Gepard

At the time the Tempest will be ready for take off, Scotland will be an independent state. So England stands alone. Italy and Sweden will retreat from the project. They are to depending from the EU.

The plane will end like the TSR2. UK has not enough money for a complete developement. Which other nations would buy this plane? The Americans? Surely not. The Europeans? Since the UK left the EU surely not.

MiG-19R and MiG-19SF used IIRC the RD-9BF-811 engine. This engine had a military thrust of 29 kN and with afterburner 37 kN. The fuel consumption was 104 kg/kN*h dry and 169 kg/kN*h with afterburner. The engine weights 725 kg.

Your improved MiG-19 could looks like this: It is prototyp SM-12PM. And so it looked in real life: It was a combination of MiG-21PF air intake, cockpit and radarsystem with the fuselage, wings of the MiG-19PM. The engines were R3M-26 with 25 kN dry and 32kN afterburner. The fuel consumption was reduced, so that the range could be increased by 600 km. The top speed was increased by 288 km/h.

There is a problem with this terrain. The target area Luanda is situated not there, where on the planning map the city of Luanda is. The reason is, that the correct location of Luanda is to close to the edge of the terrain. It is inside the "invicible wall", which you cant enter. To place an airfield close to the target area Luanda is on the first view not difficult. Simply creating a new target area by copy and past an existing airfield, change the target area number to the correct sequence number, change the Position to: "Position=214000.00,879000.00", rename the target area to "Luanda Airport". Thats it. But on the second view, the terrain is to rough for an airfield. Parts of the airfield will "sink in" the soil, others will hover in the air. Thatswhy the heightfield must flatten first. And for this a quick and simple solution is not available.

Ups. Not good.

If the red Prussians would have won:

Low cost, high capable fighter.

Somewhere in Northern France.

MiG-21SM is flying along the coastline of the Kuril Islands.

Dam - Dam - Dam - DamDamDam - DamDamDam

MiG-23PD was the designation of the Ye-230 development aircraft line. It had similar wings like the MiG-21, that is true, the gear system was similar. But it was a dead end development line. The same was Ye-8, which based on MiG-21PF. The intended service designation of the Ye-8 was in fact MiG-23. But it had nothing to do with the real MiG-23. The MiG-21PD, which you mentioned, was only a technology demonstrator. It had only fuel for 10 minutes or so and was unable to retract the landing gear. The MiG-23 based on the Ye-231 development aircraft line, which had not much in common with the MiG-21, beside some electronical equipment. Back to Su-17 vs MiG-27. Both planes were developed, because the soviet frontal aviation realized in the 1960th, that there was no dedicated CAS aircraft available. To modify the MiG-17 and Su-7 from fighters into fighter bombers helped not very much. Thatswhy the construction bureaus MiG and Sukhoi got the task to build a fighter bomber plane which should be able to fly CAS missions and tactical nuclear strikes. Sukhoi took the Su-7 plane and changed the wings in that kind, that the outer wings could swing. This was simple and clever. The development risks were low. The plane was easy to handle for the pilot. Existing weapon stations could be used. Sukhoi decided to add additionaly electronic, like ECM, Laserdesignater etc, as pods on one of the weapon stations. With the last versions this was changed, the Su-17 got the humpback, with enough space for a powerfull electronic package. The latest versions Su-17M4 and Su-22M4 were mighty planes. They were so big and strong, that east german pilots, who after the political change switched from Su-22M4 to Tornado IDS said "In contrast to the "Susi" the "Tony" was a fragile plane!" The Su-17 was a plane with the major focus on CAS. The MiG-23BN was a little bit different. The MiG-23BN was smaller than the mighty Susi. Electronical equipment like Laser or ECM were built in internally. The MiG-23BN had thick armour plates on the sides of the cockpit. The Autopilot, the weapon control system and the navigation system were networked. Thatswhy a MiG-23BN was able to follow a flight path along programmed waypoints automatically and was able to fire weapons automatically and was finally able to land automatically. Only for start the pilot was needed, the rest the plane was able to do it alone, without pilots help. Of course, the accuracy of the automatical weapon release was not good enough to hit small targets with conventional weapons, but it was good enough for hitting a target with a 30kt nuclear bomb. And this was the main task for the MiG-23BN. The CAS role was rather secondary and there the MiG-23BN was not really good. The KH-23 missile was more or less crap and without this missile the MiG-23BN was only a dumb iron dropper. So you can say while the Su-17 was more focused on CAS, the MiG-23BN was more focused on nuclear strike. The MiG-27 was the attempt to implement modern weapon systems into the MiG-23BN airframe. The electronic was much better, the autopilot, for instance, was not longer dangerous for the pilot of the plane. The air intake system was modified, the engine changed. The plane got the ability to defend itself against air opponents. And so on. The MiG-27 was a much better CAS plane than the MiG-23BN, but finally the latest versions of the Su-17 or Su-22 were the better planes.

The first part of your statement is correct. The Su-17 was the successor of the Su-7 and the early versions were very similar in design. Only the swing wing was the difference. But the MiG-23 had nothing in common with the MiG-21 (only the MiG-23MS used the same radar as the MiG-21bis). The MiG-23 was much bigger. A MiG-21 was a very small plane, similar with the F-104, which was small too. But the MiG-23 had a much larger scale. The radar nose, the engine, the entire fuselage, the gear system. This was completly new on MiG-23. Tomorrow more. Its to late in Germany now.

Warm welcome over Britain.

German Hornets.

Midair collision. Thats bad!

The decision to retreat from Afghanistan is correct. To stay one or ten years longer would change nothing and waste billions of Dollars and Euros. But how the retreat was done was completly wrong. First: The time. In Afghanistan there are two times. One more or less peacefull time in the winter, because it is simply to cold to fight. And one wartime in summer. It would be much more clever to retreat in winter. The soviets did it in winter. And their proxy Nadjibulla was able to fight two more years. He had some month to prepare for the wartime periode. The americans decided to retreat in summer. This is the wrong season. The enemy had perfect weather for war operations. Second: If you retreat it is the most challenging military operation. You must take all with you. The technic, the supply goods, your supporters and your troops. The americans and all of their allies simply had forgotten the supporters. They should have been evacuated before the troops left the field. And finally: Never give the timetable of your retreat to the enemy! This is stupid!

"Horrido!!!"

Little tiger over the "Ilha formosa", what means "beautifull island" in portugese. Today we call this island Taiwan.

German carrier operations.

The plane MiG-19S was a very good dogfighter in subsonic area. But for the pilots it was a nightmare. The fuselage fuel cells had a design flaw and so they were leaking under certain conditions like hell. During flight it was so bad, that there was a permanent danger to lit up the plane. Additionally there was a permanent danger of overheating the engines, because the cooling was not efficient enough. Even worse when using afterburner. Then the plane was dangerous for the pilot. IIRC the LSK (east german Air Force) lost 30% of their MiG-19s by engine problems (overheating or fire). If there would be the chance to modify the FM in that kind, that overheating problems would appear ....

The Brits evacuated over 800 with one plane. The Americans evacuated over 600 with one plane. The Germans evacuated 7 with one plane. Well done Luftwaffe! Outstanding job!

A succesfull retreat is the most challenging military operation. I fear, that in near future the days of the fall of Kabul will be a part of a textbook, how not to handle such a crisis. If i hear, that the german government decided on last saturday to evacuate germans and afghan people, who helped the germans, with start on monday then i expect, that the first A-400M transporter will land at 00:01 at Kabul airport. But in reality the planes started this morning from the german base Wunstorf and one plane reached Kabul this evening. Why they have not sent the birds on saturday or sunday? This is bad management! Whoever relies on us is lost! This is the lesson!

Convair 201. Service designation of the US-Navy F-13A Seagull. A pair of F-13A of VF-31Tomcatters during SEAD mission.