Next aircraft speculation

[Nerd1000]

That's the first time I've ever heard that. I seriously doubt that if Russia knew 100% that it was full of civilians and off course they would have shot it down. In fact, they wouldn't.

 

I don't know what that has to do with the Mig25 and SR71 though.

 

Apologies, I should check my facts more thoroughly before I post. The Pilot was interviewed later on and said that he identified it as a Boeing. The GCI however did not ask him what it was, and he did not tell them. When the 747 started a climb the pilot interpreted it as evasive maneuvers, and the order came down to open fire.

 

Anyway, as you say we're getting off topic here. I think a MiG-25 would be an interesting addition to the sim, especially because we might see people developing tactics for it against F-15s and the like. Does anyone know how good the look-down abilities of the Foxfire (and/or the later Sapphire radar on the MiG-25PD) were?

[Dudikoff]

The Migs you mention probably can't reach the speeds you mention when fully loaded with weapons either' date=' like with all other industies, aircraft makers advertise their wares under the best possible conditions....[/quote']

 

Blah, blah, blah.. If you bothered to investigate just a tad, you might have e.g. found out that the MiG-31 can cruise at Mach 2.35 for a combat radius of 720 km.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Dudikoff

[thaisocom]

That's the first time I've ever heard that. I seriously doubt that if Russia knew 100% that it was full of civilians and off course they would have shot it down. In fact, they wouldn't.

 

I don't know what that has to do with the Mig25 and SR71 though.

It's the truth tho. Even after identified it as civilian 747 the pilot still went through and follow the order to shoot it down. In one of the interview he said "I saw two rows of windows and knew that this was a Boeing. I knew this was a civilian plane. But for me this meant nothing. It is easy to turn a civilian type of plane into one for military use."

[Quent]

You guys are also not to forget that Nicholas is swedish, like the GR.1 :detective::detective::detective: Let us begin : ATCHATCHATCHATCHATCHATCHATCHA TCHA!

[AG-51_Razor]

Doesn't the Tornado have thrust reverse? The coding for the aerodynamics associated with swing wings would have already been touched on with the Tomcat and the Tornado has a pretty complex ground attack suite of radar avionics. Just thought I'd throw that out there. :pilotfly:

[Davee]

F-111

Avionics and aerodynamic considerations for the developer and . . . . interesting fit for the time period.

[didilman]

F-111?

Im not in Ill wait F-14 and wait what is next.

Im still in russian want Mig-25 or 23.

[Sierra99]

Big statement to make considering they never overflew the USSR...

 

However, they did indeed try to intercept them with zero success...

[tovivan]

The worst part of that incident was that the Su-15 pilot sent to intercept the 747 positively identified it as a civilian aircraft... and was ordered to shoot it down anyway.

.

 

We actually briefly touched that incident in my 20th Century Eastern Europe History class years back at Uni. There's more to it than what meets the eye.

 

The backstory is that the US were using spy planes for quite a while before that masquerading as civilian airliners to spy on anything they could and everybody knew it. Of course it's easy to portray shooting down innocent civilians as "typical barbarism of a brutal/inhumane totalitarian regime", but the truth is never as clear-cut as that.

 

Did the pilot know there were actual civilians in the plane? Or did he think there was a chance it was the crew of the intelligence-gathering equipment dressed in civilian clothes IF he could even see the people inside? Did the GCI know? Did the General who ordered the shooting down know with absolute certainty? Or was there enough doubt to think "the Americans are up to their usual tricks" and were exploiting protection given to them by using a civilian-looking airplane? Was there maybe something extremely top-secret taking place/being there right at that time in that area when suddenly an airplane appeared that could've been a spy plane?

 

Btw., that's not the only case of an airliner falling prey to a military: a US Navy ship shot down an Iranian airliner (Iran Air Flight 655) in 1988, quoting: "in Iranian airspace, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, and on the flight's usual flight path". The ship was knowingly violating Iranian waters at that moment. The US never apologies (to anyone, even the families of the victims) for the shoot-down, nor did it ever accept legal liability.

 

There were no tribunals called for either of these incidents.

 

USSR did shoot down a U-2, tho.

 

IIRC, without going to check, it was over USSR territory. Spies are and have always been treated differently than openly military-units. Due to the nature of their work there is no quarter given to them and were usually executed after being interrogated. For example, during WWI on the Western Front it was enough someone was caught with rubber gloves for him to be summarily executed as a spy by the Germans (German Western defences had an electrical wire system as part of the protection).

 

Some secret agencies tried to prevent that by giving their agents military ranks (British SOE) and even having them wear rank insignia on sabotage missions, but that usually didn't work. Opponent's order (on both sides) was almost always to execute after interrogation to get useful information. Unless there was a chance to recruit them as a double-agent (England-Spiel).

 

And if they catch a foreign/hostile plane over their territory and it turns out it's a spy plane then very few countries would hesitate shooting it down if they had the capabilities and no-one would question their right to do so. Not only is such a plane violating sovereignity of that country's skies, but it's also spying. As said, spies are always treated differently. The proof of such spying by losing it's plane got the US into quite an uncomfortable diplomatic mess.

