Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iraqi 'Mach 3' MiG Buried in Sand (Charles Smith)
NewsMax.com ^ | August 6, 2003 | Charles Smith

Posted on 08/06/2003 12:35:40 PM PDT by HighRoadToChina

Iraqi 'Mach 3' MiG Buried in Sand Charles R. Smith Wednesday August 6, 2003

NewsMax.com has obtained exclusive photos of a buried Iraqi jet fighter being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops. The Iraqi jet, an advanced Russian MiG-25 Foxbat, was found buried in the sands after an informant tipped off U.S. troops. Click here to see the MiG buried in the Iraqi desert.

The MiG was dug out of a massive sand dune near the Al Taqqadum airfield by U.S. Air Force recovery teams. The MiG was reportedly one of over two-dozen Iraqi jets buried in the sands, like hidden treasure, waiting to be recovered at a later date.

Contrary to what some in the major media have reported, not all the jets found were from the Gulf War era.

The Russian made MiG-25 Foxbat recovered by U.S. Army troops in the pictures, is an advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the west and is equipped with sophisticated electronics warfare devices.

U.S. Air Force recovery teams had to use large earth moving equipment to uncover the MiG which is over 70 feet long and weights nearly 25 tons.

Click here to see troops digging the MiG out of its hole.

Click here to see troops towing the jet away.

All photos courtesy of MSGT T. Collins, USAF

The Foxbat is known to be one of Iraq's top jet fighters. The advanced electronic reconnaissance version found by the U.S. Air Force is currently in service with the Russian air force. The MiG is capable of flying at speeds of over 2,000 miles an hour or three times the speed of sound, and at altitudes of over 75,000 feet.

The recovery of the advanced MiG fighter is considered to be an intelligence coup by the U.S. Air Force. The Foxbat may also be equipped with advanced Russian and French made electronics that were sold to Iraq during the 1990s in violation of a U.N. ban on arms sales to Baghdad.

The buried aircraft at Al Taqqadum were covered in camouflage netting, sealed and in many cases had their wings removed, before being buried over ten feet underneath the Iraqi desert.

X MARKS THE SPOT

The discovery of the buried Iraqi jet fighters illustrates the problem faced by U.S. inspection teams searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is larger in size than California and the massive deserts south and west of Baghdad were used by Saddam Hussein to hide weapons during the first Gulf war.

U.S. intelligence sources have already uncovered several mass grave burial sites in the open deserts with an estimated 10,000 dead hidden there. In addition, Iraq previously hid SCUD missiles, chemical weapons and biological warheads by burying them under the desert sands. U.N. inspection teams found the weapons in the early 1990s after detailed information of the exact locations was obtained.

Top U.S. weapons inspector Dr. David Kay is known to favor human intelligence as the primary means to find Iraq's hidden treasure trove of weapons and secrets.

While there are rumors of Iraqi chemical and biological weapons being shipped to nearby Syria, the weapons may very well still remain inside Iraq buried under the vast desert wastelands.

Some critics of the Bush administration have claimed that the inability of U.S. forces to uncover weapons of mass destruction is proof that the President misled the nation into the war with Iraq. However, in recent days the critics have fallen silent as word quietly leaked from Iraq that major discoveries have already been made and are now being documented completely. Bush administration officials are keeping any such discoveries secret for the moment.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: allyourmigs; arebelongtous; britanniaisatroll; foxbat; iraq; iraqiairforce; mig; migs; pictures; rebuildingiraq; trollalert; trollbane; trollinthread; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 281-283 next last
To: bedolido
The Foxbat can do Mach 3, sustaining it like the Blackbird is another matter. It was originally designed with the purpose of intercepting the B-70 Valkyrie (which never went into production), then it may have been used to attempt to intercept the SR-71 (no success there).
181 posted on 08/06/2003 3:10:59 PM PDT by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CCCV
Sounds like he should have been one of us anyway.

He later worked with USAF and USN, briefing on Soviet tactics and training. One of the guys in my reserve unit, a former F-4 driver(with a Silver Star) but by then an intell wienie (due to an injury that took him off flight status) met him.

182 posted on 08/06/2003 3:14:46 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
"I want to know how, with all the high-falutin' satellite surveillance we have, we didn't spot the huge operation of burying these 20+ jets!"

Satellites are not so good at detecting transient events. They only come over a few times a day, and you know exactly when. It's easy to miss something that you aren't specifically looking for, or are looking in the wrong place. Throw a tarp over the aircraft when the satellite comes over and it will likely not be noticed out in the middle of nowhere. Plus it probably wouldn't take all that long to bury an aircraft in such loose sand.

183 posted on 08/06/2003 3:18:07 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: CCCV
MiG-25 maneuverable? I don't think so. Strictly an interceptor for shooting down bombers. Same would go for its sucessor, the MiG-31 Foxhound, which may be a little better, though slower, and an updated radar and missile loadout. The maneuverable bird in PVO is the Flanker.
184 posted on 08/06/2003 3:20:05 PM PDT by Fred Hayek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: xm177e2
That, and it's not easy to get delta wings to work (even now we need high-powered computers working while the planes are in-flight in order to get delta wings to work well).

Not really. There were a whole series of French Mirage fighters with delta wings, not to mention our own F-106 and it predecessor the F-102, flown by "W" in his younger days. Low speed is where they have the biggest problem. The B-70 had those drooping wingtips to allow it to exploit a particular high speed effect (compression lift maybe?... the brain is slowly going as well as going slowly)

185 posted on 08/06/2003 3:22:19 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Spook86
What's interesting is that the MiG-25 finally found its niche as a high-altitude, fast-flying reconnaissance airplane.

MiG-25's equipped with cameras and SIGINT/ELINT equipment flew regularly along the borders of West Germany at 65,000 and Mach 2.6 on regular recon missions. However, the plane was not completely invulnerable, as a number of MiG-25 recon planes were shot down by Israeli Air Force F-15's during the 1980's. They're unlike the SR-71, which regularly flew at over Mach 3.0 around 85,000 feet, which made interception quite difficult indeed.

However, the MiG-25 did evolve into the MiG-31 Foxhound, which was a high-speed interceptor with long-range missiles that was designed specifically to defend Soviet border areas, replacing the aging Tu-28 Fiddler interceptor.

186 posted on 08/06/2003 3:47:47 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: pfflier; CCCV
I have over 16 years professional experience as a Mechanical/Quality Engineer in Aerospace, with 4 years in the SR-71 maintenance program.

The MiG-25 was designed to intercept the SR-71 and strategic bombers in the early 70s, and is no threat at all to US warbirds nowadays...

Besides, burying those Soviet era interceptors in the sand was about the dumbest thing I could imagine...it would take a GOOD maintenance crew 3-6 months to get them operational again.

This is just more smoke & mirrors to distract from the real question at hand: Where are the WMDs?

I would be more impressed if Saddam had MiG-29s with modern avionics onboard...
187 posted on 08/06/2003 4:20:18 PM PDT by Veracious Poet (Adages come, adages go, but the superfluous will always be with us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: HighRoadToChina
I guess it wasn't on high alert.
188 posted on 08/06/2003 4:20:46 PM PDT by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
I didn't know the Foxbat could do Mach 3.

The Foxbat was built to counteract the B70 Valkrye (sp?) which was built but never went into production.

189 posted on 08/06/2003 4:57:08 PM PDT by Tom Bombadil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CCCV
I understand the principle but not being a jet engine guy, I never understood why they couldn't just shut off the fuel.

As I understand, the engine would not be capable of re-starting, due to its deteriorated state. They get great fuel-milage for a while as the lining of the engine becomes part of the reaction.

190 posted on 08/06/2003 5:03:38 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: HighRoadToChina
Welcome back, David. Am glad that your email is back to normal.
191 posted on 08/06/2003 5:04:45 PM PDT by FreepForever (Communist China is the hub of all evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: John H K
1) There were NO M-1 Abrams actually destroyed by the Iraqis;

There was one effectively destroyed by a sniper. He shot and killed the driver as he was going over a bridge, and the tank went over the side. ...but that's not what you meant either.

192 posted on 08/06/2003 5:18:03 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Only 96 others.

< Shouldn't that have been a number, 94 or less? :P

193 posted on 08/06/2003 5:19:36 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet
I was told to design a "zero volt" power supply to be used as a "reference" voltage. I put together some meters, lights, switches, and tubes in a box. The output terminals were just strapped together on the inside.

They must not have tested it very well. It should have been a single wire to ground (plus ornamentation), yes?

194 posted on 08/06/2003 5:21:07 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: HighRoadToChina
The more we find, the more it points to a covert Axis between Ba'athist Iraq and the PRC - Russia Axis. Those who wish to naively believe that Russia has now turned a leaf becoming pro Western, and that the PRC are all talk and no action, need to take serious pause and examine critically the nature of the assistance rendered before and during the war by Moscow and Beijing. I would not be at all surprised to find out that the assistance has not stopped - ala Vietnam! Some friends, eh?
195 posted on 08/06/2003 5:23:29 PM PDT by GOP_1900AD (Un-PC even to "Conservatives!" - Right makes right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
I want to know how, with all the high-falutin' satellite surveillance we have, we didn't spot the huge operation of burying these 20+ jets!

Well, it depends on whether we were looking there (better resolution generally means narrower field of view), and how long it took to bury it. We hide AIRCRAFT CARRIERS at SEA.

196 posted on 08/06/2003 5:24:44 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet
[Disclaimer] I have taken the time to read the entire thread so my responses may not be timely [/disclaimer]

Did the gauges bounce around and lights flash like a toy train? Damn, I hope so!!!


Eaker

197 posted on 08/06/2003 5:25:53 PM PDT by Eaker (This is OUR country; let's take it back!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
I want to know how, with all the high-falutin' satellite surveillance we have, we didn't spot the huge operation of burying these 20+ jets!

Well, it depends on whether we were looking there (better resolution generally means narrower field of view), how long it took to bury it, and whether the plane was exposed while being buried (they did note camo-net. We hide aircraft CARRIERS at SEA.

198 posted on 08/06/2003 5:25:54 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
[Disclaimer]I have taken the time to read the entire thread so my responses may not be timely [/disclaimer]

I want to know how, with all the high-falutin' satellite surveillance we have, we didn't spot the huge operation of burying these 20+ jets!

The satellites have a limited "scope of view". If there is interesting stuff on the left the satellite will not see what is going on to the right.

Picture yourself at the range. You will be looking at your target and will not see someone sneaking up behind you.


Eaker

199 posted on 08/06/2003 5:30:49 PM PDT by Eaker (This is OUR country; let's take it back!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I will never be able to show my face again.

You are stealthy. Nobody else saw the repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated, posts!!!

;<)


Eaker

200 posted on 08/06/2003 5:35:07 PM PDT by Eaker (This is OUR country; let's take it back!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 281-283 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson