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
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 281-283 next last
To: SC Swamp Fox
ARF!
A couple of years ago I was out with a geophysics guy hunting for UST's (underground storage tanks) and before hitting the ground penetrating radar he was going over the site with a hand held proton spin magnetometer. I commented that that would be a pretty good thing to drag around behind a P3 and low and behold that was what the unit was derived from (the sub detecting one)...
221
posted on
08/06/2003 6:58:46 PM PDT
by
Axenolith
(And you don't want to stand below where the cows roost :))
To: stboz
It just don't get no better'n this.
Foxbat my a$$.
222
posted on
08/06/2003 7:00:27 PM PDT
by
stboz
To: Destro
The Rooskies beat us into space by a couple of years. When we were building rockets to lift 20 lb payloads into space, they were building rockets that would boost a dump truck.
223
posted on
08/06/2003 7:02:59 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: HighRoadToChina
The Iraqi jet, an advanced Russian MiG-25
the "advanced" version of a MiG-25 Foxbat would be a MiG-31 Foxhound ... yes, the MiG-31 really exists ... but it won't do Mach 5 ... and you don't get to think in Russian to activate the weapons system ...
To: TankerKC
In the mid 80's I was repairing ARC-105's and ARC-94's. Both were HF mechanically tuned, tube amplified radios. As luck would have it, the civilian market also used the ARC-94 in commercial airliners and that ability landed me a job.
225
posted on
08/06/2003 7:06:02 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: krb
Whoa...what a score.
nah, not really ,,, the USA already owns the MiG-29 and the SU-27 Flanker ... in fact, the US Gov't bought extra engines for the -27's back in 1999 according to an article I read then ... somebody said they came from Estonia ... in any case, the MiG-29 and SU-27 both are vastly superior to the MiG-25, basically a 1960's airplane ...
To: Axenolith
Walking over a steel underground storage tank: mangnetic detection is easy.
Flying over thousands of square miles of sand at 1000 ft. looking for a mostly aluminum airplane: magnetic detection doubtful.
All you would need is a burned out tank or APV nearby to act as a decoy, the MAD operator would never be able to tell the difference. The same tactic is used by submarines. In "Hunt for Red October" didn't Clancy have a russian sub hide near the wreck of the Andria Doria?
227
posted on
08/06/2003 7:14:56 PM PDT
by
SC Swamp Fox
(Aim small, miss small.)
To: Semper Paratus
"The one they found isn't going to hit Mach .00003."Ain' gonna fly very far either. The wings are missin'.
To: SC Swamp Fox
Oh, I understand that, and the magnetometer doesn't tell squat between a tank and a buried concrete slab full of rebar.
Its been so long since I read HRO I don't remember that part.
229
posted on
08/06/2003 7:33:23 PM PDT
by
Axenolith
(And you don't want to stand below where the cows roost :))
To: HighRoadToChina
Only jihadi idjits would thing a plane could fly at Mach III in sand. They must have shi'ite for brains!
To: HighRoadToChina
Thanks for the heads up!
To: sheik yerbouty
You're too funny.
To: xm177e2
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)
Delta wings are not that difficult to master. It is just a matter of choosing an airfoil section with the correct pitching moment. We (U.S.) had several planes in the active inventory from the 50's through the 70's with delta wings (F-102 and F-106) that didn't have flight control computers required to keep them in the air(not to mention the french Mirage's).
To: Itzlzha
Any sophomore aero engineer should be able to figure out the theoretical top speed of a specific jet just by measuring the geometry of the engine intakes. Turbojet/turbofan engines cannot run if they injest air flowing at supersonic speeds. Some planes, like the T-38 and F-16 have fixed ramp inlets which limit their speed to sub-Mach 2. Others like the F-15 have variable geometry intakes and bleed-air doors that allow them to reach higher speeds. The SR-71 also has variable geometry intakes and bleed doors. That big spike in the front of each intake has more that three feet of travel.
Another consideration for sustained high speed flight would be the airframe's structural material. Any flight at sustained speeds of Mach 3 create, due to friction, surface temperatures that would cause an aluminum airframe to "fold" . An F-14's airframe, which is predominantly aluminum, would not be able to make the flight that you describe. An SR-71, which is constructed mainly of titanium, will have surface temperatures, in some areas, greater that 500 degrees Fahrenheit. Their airframes are actually annealed during every flight and are said to be strengthened. The useful life of the program was supposedly determined by the engine life and availability of spares for the J-58's.
To: HighRoadToChina
To: woody9
Non of our satellites picked up these things while they were being buried. Hard to believe. Not as hard to believe as you might think. Because they're in low earth orbits, photo recon satellites do not have anything even approaching continuous coverage. Morever, because their orbits are relatively easy to determine, and because they carry only a very limited amount of fuel to change those orbits, the satellites can be easily avoided for hours at a time. Sure, you'll see the pit being dug (assuming that it's not being done under netting), and you'll see some sort of activity even with the netting that would definitely be in place during the actual burial, but unless you've managed to have moved a satellite without word getting back to the Iraqis to catch an actual airplane being taxied into that pit, you don't know what's going on from just a photo.
236
posted on
08/06/2003 8:45:49 PM PDT
by
steveegg
(If you think Bush is bad, you'll really hate Hillary and the 9 Dwarves - all bad, no good)
To: HighRoadToChina
Many thanks1 I strive to offend the effendis and impugn the impotentates!
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). At least, that's what I've read, I don't know a whole lot about this subject.
Delta wings are not difficult to get to work. I worked F-106s in the AF during the early 80s and they had been flying since the 50s along with the F-102s which were flying in the early 50s. Believe me we didn't have high power computers.
238
posted on
08/06/2003 8:56:17 PM PDT
by
Kadric
To: Sparta
ebay. Just search for "MiG-25 like-new"
To: ASA Vet
The author used "Russian" and "sophisticated" in the same sentence?
Sure, why not. I understand this MiG has the ability to carry on conversations about existentialism, recite poetry by famous 19th century Russian poets, play Chess, brood, and smoke cigarettes.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson