nele

Picture of "R" model (from www.airwar.ru); SPS-141 is just one variant. The text says that containers are maked in letters (types "R" for SIGNIT, "D" for day photo, "N" for night photo). "R"-SIGNIT devices Romb-4A and 4B, and AFA-39 photocamera for validation; "D"-2xAFA-39 oblique, 4XAFA-39 planar cameras, slotted(?) AFA-5 "N"-UAFA-47, 188 photo-flares, Other equipment that can be in the container: "Sirena" active jammer; Air-sampling device (nuke, gas particles...) UHF communication retranslator. Based on MiG-21PFM, other differences are two additional pylons (FT only), 340l header tank. Self-defense: 2 R-3S or 2 UB-32, bombs, etc (on two pylons). Introduced in 1965. A question: please take a look of this -21: "Sky corner" makes this as MiG-21S version ("Type 95") that was in production 1965-1968. Obvious difference is the external gunpack. Note that M and MF are Types 96 and 96F. The reason I am writing this is because I stumbled on one Polish site, where they state that MA is Polish designation for the WarPac version of MiG-21M of India , and that MA's are virtually undistinguishable from MF externally (after few overhauls, equipment was unified bar the engine). All that covered wit pictures of what looks like MF, with a gun, and some close-ups of rear-fuselage and gear-covers (those were some "rivet-counters" ) So, although I also knew MA as early 4-pylon MiG besides R... this looks like the missing link.

I have a picture of -BIS with dual R-60 launchers and FT that I took myself (Yugoslav AF, 1997). Gerald 14, how about R-25 WEP that depends of speed/altitude? That can be done with a "dummy" engine that produces AB thrust differential. Can be done. I made a rough example in Foxbat Hi-alt demonstrator mod.

Gerald14, I'm sure about this one The one of Iraqi "Fishbeds" left after embargo in Yugoslavia has a documentation that it has been built as SMT, and it got BIS spine for export (with tank removed, of course). The maintenance was the same as for MF. It has probably flown as SMT in Soviet Union for some time and then "exportized". The equipment of that aircraft is identical to the export MF, right down to R-13 engine, and some spatial adjustments in the spine area. I guess they ran out of MF-spines . After the rift with Soviet Union, Egyptians did try to arm MFs with Sparrows. It was when they had problems with F-4E's, but they opted to get F-16's instead. Considering problems of guidance, missile size and common sense, it was better solution.

For "flogger", MLD model has some APU's (for R-60). "Fishbed" has four main spine shapes; "F" style, basic series "PF" teardrop style, PF and PFM (S) "MF" style-M,SM,R,MF "BiS" style, BIS and subvariants; "SMT" humpback with fuel. I think it is impossible to name all subvariants in correct way "Odd" type include early "MA" without a gun, and its spine seems a little deeper in tail; More "odd" are some SMT's exported to Iraq, that got BIS-spine. Some earliest BIS-es had R-13 engine. Both R-13 and R-25 have WEP, but those are not quite "engine-burnout" regimes, but more speed-altitude dependent ones (like combat-plus on Kfirs J-79). Having a flat piece of land nearby is desirable when using WEP, however... MiG-21M is roughly-MF with R-11 engine from PFM, licenced by India. "Paper" max thrust is similar to R-13, but considering humidity, temperature, elevated airstrips and engine bleed for flaps, it was not particulary a good deal. Weapon refits vary from "standard" R-13 quartet, over Egyptian Sparrow/sidewinder combo, Yugoslav quad R-60MK on dual launchers with underwing tanks... Yada, yada, yada... :blush2:

I am trying to find photos of ASP-23D (MiG-23M) displaying elements, but no luck so far. I only have a few seconds of video showing it, with just fixed reflected gunsight grid on. And MiG-23UB flight manual does not help, since it has the same gunsight as MiG-21. Thing is, I am interested what elements it contains. MiG-23ML and later have "normal" HUD, but that one had to be something to see! MiG-23MF should be very close thing, but some were reworked MiG-23M, and it basically got for export at the time as MiG-23ML appeared (76-77). I speculate that some could have updated displays (like they got SOUA installation and dorsal fin tank "excluded"). Any luck with Overscan's info?

ArtuR and Crusader are right, and I was wrong-they have NO display : MiG-23M MiG-23MF MLD However, sights of M/MF are "Soviet" manner of HUD, since they are servoed analogue reflected systems (Like AWG-10 on F-4J). You can see that the sight "head" is different. Now I am reading! MiG-23M(E). Soviet designation for R-27 engined models of MS.

To Kukulino- with "on target" I meant that the HUD symbol overlaps true aircraft. MiG-23ML has only a projection of (removed) radar display onto HUD in BVR mode. M ad MF are very similar, mainly different IFF. Artur-M/MF/MS/ME all have "classical" cockpits, with CRT tubes only the radar is different (and engine in some ME/MS). That is, similar to MiG-21BIS. It is easy to mistake reflector-sight with servoed display for a HUD. I have a short video of firing Gsh-23 from "M" with classical sight clearly visible. I have instructions for the twin-seater displaying the same thing (same sight). ML/MLD/P/MLA have HUD only display. Some modes are similar to those on MiG-29-12A/B, without "Shlem" IR seeker head-slave. Wikipedia has many inaccuracies regarding ex-soviet airplanes. Check http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig23m.html and use some online-translator. That is MiG-23M page at the largest Russian airplane encyclopedia online.

ME/MS has classic display, and radar is basically like on late MiG-21 series (Sapphire-21). M/MF have Sapphire-23D and classic display (with classic, reflector sight). ML/MLD/MLA... have HUD-only display, but that is rather the reflected classic display onto HUD, with relative and not true "on target" positioning. Dunno about IR modes, I had some problems reading Russian forums from my wireless GSM card. I will type the search in cyrilic, so I shall see what will come out ;)

Nobody called Tu-28/128 a "Fighter" in Soviet Union. Their crews and crews of normal-sized air-combat airplanes called them "ships" Although their size and G-limit (around 2.5...) raise an eyebrow, it is log-range aircraft that main use was against bombers over the vast landscape, and their missiles were awesome for the day-both and size and high g-loading. Think of it as a flying SAM-site It used Smerch radar of earlier generation (as it could fit only in the Tu-28!). Excellent (and probably the largest) performer of its time. Although B-52 was its main prey, it was sucessfully used against recce&ELINT unmanned baloons of both USA and China. And that's an overkill that will probably never be matched

Sorry for jumping in, but... I have OCR'd flight manual for entire -17 series (from non-AB, non-powered AILERONS to PFU with all-powered). Quote; "The forces necessary for pulling of the plane in a steep dive with extended air brakes, grow with growth of speed of a dive. At putting the plane in a dive on the maximal speed of horizontal flight at height of 14000 m speed of the plane to height about 10000 m reaches the maximal value of 1240-1250 km/hours (narrow dial) at stick forces of 30-40 kg. Keeping that stick force enables controlling the aircraft..." "...from 1340-1350 km/hours (on a narrow dial) the plane reaches the maximal value of speed on a steep point of a dive at heights of 9000-11000 m at going into a dive from height of 14000 m. thus actual speed of the plane does not exceed 1230-1250 km/hours. In spite of the fact that stick forces of airplane reaches 30 kg, the corner and speed of its dive gradually decrease. After achievement of height of 8000 m (on altimeter) the corner of a dive of the plane decreases up to 60 and speed up to 1310 km/hours..." "...To observe of the index of speed at performance of a dive in case of input in a dive from a straight line it is not required. The plane at increase in speed of flight itself starts to pull from a dive. The efforts necessary to change the dive angle, reach size of 30-50 kg earlier, than the plane reaches as much as possible admissible speed of flight..." "268. To dive 45-50°DEG at maximal speed of horizontal flight it is necessary to make a fast push of control stick until speed reaches value that stick forces are 50kg..." That speed is 1240kph at 10,000 and 1220kph at 5,000m. "...stick force necessary to pull "g" in a dive, sharply increase with growth of speed and of 10000 m at speed of 1160-1210 km/hours (on a narrow dial) reach about 50 kg on "g"unit. It means, that change of effort from pressing 25 kg up to pulling 25 kg at end of a dive at height of 10000 m at speed of 1160-1210 km/hours (on a narrow dial) creates an overload nearby 2. With reduction of speed an overload at a conclusion from a dive reduces..." Long time ago, there was a discussion on rec.aviation.military, and Dave Sutton (MiG-17F owner) basically discredited that report, because the test-pilots were doing things WRONG. Nele

Uh, I cannot help you with Thunderjet, but MiG-9 flaps were not overly efficient. Is it possible to "install" transsonic behavior in aerodynamic model(s) of those early birds? Elevator lockups, aileron reversals, pitch-ups, pitch-downs, vibrations... any current model with that? Nele

Well, there is one more thing-that is inlet drag . You always have a difference between installed engine and engine on a testbed. Could be neglible, but exists, even in static conditions. Thrust drops with altitude, but grows with speed. The curve of both are hardly straight lines. I tweaked dry and wetmach alot for MiG-23's and experimental Foxbat, but it is not good for low speeds. The reason is you get mucho thrust in flight where there should be little-static (at the top of the loop-or while doing a "bell"). Also, AI can get stupid (or "smart") and use it for turning fight on the heel Nele

Silverbolt, you can fold the wings of SMT only using a jigsaw. Air Force has Mig-29A (29-12B). Of course, they are upgraded to meet local conditions. This is "K" with fold wings: India has ordered K's and KUB's. KUB is, unlike basic Fulcrum-B, fully capable multirole twin seater (similar to Mig-29MRCA). Here, first Indian KUB, still undelivered: Here is the cocpit: MiG-29A ¸(9-12B) compared to MiG-29KUB compared is about as F-16 Block 10 to F-16 Block 52 Nele

Some performance data, translated from airwar.ru by PROMT and fixed a little by me; >quote< On May, 7th, 1947 the modernized machine has arrived in ГК scientific research institute of the Air Forces. Leading engineer Rabkin and pilot-verifier L.M.Kuvshinov have been appointed responsible for carrying out of tests according to constructive changes. Quality standard of stability and controllability was spent at height 3000-8000 with finishing speed up to M=0.77. Heavy control of ailerons for the speed above than 600 km/h has been noted. As a result of the lead alterations the general capacity of tanks has decreased with 1,679 l up to 1,627 l. By results of tests it was recommended to establish by other planes MiG-9 the changed plug nose wheels with a greater shoulder of self-orientation equal 110 mm (with the axis of a wheel carried back). The increase in the area of keel, and also replacement of system of pressurization of tanks with system of swapping of fuel and installation starting fuelsystem with draining on a tank of forcing ways already have been introduced in a batch production. For carrying out of tests for aerobatics and durability serial fighter MiG-9… …As the most part of aerobatic manoeuvres on production tests was not checked, military verifiers had been executed 200 figures. The technics of performance of aerobatic manoeuvres as a whole was same, as at piston planes, however, handling appeared worse. Thus it was considered, that TsAGI has limited speed on flutter up to 950 km/h, and the main designer has entered restriction for serial airframes up to M0.8. Time and radius of a turn were at height of 1,000 m 30.5 sec and 655-685 m, and on 5,000m-39 cec and 970-1040m. On the conclusion of leading pilots and pilots of flight plane MiG-9 on rise after takeoff was steady and well obeyed controls. At retract undercarriage balancing did not vary. In flight lateral stability normal. During pilotage loadings on the pilot stick are large. The minimal speed made 225-230 km/h. Flight on one engine with U/C down, provided high safety of flight, is possible. Concerning arms it was marked, that in flight it is easy to aim at speed up to 550 km/h, and shooting was recommended to be conducted short bursts. Landing was simple, the plane did not drop a wing and well obeyed controls... ...Three flights on air fight with fighter Yak-15 have been taken, at heights of 5000 and 7000-8000 m. thus on turns Yak-15 came into tail MiG-9 in the end of the first Turn. In fight on ascending maneuvers MiG-9 also conceded Yak-15, carried out vertical figures faster. However at accelerating from Yak-15 or during its chase in horizontal flight and on long dive MiG-9 had advantages in greater maximal speed... ...(After installation of gas-deflectors on NR-37) Tests have shown, that installation of deflectors has a little lowered the basic flying characteristics of the plane. The maximal horizontal speeds have decreased for 9-24 km/h and have made at height of 5000 m - 854 km/h, at height of 8000 m - 832 km/h. Time of a turn at height of 5000 m was equaled 39-41 sec. Without shooting from the weapon engines worked steadily in a range from 8500 up to 9500 rev/min at heights up to 12160 m... ...According to the task the third prototype of fighter MiG-9 (No-3) in November, 1946 should be shown on the state tests equipped by external fuel tanks. However because of participation of the plane in preparation for November air parade to carry out this action by machine F-3 it was not possible. As a result with external tanks equipped the first serial copy of fighter MiG-9 101001. In April, 1947 it was necessary to test the converted plane… …ejectable external metal tanks in capacity on 260 l had the streamline form and have been placed on the ends of a wing at joint 21. The suspension bracket of tanks point-to-point also was carried out by means of a hook located in the centre of gravity of a tank, and the bombing lock MDZ-40 fixing a tank for a special ear, strengthened in its back part. Lateral efforts perceived four adjustable an emphasis. Tanks were interchangeable. An installation time at work two person 15-18 minutes Dump of tanks was carried out simultaneously… The fuel system consisted from 4 fuselage and 6 wing unprotected tanks in the general capacity 1595 л. All tanks of a soft design, except for fuselage tank No 4 which was metal. A feed of engines by kerosene was made through fuselage a tank ¹ 2. The system of connection of tanks provided the certain sequence of development of fuel with the purpose of preservation in flight of forward centering the plane... >unqote< That's 'nuff, I'm tired and hungry Nele