 

To get back on topic:

Anyway, as you say we're getting off topic here. I think a MiG-25 would be an interesting addition to the sim, especially because we might see people developing tactics for it against F-15s and the like.

 

Totally agree! It would bring a new aspect to air engagements, as a MiG-25 would be able to engage and disengage at leisure, but still being hampered by obsolete systems and missiles. Almost boom-and-zoom.

 

PLUS the MiG-25 isn't really a top-secret, is it? I mean the American and the Japanese had one for a few days and they took it apart (the Soviet engineers found American and Japanese electronics hacked onto the systems and the fuselage was full of holes), so it's technologies have been discovered decades ago. That's what spurned the development of the MiG-31 - move-on from technologies that were known to the West and get back advantage given by using secret tech.

 

IIRC the entire Western scientific community was laughing because they found some obsolete technologies in the plane. It stopped laughing when they discovered those obsolete technologies allowed the 25 to operate after a nuclear strike and EMP blast while their own planes would've fallen out of the sky.

 

If the Russians are not forthcoming with the documentation and specifications required to make a DCS level module, then the only thing ED has to do is file a FoIA request in the US for the reports IF they're not public-access area to being with... :D

 

Thus there is no reason or even excuse not to make a 25. :D

 

/case

Edited September 14, 2015 by tovivan

[Farlander]

Id like to say that there is way more to both of these cases where the airliners were shot down. You can do your own research, and in the end you are going to notice that both of them happened because of confusion.

 

If you want to know the whole deal, go read up on it. if it's the usual USA vs. USSR arguement then im sorry to say that both incident were just as bad, but the one in Iran is just simply more disgusting...

 

Can the MiG-25/31 shoot down the sr-71?.... we don't know.

[NineLine]

Guys, lets keep it on topic, the airline shoot downs isnt relevant to this topic.

[Vantskruv]

This!!

 

[Solty]

I am more interested in the second plane, that I would love to see some aircraft from Pacific theatre like A6M Zero or F4U Corsair :3

 

Zero would be ideal enemy for the P40F Though :)

[Capn kamikaze]

Big statement to make considering they never overflew the USSR...

 

Believe that if you want....

[J7G]

If you want to continue this particular conversation you can PM me with links and references and we can talk about it there.

[Nerd1000]

I am more interested in the second plane, that I would love to see some aircraft from Pacific theatre like A6M Zero or F4U Corsair :3

 

Zero would be ideal enemy for the P40F Though :)

 

And of course with a Zero we could reenact the F-14 vs Zero scene from The Final Countdown.

 

[thaisocom]

Doesn't the Tornado have thrust reverse? The coding for the aerodynamics associated with swing wings would have already been touched on with the Tomcat and the Tornado has a pretty complex ground attack suite of radar avionics. Just thought I'd throw that out there. ilotfly:

Tornado would be another interesting aircraft to fly.

[QuiGon]

Tornado would be another interesting aircraft to fly.

 

I'd for sure love that, but i doubt it. VEAO has their hands on it, so I don't think Leatherneck will do it too. But maybe I'm wrong and they're developing the Tornado IDS, while VEAO is doing the Tornado GR. That would be totally awesome, but again I doubt it.

Edited November 1, 2016 by QuiGon

[Dudikoff]

And of course with a Zero we could reenact the F-14 vs Zero scene from The Final Countdown.

 

I keep seeing these kinds of posts, but does anybody seriously wants to reenact that? You can use some of the current WWII modules and see just how fun would that be.

[thaisocom]

I'd for sure love that, but i doubt it. CEAO has their hands on it, so I don't think Leatherneck will do it too. But maybe I'm wrong and they're developing the Tornado IDS, while VEAO is doing the Tornado GR. That would be totally awesome, but again I doubt it.

Maybe LN will do Tornado ECR.

[QuiGon]

Maybe LN will do Tornado ECR.

 

I would be happy with that too, although not as much as I would be with a Tornado IDS. But a dedicated SEAD plattform would be nice, especially if it is one (or even the?) best SEAD platform out there.

[Hiromachi]

I keep seeing these kinds of posts, but does anybody seriously wants to reenact that? You can use some of the current WWII modules and see just how fun would that be.

 

I think it merely a joke. There would be little fun in such thing. On the other hand knowing that VEAO goes with F4F and P-40 having Zeke or Oscar and Tony would be a fun to play.

[Krupi]

Personally hoping for a Mig 23 or Mig 21 opposition, until I got my hands on Leathernecks Mig 21 I didn't care much for jets! Now I can't wait to see what they are working on!!!

 

Whatever it is after my Mig 21 experience it will be a day 1 purchase/pre-order :thumbup:

[assafm25]

Tornado GR and IDS its not the some ?

from WIKI

 

Tornado IDS

Tornado GR1

RAF IDS variants were initially designated the Tornado GR1 with later modified aircraft designated Tornado GR1A, Tornado GR1B, Tornado GR4 and Tornado GR4A. The first of 228 GR1s was delivered on 5 June 1979, and the type entered service in the early 1980s. A total of 142 aircraft were upgraded to GR4 standard from 1997 to 2003.[49]

 

i think u ask for the ADV Air To Air version

[TomCatMucDe]

i can garantee a day one prepurchase as long as it's no WW2 or Korean era jet.