are eastern planes but I was upset to hear about such barbaric act(( 

 

About the cover of the plane, I have a piece (about the size of a cellphone) from the F-117 shot down in Serbia ... it is like a small piece of a black briefcase, fiber material similar to the stuff they build boats from. I know - because we had crashes with boats - that this material is very hard if not impossible to repair if crack and breaks happen. Even worse with a plane as a boat has to withstand less g-force... worst case some water comes in))

[+MigBuster]

About the cover of the plane, I have a piece (about the size of a cellphone) from the F-117 shot down in Serbia ... it is like a small piece of a black briefcase, fiber material similar to the stuff they build boats from. I know - because we had crashes with boats - that this material is very hard if not impossible to repair if crack and breaks happen. Even worse with a plane as a boat has to withstand less g-force... worst case some water comes in))

 

Interesting - how did you come about that?

[MAKO69]

Thanks for the answers guys... It is completely understandable. Its a very old design actually, I still remember when I was only in high-school and it was already flying wonder machine.

Why I asked about scrapping because I heard that all airframes were destroyed... Even though my genre are eastern planes but I was upset to hear about such barbaric act(( 

 

About the cover of the plane, I have a piece (about the size of a cellphone) from the F-117 shot down in Serbia ... it is like a small piece of a black briefcase, fiber material similar to the stuff they build boats from. I know - because we had crashes with boats - that this material is very hard if not impossible to repair if crack and breaks happen. Even worse with a plane as a boat has to withstand less g-force... worst case some water comes in))

Be careful handling that stuff I hear it can cause men to grow breasts. Who's to say you weren't duped into buying small piece of a black briefcase.

[Snailman]

Be careful handling that stuff I hear it can cause men to grow breasts. Who's to say you weren't duped into buying small piece of a black briefcase.

 

Because I have seen the original wreck too, in Serbia. It was put into museum, with a text "We are so sorry, we didn't know it was invisible". There was the celebration on the anniversary, even talked with the officer Zoltan Dani (hungarian by nationality) who commanded the missile battery.

 

Ironically enough, after the action he did not know what will happen next, a court martial or a decoration... His methods he developed against the stealth attackers were ignored and not authorized by his superiors. UNTIL the successful action... He was promoted to colonel, then put aside into administration.. then quickly forced to retire. Now he has a bakery in his village.

 

 

PS I have no prob with breast size, although I have problem finding a girl with bigger size

Edited December 12, 2013 by Snailman

[+JediMaster]

Yeah, early RAM was very much based on fiberglass with metal fibers to help disperse the EM energy that painted it. So like all fiberglass, you have to be careful around it so as not to breathe small bits in.

 

The F-117s major issue was the doors didn't have good seals, they used tape. So every time a panel was opened for maintenance there was a lengthy process of retaping all the door seals prior to a mission.

 

As for the timing of its retirement, it seemed to coincide roughly with the F-22's entry into service. Although it's not done it operationally yet, it CAN carry a small bomb load and do roughly the same mission the F-117 could. In practice, it won't, as mentioned the B-2 is better at that right now.

[Lexx_Luthor]

Mako::

 

...and the F-105 was to serve into the mid 1990's with upgrades.

 

Very interesting. I had no idea. I guess it would have worked well as a common man's F-111.

[Lexx_Luthor]

Another one I didn't know, just found this...

 

Beryl Erickson::

 

Also FICON was to be an improved capability for F-84F weapon delivery, though that never happened.

 

~ http://50.137.56.231/b-58/cws_erickson.cfm