Regarding Anab-I have some information downloaded from Russian sources-but not on this computer. It is kinda hard to track "Anab" performance from Western sources, since it is one airframe (or "missile frame") that has been improved drastically from its beginnings-the only thing kept was basic shape. It is mainly intended against bombers. In the beginning it was only pursuit weapon (IR and SAHM), but it got all-aspect seeker(s) later. When you are building something in conservative manner (read-oversized), it is easier to pack new gear inside it later I have side-by-side comparision of versions somewhere-but at home. So, If you wish to wait for me to dig it up... Note-"Eagle" radar on Su-15TM is the same as one of MiG-25P (Foxbat-A), but repackaged and with smaller dish. Nele

Think of "Foxhound" like "Foxbat" with Tomcat armament and range R-33 missiles are, however, SARH. Newer, AH R-37 missiles are used on MiG-31BM and was intended to be the main weapon of MiG-31M prototype. However, taking into consideration MiG-31 Phased Array radar, R-33 and AiM-54A are close match. While they are externally similar, MiG-31 just kept the MiG-25 shape. It has been restructured and lightened. Turbofans gave lower consumption, but allow cruise at M2.35. It got also a big gun, 23mm 10,000rpm-capable GSh-23-6 "chainsaw". As it was mainly "captain's" plane, rarely flown by lower ranks, it is neatly holstered down aside It is mainly used a last-ditch against cruise missiles. It is about as (un)maneuvrable like MiG-25. It is heavier and unlike Foxbat, it drops the nose if pulled hard. But again, that depends of weight. The "habitat" of this beast is medium-high altitude for LDSD's-but unlike MiG-25, it does not the engine-speed limit. You can expect it at low altitudes hunting for terrain-following bombers and cruise-missiles and doing snap-ups. Nele

Here is to help You fix those 0.01 percent You are not yet satisfied with

Here are -two- versions of cheaper attack version of Flogger- MiG-23B and MiG-23BN for WOE. They use stock "MiG-27" airframe that is actually much closer to the MiG-23B/BN. They are "unified" (performance-wise) with my modification of Flogger figher and -27D/K series. The development of attack version of MiG-23 begun almost in parralel with basic fighter version, in the second half of '60es, following the requirement to build an airframe that would have high performance and to be built fast. It was basically a MiG-23S airframe with radar deleted and some purpose-built gadgeds installed (armor, navigation&bombing) Soon it was discovered that nose cone (that was made of light alloy, replacing the radome) obstruct view and that R-27 engine is too weak to handle required 3 tons of bombs. Therefore, MiG buerau adopted the nose from abandoned MiG-21Sh and then-new and still secret Lyulka Al-21 engine. Lyulka was a development of who-knows-how obtained General Electric J79-3B, the engine used in F-4B Phantom. It was rather attractive powerplant, with variable-incidence compressor with titanium blades. Since the Soviet-built version had entirely redesigned compressor, it was much more powerful and efficient then both of its unwilling "parent", J79 and R-27. The same engine was already in use in ealy versions of Su-17, and was to be the powerplant of new Su-24. The new attack version was marked MiG-23B. It was not just a fighter with a flattened nose-it had a "Fon" laser rangefinder, very good inertial navigation system with autopilot (in which entire route could be programmed) and bombing sight. It also got armor and two additional strongpoints at the rear of the fuselage (capable of 500kg each, but limited to 250 due to CG worries). Multi-bomb racks partially solved the problem of only four basic hardpoints (but made underfuselage bomb-mounting and a centerline tank very tedious job ) Also, later it received onboard SPS-141 jammer (bulges over the wing harpoints). You can find MiG-23B ini files hereMiG_23B.zip. Not built in many samples, this aircraft is the "father" of entire attack series (23BN and 27K/M/D). Due to shortage of Al-21F-3 engines, the team had to swithch to new R-29 engine (developed from R-27) used in MiG-23M. It was heavier and builkier, but was very reliable and much simpler of Al-21F. It also had higher fuel consumption, but it did not have much impact onto aircraft performance. It was also more powerful, and its installation allowed additional armour. The first engine was a fighter R-29 with simpler afterburner-designated R-29A. Later versions got R-29B engine specially modified for low-level ride (the same engine as on MiG-27). The modified aircraft got some new electronics and modified bombsight, after which letter in its designation ("N") entire aircraft got the name- MiG-23BN. It was also much easier to manufacture, because differences between figter and attack airframes were much smaller. Even variable intakes were kept, but were unpowered on later versions with R-29B engines. Ini files for MiG-23BN "Flogger-H" can be found hereMiG_23BN.zip. The type was mainly exported, and was relatively quickly supplanted with MiG-27s in Soviet Union as their number grew. It was more liked by some pilots then MiG-27, as it was lighter (especilly than MiG-27K) and easier to operate. Also, its dumb bomb-loading capability was equal in the terms of practice load, and laser rangefinder made less-capable GSH-23 and unguided missiles quite useful. If there was any conventional war, the number of these cheaper and reliable aircraft would probeably be much higher than that of MiG-27's. Installation: copy the folder from the archive in \objects\aircraft folder of your WOE installation. You will also need Su-17 cockpit (actually, any single-engined fighter cockpit should do) in the \objects\aircraft\cockpit folder. The rest of the files are the part of WOE installation. I have the files extracted at home and have somewhat different paint scheme, so please notify me if I need to modify this instruction. Please note: in "hard" mode, these aircraft display particulary violent spin, different than my other "Floggrers". They will make you sweat riding it out-or eject! I don't know the cause for this-and it was hard for me to find it because of the different layout of "stock" ini files, it is hard to track, so if you find an error... Nele

For MiG-23M I used slight wing AoA differece and engine torque, plus a few lines from Fubar :blush2: But behavior here is excessive (B/BN) although it is (almost) the same FM, but in different data.ini. I shall have to copy it to SFP1 installation to see if the problem continues. Newbies with WOE and SFP1-you can do it too, you have to unpack OBJECT.CAT from WOE and include all MiG27xxx.LOD and MiG27_shadow.SHD file in the B/BN directory, plus MiG27xx.BMP files in SovietCamo1 directory. And try color swap for "new" color shemes, does a ton of difference Some color schemes of BN at http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig23bn.html (bottom page) Nele

