By: SOC
- 22nd September 2000 at 16:05Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Well, Mike Dewine (R-OH) is my cousin, so if I can keep him in office...heh.
Nothing's wrong with Saudi from a cultural standpoint, just from a hot as hell standpoint. I didn't like where I was when I was there, but most of that is thanks to Osama bin Laden. I'm just not personally compatible with hot weather.
There used to be an AAAM program, to replace the Phoenix, but the navy axed it when the NATF went down the tubes, or thereabouts. A while ago Jane's or somebody reported that an air-breathing AMRAAM had actually been used in Desert Storm. I'm trying to hunt down the article.
Who cares what new aircraft are fielded by Iraq. They'd screw up any coalition operation just by buying a few S-300 systems, or other advanced SAM systems. People don't realize how much of an air offensive actually goes into SEAD operations. And that was against SA-2/3/ and -6 systems.
Nightmare Scenario: Saddam's heir gets a brain, rebuilds the economy, and imports S-300PMU-2 systems, along with MiG-31M's and Chinese F-10's. Talk about the trouble we would have with that...
By: PhantomII
- 24th September 2000 at 05:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
For the most part, we all agree the MIG-25 is a great interceptor, so it the MIG-31 for that matter. What about its recce, bombing, and SEAD abilities? Let me get some input on that stuff.
By: SOC
- 24th September 2000 at 06:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The MiG-25BM (the SEAD plane) had a very long development period. It carries 4 AS-11's underwing, and one of the problems was adapting this missile to being carried at the Mach 2.83 speed of the FOXBAT. Whether it works better than an Su-24 equipped with AS-11/17 ARMS is anyones guess. And yes, the MiG-25RB and all subsequent reccee variants have the ability to drop bombs, aimed by radar, from over 65,000 ft. Flares to aid in photography are also used. Heh. "BOMBBAT". There's an image of the Pyramids at Giza in the book MiG:50 Years of Secret Aircraft Design that shows the detail these aircraft could get 30 years ago. For the record, if anyone has seen this, it was taken at over 70,000 feet.
By: PhantomII
- 26th September 2000 at 02:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I have some more questions. Why doesn't the MIG-25BM have to carry the targeting pod for the AS-11 like the F-4 Phantom and Su-24 have to? Also, is it a very effective SEAD platform, would it be as capable as say the F-4G or F-16CJ? Finally, how can an aircraft accurately bomb from 65,000 feet or higher. I just don't see how that is possible.
By: SOC
- 26th September 2000 at 02:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The BM carried most of its mission avionics in its nose in place of the fire control system on the MiG-25P. Thats why the pod isn't needed. As for the RB, it was originally intended to drop large flares to improve its night photo-recon capability. Someone decided bombs could just as easily be carried, and there you have it. The computer controlled bombing system is not as unaccurate as you might believe, but this is certainly not an aircraft to build a strike package around. You have to admit it would be a relatively survivable aircraft, however.
Is the BM as good as an F-4G? Probably not. Where it benefits is its high speed and therefore larger stand-off missile range. What this aircraft needs to be really capable is the AS-17, which was designed to counter systems like the Patriot. It does however benefit from its large avionics suite, which probably gives it a better performance in the overall SEAD role than an F-16CJ, which only posesses a Harm Targeting System (HTS) pod at the present time. Whether the aircraft will be given better avionics, perhaps in a dorsal spine like some Israeli F-16's, remains to be seen. A more likely SEAD aircraft for the US will be the proposed F/A-18G Super Hornet derivative, which will posess more in the way of dedicated avionics for the role.
New
By: Anonymous
- 27th September 2000 at 22:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
It's all bullshit Syria does not have the money for such upgrades. At best 4 or 5 aircraft are airworthy. After Assad's death everything went down the toilet
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 27th September 2000 at 23:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I always wonder what kind of excellent sources of informations some people have.... beautifull.... :7
New
Posts: 84
By: Raj
- 28th September 2000 at 01:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
My dear friend, dishonest Abdul,
IAF MIG-25s regularly make high altitude photo-recce runs along the Indo-Pak border and sometimes into Pakistan Airspace too.
The PAF doesn't have a single system capable of shooting them down, land based or fighter based.
I suggest you get some education before making your inaccurate statements
New
By: Anonymous
- 30th September 2000 at 01:16Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 22nd September 2000 at 16:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Well, Mike Dewine (R-OH) is my cousin, so if I can keep him in office...heh.
Nothing's wrong with Saudi from a cultural standpoint, just from a hot as hell standpoint. I didn't like where I was when I was there, but most of that is thanks to Osama bin Laden. I'm just not personally compatible with hot weather.
There used to be an AAAM program, to replace the Phoenix, but the navy axed it when the NATF went down the tubes, or thereabouts. A while ago Jane's or somebody reported that an air-breathing AMRAAM had actually been used in Desert Storm. I'm trying to hunt down the article.
Who cares what new aircraft are fielded by Iraq. They'd screw up any coalition operation just by buying a few S-300 systems, or other advanced SAM systems. People don't realize how much of an air offensive actually goes into SEAD operations. And that was against SA-2/3/ and -6 systems.
Nightmare Scenario: Saddam's heir gets a brain, rebuilds the economy, and imports S-300PMU-2 systems, along with MiG-31M's and Chinese F-10's. Talk about the trouble we would have with that...
Posts: 7,989
By: PhantomII - 24th September 2000 at 05:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
For the most part, we all agree the MIG-25 is a great interceptor, so it the MIG-31 for that matter. What about its recce, bombing, and SEAD abilities? Let me get some input on that stuff.
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 24th September 2000 at 06:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The MiG-25BM (the SEAD plane) had a very long development period. It carries 4 AS-11's underwing, and one of the problems was adapting this missile to being carried at the Mach 2.83 speed of the FOXBAT. Whether it works better than an Su-24 equipped with AS-11/17 ARMS is anyones guess. And yes, the MiG-25RB and all subsequent reccee variants have the ability to drop bombs, aimed by radar, from over 65,000 ft. Flares to aid in photography are also used. Heh. "BOMBBAT". There's an image of the Pyramids at Giza in the book MiG:50 Years of Secret Aircraft Design that shows the detail these aircraft could get 30 years ago. For the record, if anyone has seen this, it was taken at over 70,000 feet.
Posts: 7,989
By: PhantomII - 26th September 2000 at 02:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I have some more questions. Why doesn't the MIG-25BM have to carry the targeting pod for the AS-11 like the F-4 Phantom and Su-24 have to? Also, is it a very effective SEAD platform, would it be as capable as say the F-4G or F-16CJ? Finally, how can an aircraft accurately bomb from 65,000 feet or higher. I just don't see how that is possible.
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 26th September 2000 at 02:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The BM carried most of its mission avionics in its nose in place of the fire control system on the MiG-25P. Thats why the pod isn't needed. As for the RB, it was originally intended to drop large flares to improve its night photo-recon capability. Someone decided bombs could just as easily be carried, and there you have it. The computer controlled bombing system is not as unaccurate as you might believe, but this is certainly not an aircraft to build a strike package around. You have to admit it would be a relatively survivable aircraft, however.
Is the BM as good as an F-4G? Probably not. Where it benefits is its high speed and therefore larger stand-off missile range. What this aircraft needs to be really capable is the AS-17, which was designed to counter systems like the Patriot. It does however benefit from its large avionics suite, which probably gives it a better performance in the overall SEAD role than an F-16CJ, which only posesses a Harm Targeting System (HTS) pod at the present time. Whether the aircraft will be given better avionics, perhaps in a dorsal spine like some Israeli F-16's, remains to be seen. A more likely SEAD aircraft for the US will be the proposed F/A-18G Super Hornet derivative, which will posess more in the way of dedicated avionics for the role.
By: Anonymous - 27th September 2000 at 22:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
It's all bullshit Syria does not have the money for such upgrades. At best 4 or 5 aircraft are airworthy. After Assad's death everything went down the toilet
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 27th September 2000 at 23:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I always wonder what kind of excellent sources of informations some people have.... beautifull.... :7
Posts: 84
By: Raj - 28th September 2000 at 01:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
My dear friend, dishonest Abdul,
IAF MIG-25s regularly make high altitude photo-recce runs along the Indo-Pak border and sometimes into Pakistan Airspace too.
The PAF doesn't have a single system capable of shooting them down, land based or fighter based.
I suggest you get some education before making your inaccurate statements
By: Anonymous - 30th September 2000 at 01:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Thanks, it's true