[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/k/ - Weapons


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: MiG-Art.jpg (1.42 MB, 2400x1493)
1.42 MB
1.42 MB JPG
Post 'em, F100Ds and such are welcome here too
>>
File: ii2cutaway.jpg (144 KB, 600x395)
144 KB
144 KB JPG
>>
>>42012366
"We Wuz 1000-to-1 Kill Ratio"
>>
Polikarpov I-16, cuteness overload.
>>
File: Ye-166.jpg (3.1 MB, 3264x2448)
3.1 MB
3.1 MB JPG
MIG Ye-152 in it's "E-166" configuration for record breaking purposes. This was what the MIG-25 was going to be before it was decided to go for a 2 engine large plane instead. Mach 2.8 capable.
>>
Nguyen Van Coc's MIG-21PF...the most feared predator in Vietnam skies
>>
File: e8_2.jpg (29 KB, 640x472)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
E-8...supposed to be the MIG-23.
>>
>>42012535
>that cockpit
I would not want to have to fly that thing
>>
File: MiG-21SMT_Arboga_before.jpg (365 KB, 1600x1200)
365 KB
365 KB JPG
>>
File: MiG-21SMT_Arboga_after.jpg (308 KB, 1786x891)
308 KB
308 KB JPG
>>42012660
>>
File: Tupolev-Tu-95MS-1.jpg (147 KB, 1500x1000)
147 KB
147 KB JPG
Tu-95MS. Contrary to popular believe it is much newer than B-52 because the MS version is a Tu-142 (first flight 1981) with bomber avionics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-2dfEc70gU
>>
File: 1027281753.jpg (48 KB, 1000x541)
48 KB
48 KB JPG
Myasishchev M-55. Initially designed to combat high altitude spy balloons, later converted to ELINT and later to atmospheric research. 15 FAI World records all still stand today.
>>
File: 1552776061870.jpg (197 KB, 1280x1024)
197 KB
197 KB JPG
>>
>>
File: t-4 nose.jpg (65 KB, 497x331)
65 KB
65 KB JPG
>>42012627
It's an interceptor, not a fighter. You don't need good visibility to launch missiles.
>>
>>42012733
T-142 is a T-95 variant.
>>
File: 1552155726787.jpg (1.84 MB, 3010x1970)
1.84 MB
1.84 MB JPG
>>
File: m-17 stratosfera.jpg (66 KB, 1052x565)
66 KB
66 KB JPG
>>42012786
>>
File: Yak-18.jpg (174 KB, 975x650)
174 KB
174 KB JPG
Yak-18. Warsaw Pact primary trainer during the first half of the Cold War.
>>
File: Yak52TD01.jpg (175 KB, 908x496)
175 KB
175 KB JPG
>>42012857
Yak-52. Warsaw Pact primary trainer during the second half of the Cold War.
>>
>>
File: tu-95ms (17).jpg (906 KB, 1500x1009)
906 KB
906 KB JPG
>>42012839
And Tu-92MS is a Tu-142 variant. Tu-95MS was produced in 1981-1992.
>>
>>42012786
Nah, only 5 stand, but mostly because it is in the turbojet class and that's a technological dead end.
>>
File: NaLxTZS.jpg (306 KB, 1218x701)
306 KB
306 KB JPG
>>
>>42012865
Yak-152. New primary trainer but now in doubt because it uses a German diesel engine.
>>
>>42012876
I don't think people are talking about production when they talk about what design is older.
>>
File: 1531836391262.jpg (49 KB, 600x500)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>>42012366
>>
File: su15_yellow_36.jpg (18 KB, 500x245)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
>>42012849
Underappreciated old workhorse.
>>
>>42012839
The Tu-142 airframe is considerably different so maybe it is correct to call it a Tu-95 variant or maybe not...i don't know.

>>42012854
That was the predecessor to the M-55. Single engine turbojet engine.

>>42012878
Correct for M-17 not M-55. M-55 uses 2 turbofan engines.
>>
File: su15_yellow_36-2.jpg (85 KB, 981x543)
85 KB
85 KB JPG
>>
>>42012892
>Designed by Russian engineer Vladimir Raikhlin
There's literally nothing that stops him from just producing it in Russia in case the west tries to mess with his business.
>>
Czech L-29 Delfin. First Warsaw Pact jet trainer. Won competition against Yak-30.
>>
>>42012911
>The Tu-142 airframe is considerably different
How so? Larger wings and elevators, and different landing equipment? If so, then the super hornet is a completely different plane than the hornet.
>>
File: su-15tm (1).jpg (31 KB, 1024x686)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>42012906
This.
>>
>>42012937
What's so controversial about the fact that YF-17, F-18 and F-18E are different aircraft?
>>
File: Aero_L-39_Albatros-001.jpg (203 KB, 1024x768)
203 KB
203 KB JPG
>>42012935
It's successor L-39 Albatros. First jet trainer with turbofan engine.
>>
>>42012958
The F-18E is a variant of the F-18, factually. Anything else is controversial.
>>
Ceaușescu's attempt of building a romanian fighter that was killed by the lack of funding for such a large project.
>>
Very unfortunate that these are just decaying.
Very early MiG-23.
>>
>>42012923
Aircraft was designed from ground up to be equipped with German "Red A03" engine and Russian alternatives require significant changes.

https://red-aircraft.com/products
>>
>>42012937
The "guts" of the airframe is significantly improved. And the Super Hornet is significantly more modern than the "old" Hornet.
>>
>>42012892
>diesel aircraft engines
Wait, is that a thing?
>>
File: tu-95 with kh-80.jpg (241 KB, 800x597)
241 KB
241 KB JPG
>>42012974
And Tu-95MS is a variant of Tu-142.
>>
File: yak-152 (9).jpg (579 KB, 2048x1365)
579 KB
579 KB JPG
>>42013006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_diesel_engine
>>
>>42013004
Yes, just as a F-15E is updated and improved over the C. It's still an F-15.

>>42013034
Tu-142 is a variant of a Tu-95, therefore Tu-95MS is a variant of the Tu-95.
>>
>>42012937

Not same anon, but Tu-142 have completely different fuselage than Tu-95MS, to the point where there's less than 15% of hull structure panels that are interchangeable between these two. Also wings of Tu-142 were fully re-designed and optimized for long low-level flights (fun fact: most of the new design were based on old Miashishtev M-4 Bison, which was Tu-95 competitor) to the point that NK-12 engines must been modified to fit a new mounts.
>>
>>42012366
Hot
>>
File: IAR-93.jpg (28 KB, 1000x350)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>42012979
IAR-93 Vultur. Romanian fighter-bomber intended to replace the Mif-15 and 17 in the figher-bomber role. This was built in Yugoslavia under the name of J-22 Orao
>>
>>42013077
>Not same anon, but Tu-142 have completely different fuselage than Tu-95MS, to the point where there's less than 15% of hull structure panels that are interchangeable between these two.
There is less commonality between the super hornet to the hornet. Comparatively speaking, far more has changed for the hornet to super hornet.

Its still an F-18 though.
>>
File: 1461262039214.jpg (1.33 MB, 1864x1308)
1.33 MB
1.33 MB JPG
>>42012366
>>
>>42013055
Huh, okay. I've never thought about that even being possible, I always associate diesels with low-RPM high-torque applications.
>>
File: 1394753337174.jpg (2.83 MB, 3000x2316)
2.83 MB
2.83 MB JPG
>>
File: tu-95ms (6).jpg (607 KB, 1849x2773)
607 KB
607 KB JPG
>>42013070
Tu-95MS is a variant of Tu-142, and Tu-142 is a variant of Tu-95. Tu-95MS has different dimensions, wing area, aspect ratio, weight, engine power output, speed, range, payload, wing loading, takeoff distance, armament, avionics.
>It's still an F-15.
It's a variant of F-15 with its own development cycle, first flight date and characteristics.
>>
File: 1394754603334.jpg (533 KB, 1408x1056)
533 KB
533 KB JPG
>>
>>42013133
Saying that Tu-95MS is still Tu-95 is like saying F-18E is still YF-17.
>>
File: 1461265418087.jpg (763 KB, 1500x1000)
763 KB
763 KB JPG
Is this Soviet?
>>
>>42013195
YEP, upgrades will change characteristics.

Its still a Tu-95. Much like a F-15E is still an F-15. A F-18E is still an F-18, and a Su-35 is still an Su-27.
>>
File: il-38 & cv-41 uss midway.jpg (1.47 MB, 3000x2346)
1.47 MB
1.47 MB JPG
>>42013218
Yes, Il-38 is a Soviet aircraft.
>>
>>42013213
Incorrect. You would be right if i was calling the Tu-95MS the same as Tu-95/I.

I am not.
>>
>>42013229
You are confusing aircraft families for its "founders". All Su-27 are Flankers, but not all Flankers are Su-27.
>>
>>42013249
Wrong, since Tu-95MS is a variant of a variant.
>>
>>42013261
I am not. Flanker is a NATO reporting name anyways.
>>
File: 1505949364059.jpg (987 KB, 1600x919)
987 KB
987 KB JPG
>>
>>42013274
Twisted logic, in that case the F-18D is a different aircraft than the F-18B because it is a variant of a variant.
>>
>>42013229
>A F-18E is still an F-18
They only superficially look similar, they're completely different aircraft
>>
File: CF18 intercept.jpg (127 KB, 1600x1280)
127 KB
127 KB JPG
>>
File: F4 Phantom II TU95 Bear.jpg (2.75 MB, 2830x1900)
2.75 MB
2.75 MB JPG
>>
>>42013314
They are not, design wise the super hornet is a variant of the hornet. Commonality is pretty irrelevant.
>>
Tu-126 Moss. First Soviet AWACS. Introduced 1965
>>
>>
File: tu-126-02.jpg (151 KB, 1630x900)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
>>42013339
ooops...
>>
File: F14 Tomcat USN TU95 Bear.jpg (1.77 MB, 3100x2223)
1.77 MB
1.77 MB JPG
>>
File: Mig-23MLD.jpg (439 KB, 1800x1220)
439 KB
439 KB JPG
MIG-23MLD (NATO: Flogger-K) the most capable of the MIG-23 versions.
>>
File: F14 Tomcat Bear intercept.jpg (548 KB, 2000x1495)
548 KB
548 KB JPG
>>
>>42013277
And so is Bear. Yet Tu-142 "Bear" gets its own first flight and production dates, while Tu-95MS "Bear" is apparently non-ironically considered the same 1950s design.
>>42013294
F-18D is a variant of F-18B.
>>
>>42013401
The most capable mig-23 is still a mig-23 lolol
>>
File: F8 Crusader TU95 Bear.jpg (1.31 MB, 1539x1076)
1.31 MB
1.31 MB JPG
>>
>>42013386
1980's newsreel of an F-15 intercepting an TU-95

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMb9OmXDj4g
>>
>>42013412
The Tu-95MS is unironically a variant of the Tu-95.

Just like the B-52H is unironically a variant of the B-52.
>>
File: F16 MiG29 SU22 Poland.jpg (282 KB, 1365x2048)
282 KB
282 KB JPG
>>
>>42013414
It was not the outdated export versions that US and Israel had to face let's put it that way. It even had what was the best short range air-air missile at the time, the R-73.
>>
>>42013428
Thanks!
>>
File: mig-23 (12).jpg (134 KB, 680x1020)
134 KB
134 KB JPG
>>42013414
MiG-23 is an exceptionally good aircraft.
>>
File: MiG29 Tupolev TU95.jpg (283 KB, 1280x746)
283 KB
283 KB JPG
>>
>>42013447
The plane on the bottom is pure sex. What is it?
>>
>>42013434
Wrong, Tu-95MS is a variant of the Tu-142.
>>
>>42013490
This is going in my cringe folder.

>>42013458
Even the R-73, as good as it was, could not save the Mig-23 from being the Mig-23. There is a good reason why it sits rusting in the VVS reserve.
>>
>>42013509
Are you armatard? You are a broken record. This is like me saying the F-16V is not an F-16 because its a variant of the F-16E.
>>
File: mig-23 (13).jpg (223 KB, 1063x736)
223 KB
223 KB JPG
>>42013510
Why are you squealing? Is it because MiG-23 had BVR capability way before F-16 or because MiG-23 wrecked the living shit out of F-14 in Iran-Iraq war?
>>
MIG-25 taking off. Most likely the RBS radar-reconnaissance version.
>>
>>42013543
>because MiG-23 wrecked the living shit out of F-14 in Iran-Iraq war?
Just because a plane shot down another plane does not mean diddly for its use.

A Sopwith camel could shot down a F-22, does not make it the greatest fighter ever.
>>
>>42013543
Holy shit it is armatard!
>>
>>42013570
Yeah, but Iraqi MiG-23 shooting down a couple dozens Iranian F-14 does mean that it wrecked the living shit out of latter.
>>
>>42013604
>couple dozens
Source.
>>
>>42013631
There is not. Mig-23 knocked out about 2 F-14's to about 58 Mig-23's lost to F-14's.
>>
>>42013631
Source is the amount of F-14 that Iran lost during the war.
>>
>>42013656
Lost during the war =/ shot down by Mig-23. Get a grip.
>>
File: this kills the tomcat.jpg (380 KB, 800x918)
380 KB
380 KB JPG
>>42013644
>58 Mig-23's lost to F-14's
According to the most chilling stories of Iranian pilots who totally downed 3 MiG-23's with once missile, but just couldn't remember the date when it happened. Sure thing, buddy, please tell me more.
>>
>>42013664
So prey tell me where did all these F-14 disappear then?
>>
File: MiG-23.jpg (41 KB, 673x656)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>42013490

It would've been had the avionics not been so anachronistic.
>>
>>42013683
Literally anything other than a Mig-23. AAA, Sams, manpads, other fighters, friendly fire, accidents, etc.
>>
File: An-22.jpg (153 KB, 1000x541)
153 KB
153 KB JPG
Antonov An-22. Strategic airlifter, introduced 1967. Uses NK-12 turboprop engines like Tu-95
>>
>>42013674
Yet here you are claiming the iranians lost more aircraft to the Mig-23 than they did throughout the entire war.
>>
>>42013690
How anachronistic were the avionics of F-16 that didn't have BVR capability until way after MiG-23?
>>
>>42013683
Lack of spare parts
>>
>>42013696
Too bad none of that happened, but your futile attempts to damage control out of how badly American hardware dot wrecked in Iran are sure showing.
>>
Antonov An-225. First flight 1988
>>
>>42013712
So where did their f-14 disappear then?
>>42013735
That will happen to you if you begin to try to repair something shot down by MiG-23.
>>
>>42013740
So, literally every other thing that could have happened to the Iranian F-14's didn't happen, and the ONLY losses were to Mig-23's.

Classic armatard. Classic.
>>
File: P42_1400768.jpg (90 KB, 1024x766)
90 KB
90 KB JPG
"P-42"...stripped-to-the-bones version of the Su-27 for record breaking purposes.
>>
>>42013722
Design intent. Mig-23 was anachronistic to other BVR fighters.
>>
File: 31s.jpg (43 KB, 960x640)
43 KB
43 KB JPG
>>42013722

The difference is that the F-16's got a fresh set whereas they just started replacing the MiG-23's.
>>
File: citation needed.jpg (1.38 MB, 3264x2448)
1.38 MB
1.38 MB JPG
>>42013543
>MiG-23 wrecked the living shit out of F-14 in Iran-Iraq war?
Please, one single credible source this time slavtard.
>>
I am the guy who made this >>42013458 post and im going to have to tell that the F-14 performed very good in the Iran-Iraq war to the point that it was a semi-embarrassment to the Islamic regime since the F-14 program was used as an example of the Shah's megalomania and submission to the USA.

Few F-14s were shoot down, after intense and successful action in the first part of the war they were sent "to the back" so to speak because of lack of parts, missiles and other such things. Their powerful radar was also an useful asset that played a big part in this decision.
>>
>>42013722
Don't see many MiG-23s around these days, while there are plenty of F-16s.
Almost like one of them was a developmental dead end, while the other became the standard all other "light" multirole aircraft are compared to even today.

>>42013753
>That will happen to you if you begin to try to repair something shot down by MiG-23.
You do not repair shot down aircraft, damaged possible, shot down no.
Put down the krokodil for a while and the world will start to make more sense again armatard.
>>
>>42013759
No, so MiG-23 shot enough F-14 to consider the latter wrecked.
>>
File: Jalil Zandi.jpg (47 KB, 830x563)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>42013914
Jalil Zandi is the highest scoring ace of the Iran-Iraq war and the highest scoring ace F-14 pilot ever. Iranian government gave 8 confirmed kills but declassified US intelligence documents say it is likely 11 kills.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jalil_Zandi
>>
>>42013937
>When armatard gets so mad he becomes incoherent.
>>
File: mig31_01.jpg (194 KB, 750x476)
194 KB
194 KB JPG
>>
>>42013507
Airbus a330
>>
>>42013458
>It even had what was the best short range air-air missile at the time, the R-73.
Very few MiG-23s were ever fitted with the firecontrol updates for the R-73, let alone carried them in service.
They also lacked the helmet sight which is a large part of the reason the R-73 was so ahead of its time.
Just like most other things Russian/Soviet it was vaporware for the first 5 years of its "operational service" and after that the 23 was already well on the way out, because even Russians realize you can only polish a turd so much.
>>
File: TU-22M3 Afterburner.jpg (382 KB, 1500x1000)
382 KB
382 KB JPG
B R I G H T

L

U

E
>>
>>42013937
So, have you learned to tell the difference between MLA and MLD and the difference between R-23 and R-24 yet?
>>
>>42013414
What made it such junk?
>>
>>42014268
imagine the maint cost of the F-14 with none of the avionic and maneuverability advantages.

Went fast in a straight line though.
>>
>>42012596
I was a little dissapointed on Ken Burns's doc on how there's no mention of the NVA Air Force.
>>
File: file.png (317 KB, 780x585)
317 KB
317 KB PNG
I'll always be impressed by this jet.
SR-71 was made with all the top materials of the time, using the most sensible tech and it managed to supersonic speeds with no sweat.

Meanwhile in Igor's plant they just took some sheets from melted tractors and put two fuckyouimbigboy engines and said "Da, thiz vill vork" and it did.... kinda.
>>
>>42014268
Interceptor pushed to perform frontline aviation duties because the Soviet Union already had way too many different types in service to fund a dedicated fighter as well. (Got to keep all those designers and factories running)
It was designed to match and exceed the F-4 in combat (Which it did, if only barely with the early versions) but by the time more advanced versions went into full service in enough numbers to matter western aircraft were already into 4th gen, and most were relegated to ground attack duties for the later part of their service life.
It was almost impossible to intercept in the low level deep strike mission though, and could be equipped for the "special munitions" delivery. (Tactical nukes, mostly for low altitude tossbombing)
>>
MiG or Sukhoi?
>>
>>42014490
Yakovlev
>>
File: Su-17.jpg (522 KB, 1400x870)
522 KB
522 KB JPG
>>42014490
50s-80s? Sukhoi, reliable workhorses.
Today? Eh, MiG-29 with avionics update or Flanker+++ with a ricer bodykit, hard to pick
>>
>>42012426
mig-15 was probably the height of soviet air power, since soviet pilots were able to get 1.1:1 against the famous sabre when it had well trained pilots

its probably one of the closest ties
>>
>>42014490
Sukhois are much more reliable, specially the Su-27 family.
I see shitholes operating those with next to nothing of money for maintenance and they still kickass.
>>
File: mig-31bm (7).jpg (221 KB, 1280x895)
221 KB
221 KB JPG
>>42014419
>Meanwhile in Igor's plant they just took some sheets from melted tractors and put two fuckyouimbigboy engines and said "Da, thiz vill vork" and it did.... kinda.
[This is what discovery channel audience actually believes]
Here, actually watch something informative about these engineering marvels instead of shitposting retarded memes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pxtQhOFqAU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-FBWPmQcw
>>
File: mig-23 emblem.jpg (54 KB, 800x522)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>42014268
American state propaganda trying to cover up to how butthurt they were about their Top Gun fighter getting slaughtered by it.
>>42014284
>with none of the avionic
Yeah, in pre-mid-70s models.
>and maneuverability advantages
MLD was competing 4th gen aircraft in maneuverable training flights. No wonder 3rd gen junk like F-14 got slaughtered so hard by Iraqi MS/MF.
>>
File: mig-35 (1).jpg (133 KB, 1492x995)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
>>42014619
>MiG-29 with avionics update
That's MiG-29SMT. Modern Fulcrums are more than that.
>>
File: mig-17f.jpg (212 KB, 1600x900)
212 KB
212 KB JPG
>>42012426
You realize it were Americans in the peak McCarthyist russophobic hysteria who launched a state propaganda campaign that claimed they had 10:1 k/d ratio against MiG-15, which later turned out to be 1.3:1 or something like that?
>>
>>42012733
>bomber
missile carrier
>>
File: tu-95k22 with kh-22.jpg (149 KB, 920x698)
149 KB
149 KB JPG
>>42017548
They make no such distinction in the west and just call them all "bombers" in spite of the fact that Tu-95MS can't carry gravity bombs without some considerable modifications.
>>
File: tu-95k with mig-19.jpg (31 KB, 650x483)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
Here's some rare pics of MiG-19 being used as Tu-95K payload during tests of Kh-20M suspension, engine, control and navigation systems.
>>
In particular, they solved the problem of starting the engines after a long flight at high altitude with a significant overcooling of the power plant.
>>
File: tu-95km scheme (2).jpg (52 KB, 700x532)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
The missile used a combined radio command guidance using programmable missile autopilot and radiometric equipment of the carrier. After reaching a given point with a distance of 600 km from the target, the missile was launched with the engine already afterburning. After 46 seconds of flight the missile was to start gaining altitude. After 221 seconds upon reaching 15000 m, the missile was to stabilize its flight altitude and connect to the radio command control. At 50 km away from the target, the control was to switch to autopilot and the missile was to a dive with an angle of 60° and at the altitude of 500-1000 m the thermonuclear warhead was to detonate. The cumulative range of the K-20 missile system (bomber+missile) was 7000 km.
>>
File: tu-142mz emblem.jpg (338 KB, 1024x781)
338 KB
338 KB JPG
The most capable maritime patrol and anti-submarine warfare aircraft of the Cold War, and with the latest MZM upgrade likely nowadays as well.
>>
File: tu-142 (18).jpg (237 KB, 1280x853)
237 KB
237 KB JPG
>>
File: Su-24 titanium armor.jpg (228 KB, 1000x725)
228 KB
228 KB JPG
>>42012366

Su-24 titanium armor
>>
File: su-24m black sea.jpg (1.1 MB, 2800x1854)
1.1 MB
1.1 MB JPG
>>42017938
It's from Su-34, not Su-24.
>>
>>42013507
Polish F16 with conformal fuel tanks.
>>
>>42014016
>>42013860
>>42013759
IIRC, Mirage F1's managed to shoot down an F-14.
>>
File: Su-24 Fencer.jpg (434 KB, 1920x1200)
434 KB
434 KB JPG
>>42017972

Are you sure ?
>>
File: su-25 armour.jpg (103 KB, 1280x806)
103 KB
103 KB JPG
>>42018078
Yes, I'm sure as I'm yet to find a single source that has ever suggested Su-24 had any sort of titanium armoured cockpit, while such a thing on Su-34 is mentioned pretty much everywhere.
For instance, here's an interesting article going into details on how it is being welded (in Russian, use google translate):
https://uacrussia.livejournal.com/60069.html
Pic unrelated, but since we're talking about armour here's an armour scheme of Su-25 that also uses titanium.
>>
>>42013164
props want that torque too
its just that diesels fall off in performance with altitude
>>
File: su-24 sukhoiwave.jpg (558 KB, 1980x1114)
558 KB
558 KB JPG
>>
>>42012969

Still being used for CAS by Syria, one of them was shot down recently with a MANPAD
>>
File: IAF-MiG-23.jpg (54 KB, 721x481)
54 KB
54 KB JPG
>>
File: flooded runwar landing.jpg (112 KB, 800x603)
112 KB
112 KB JPG
>>
File: citation needed.jpg (1.34 MB, 3264x2448)
1.34 MB
1.34 MB JPG
>>42017464
>MLD was competing 4th gen aircraft in maneuverable training flights. No wonder 3rd gen junk like F-14 got slaughtered so hard by Iraqi MS/MF.
>>
Is there a Soviet plane which doesn't have a negative kill ratio?
>>
File: 1477261754450.jpg (1.35 MB, 2560x1600)
1.35 MB
1.35 MB JPG
>>42012426
>ywn be a faggot in a fagot
>>
File: lolmig.jpg (752 KB, 3300x2550)
752 KB
752 KB JPG
>>
File: 1539962700108.jpg (511 KB, 4198x2708)
511 KB
511 KB JPG
>>42013749
he thicc
>>
File: mig25bm7.jpg (31 KB, 700x485)
31 KB
31 KB JPG
>>42019261
The MiG-25, probably, guess it pays off being able to run away at Mach 3 at 70,000feet.
That and it is apparently very hard to tell the difference if it is just scanning or actually guiding missiles at you, sort of like with the Tomcat making Iraqi pilots shit their pants and run away as soon as a F-14 turned its radar in their direction.
Is there a missile diving in at me at Mach 4 or is he just letting me know he sees me?
Better to not be where the missile (if there is one) expects you to be when it goes terminal guidance just to be safe.
>>
File: su-27 & b-1b (1).jpg (1.16 MB, 2000x1331)
1.16 MB
1.16 MB JPG
>>42019261
Is there an American plane which doesn't have the majority of its kill ratio compiled of victories over 20+ years old jets?
>>42019390
MiG-23 shot down 26 aircraft in Iran-Iraq war alone. Typical western propaganda, I bet the rest of the chart is the same bullshit.
>>
>>42019514
>Is there an American plane which doesn't have the majority of its kill ratio compiled of victories over 20+ years old jets?

yes
>>
>>42019500
>Soviet plane
>Iraqi pilots
So Iraqi plane then.
>>
>>42019520
Cool story.
>>
File: mig-31bm clouds (3).jpg (315 KB, 1500x1013)
315 KB
315 KB JPG
>>42019375
Nice pic.
>>
File: 1555109765622.jpg (180 KB, 677x678)
180 KB
180 KB JPG
>>42019524
>Soviet plane
>So Iraqi plane then.
>>
File: yak-28 (2).jpg (71 KB, 800x554)
71 KB
71 KB JPG
>>
>>42019565
20+ years old 3rd gen Soviet produced Iraqi interceptor with Iraqi maintenance and Iraqi pilots with Iraqi training. Still shot down "cool" and "shiny" american 4th gen multi-role.
>>
>>42019520

None that aren't younger than 40 years though.
>>
File: yak-28pp (1).jpg (639 KB, 3230x2184)
639 KB
639 KB JPG
>>42019500
>the Tomcat making Iraqi pilots shit their pants and run away as soon as a F-14 turned its radar in their direction.
Nice fairy tale, did you hear it at Discovery Channel or read in some totally valid memoirs book of some random balding F-14 pilot?
>>
>>42019590

*are younger
>>
>>42019590
More like 50+, F-15/16 still mostly shot down MiG-21.
>>
>>42012673
Fucking animal, if one's work needs a long description it's not good.
>>
File: MiG-28.jpg (808 KB, 1296x898)
808 KB
808 KB JPG
>>
>>42019616

I think most vatniks just seethe at the unfairness of it, Russia's weakness is literally just being poor.
>>
>>42019597
Well, my claim is just as substantiated by sources as yours.
Stay mad slavtard.
>>
File: mig-31 base.jpg (215 KB, 1000x864)
215 KB
215 KB JPG
>>42019646
The point is not fairness or unfairness, the point is F-15 having favourable k/d ratio against MiG-21 is not a good indicator of F-15's capabilities, and neither does it say anything about Soviet Air Force and their aircraft. USSR operated the largest air force on the planet, and American F-4, F-14, F-15, F-16 and F-18 would have not been met in combat by 45 MiG-21 and 19 MiG-29 without IFF systems.
>>
File: mig-31 high-five.webm (2.82 MB, 720x404)
2.82 MB
2.82 MB WEBM
>>42019712
So you just literally made it up. Ok.
>>
>>42019390
I was waiting for that image and armatard to ruin this thread forever
>>
>>42019728
No, i just haven't provided any sources for my claim.
And neither has anyone claiming MiG-23 blasted F-14s out of the sky.