Well, it kinda rotates around Z-axis after gets into stall first, then tumbles. It flies straight, turns straight, and I checked&changed wings for prevention twice. I should have done "per-component" testing (with some surfaces keyed) but I didn't have time for it. If you people find that I reversed something (like the rudder I forgot to correct!!!) please report before I put it in the download section. As for scheme-I did a quick mod at home by extracting bmp's from CAT file, and then shifted tone a little and bleached it. Just be sure to use same mod setting on all BMP's. No Photoshop-like monster needed, ACDsee and IrfanView can do this. The result is two-tone on gray. More like Indian, but... Other way is to make a color swap. I take a color scheme bmp-jpg from the web, then I exchange colors with those. -I shall also try to make a template as I would like to make earliest MiG-23B's that were gray. Also, Cuban BN's are quite nice colorful birds, blue on blue with gaudy flag, I shall try to do it out of fun Nele

OK, I have "transplanted" the data into stock MiG-27 data.ini (in new MiG-23BN folder). It's a bit of the mixture of information from fighter MiG-23 and MiG-27D made to fit into "stock" data.ini. Flies well, but I have some problems with spins Must be the quirk of the notepad text formatting. Since spoilers and slats are non-existent on the stock model, I cannot simulate those to be visible. Swing-wing is completely different, but I think I got it right. Also, the fuel tank is not visible (Su-7's 600 lit)... I think there was a solution to that here somewhere on the forum. I'll have to move belly pylons attaching position a notch, but I have no reference! Pylons look well. It uses Su-17 cockpit-I would like to know can I somehow drop it a little? Would be helpful for MiG-27D/K, too. Expect this little mod soon. Nele

For those that don't yet know, I made "feel" modification of fighter-series Floggers as well as MiG-27D (which resulted in MiG-27K spinoff). Fighter Flogger ini's are in download section, and MiG-27D/K can be found in the forum here. They are all unified in FM, that has been made not "scientiifically", but more on the feeling and understanding of the things from the manual(s). I have also modified stock MiG-27 (actually, by all external characteristics-MiG-23BN) as much as it was possible to fighter series (ini file has a different layout) for home use. What I need now is to update it to the published ini's and write a "procedure" how somebody could implement it in WOE (only in WOE, due to copyright). Existing (and beautiful!) 3d-model of MiG-27D can be used as a basis for BN. Ini modification is even easier (de-tuned MiG-23M)-but taller undercarriage and duct-mounted pylons clearly make it MiG-27, not 23BN. Even all thee "duck-noses" of Strike Floggers (23BN/27D/27K) differ considerably among each other. Also, an interesting mod would be MIG-23B, the first version of BN with Lyulka Al-21F engine. Had a better range. Paintwork can be stock 27 low-res, maybe I could bleach&wear it a bit for 23BN, but I don't know if I'm allowed. Nele

Some surface deflections for MiG-9; Ailerons-up 22.5, down 14.5 deg Rudder ± 25 deg elevators up 18, down 15 deg. Great article in Russian at http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig9.html 2xRD-20 800kg thrust each Nele

Yap, that's an artwork cockpit. I am still puzled by Tuphoid's writing and what I see on the pics. I have a pic from cockpit-mounted camera i ML-headroom is around palm width or less. And a side picture of BN, that also gives a nice sideview on pilot's shoulders above sideframe. Maybe both are evidence of "sekrit" butt-raiser pillow modification? Nele

IMHO, the best way to make BN (without making new 3-d model) for stock MiG-27 in WOE. It is actually a MiG-23BN, since has belly-mounted pylons and shorter undercarriage and visually is quite different from MiG-27 (when parked) . -27 has taller undercarriage and duct-mounted pylons. A nice paintwork could cover little inaccuracies. I adopted "stock" 27 to act as BN for personal use, i.e. made its _data.ini "compatibile" to that of modded 23 fighter series-but it was long time ago. Data.ini layout of stock model is different so it was rather tricky to follow it. Like ailerons that do not exist on real -23, but it came close. Since I did a lot of mods on 23 figter series since then, it would now require update, and I also don't know about copyright issues to publish it. Nele