>>42019737
Just can't win against the slavtardation.
If you argue against a brick wall at least the wall will erode over time, slavic retardation not so much.
>>
I think the Su-27 and derivates have a positive kill rate. Though they were only shooting down other old Soviet shit.

>>42019590
>Russian officials admitted that most MiG-29 fighters in the Russian Air Force were incapable of performing combat duties due to poor maintenance. The age of the aircraft was also an important factor as about 70% of the MiGs were considered to be too old to take to the skies.

Makes me wonder why.
>>
>>42019784

I already pointed out why, don't be obtuse >>42019646
>>
>>42019784
>I think the Su-27 and derivates have a positive kill rate. Though they were only shooting down other old Soviet shit.
True, the Su-15 might be up there too, if you count civilian airliners and cargo planes as valid kills.
Then again one Su-15 was lost ramming said cargo plane and another maneuverkilled by a Swedish recon plane over the Baltic.
>>
File: 1435736179190.jpg (120 KB, 500x608)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
>>42018107

Bretty interseting
>>
File: su-25k & a-10 (2).jpg (1.28 MB, 1600x1067)
1.28 MB
1.28 MB JPG
>>42020822
>>
>>42020887
Isn't that a Bielorussian Su-25k?
>>
File: su-25 (11).jpg (187 KB, 1280x848)
187 KB
187 KB JPG
>>42020907
It's a Bulgarian roundel. Belarusian ones have their flag.
>>
>>42019514
Im sure they shot down plenty of things, Arma.. i mean anon
>>
>>42021222
Who the fuck is this Armatard you clown? If you're not going to add anything worth my time, then sit the fuck down ami.
>>
>>42021654
Armatard is the patron saint of slav posting, anon. Like a singularity formed from AIDS and delusions of grandure, he is able to derail even the most mundane of threads into nothing but homosex, butthurt and whataboutism through shotposting alone. The man never rests and keeps getting banned, but the combined strength of Krokodil, AIDS and a lacking father figure keeps him coming back.
Because he's the shitposter that /k/ deserves, but not the one it needs right now. Npt even /pol does. So we'll expose him. Because he cant take it. Because he's no one's hero, not even his Babushka's. He's a loud retard. An intense shitposter. An Armatard
>>
File: Ye-8.jpg (46 KB, 674x1033)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
>>42012626
>E-8

It's a Ye-8, designed as a replacement for the Mig-21, bits of it eventually were incorporated into the Mig-23.
Unfortunatly, during test flights, the new engine built for the project on one of the prototypes exploded while in mid-air while it was going mach 2.1. When one of the newly liberated fanblades decided to join him in the cockpit the test pilot was injured, so when he'd gotten the plane under mach 1.8 he ejected.
>>
File: 1468697744950.jpg (120 KB, 1600x1200)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
>>
File: MiG-19 01.jpg (124 KB, 800x600)
124 KB
124 KB JPG
>>42014018
The MiG-25 and 31 were never really my favorites but I like that paint scheme.
>>
File: aircraft junkyard8.jpg (239 KB, 640x480)
239 KB
239 KB JPG
>>42012366
BAF, Afghanistan. '03
>>
>>42019720
>point is not about fairness
>wah its not fair to...
Cope
>>
File: 7277440100_4802620346_o.jpg (554 KB, 1280x960)
554 KB
554 KB JPG
>>42024453
>>
File: aircraft junkyard5.jpg (160 KB, 640x480)
160 KB
160 KB JPG
>>42024739
>>
>>42012974
>The F-18E is a variant of the F-18, factually.
A convenient lie made up by the Navy to get the plane approved by congress, nothing more.
>>
>>42012596
>counts 2 spy drones as kills for himself
really nigga
>>
>>42026339
a lot of ww2 aces get their kill counts by slaughtering more or less defenseless planes
>>
>>42026419
Not exactly the ace's fault that barely any of them fought back. IL-2s were especially bad in that they'd fly straight and level even under fire, in the early war at least.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.