MiG-17PF

[303_Kermit]

1 hour ago, foxbat155 said:

Well, lots of false info here.

1. Lim-5M wasn't frontline fighter, but first polish attempt to build a light attack aircraft based on licence MiG-17F version called Lim-5,

2.Lim-6Bis was a final variant of few "light attack aircraft" variations on trials, like Lim-5M, Lim-6,

3.Lim-6M was a Lim-5P (MiG-17PF), rebuild into Lim-6bis standard of light attack aircraft during 70's, radar was removed,

4.Original MiG-17F was NEVER armed with R-3S missiles, few cuban MiG-17 were rebuild localy in order to use those missiles, only some chinese J-5 fighters got chinese copys of R-3S,

5.Polish Lim-5P was, similary like original Soviet PF,  a pure gunfighter, and never used any AA missiles, only limited amount of Soviet PFU's had 4xRS-1U and removed guns, exclusively for Soviet PVO,

6.MiG-17 and then MiG-17F borrowed a lot from MiG-15,

7. On the photo you can see original Soviet MiG-17PF with RP-1 radar, PolAF used about 20 of them, Polish built Lim-5P was based on the later PF wariant with RP-5 radar.

 

Well... Lots of mistakes here:
1. Lim-5 was still a frontline fighter, (some say fighter-bomber) with added A2G capability (limited). Lim-5 = MiG-17F - that is true. MiG-21 bis also carry some bombs. In spite of it - it's frontline fighter
2. Lim-6M are rebuilt Lim-5M to standard of Lim-6bis (built in series. Lim-6 stayed as a trial)
3. It's actually opposite, as I wrote above. It's worth to mention that Lim-6bis in comparison to Lim-5M has:
-Syrena-2 and SRO-2 (RWR and IFF)
-Front armor plate 10mm (640x666 - 29,3kg)
-Front armor glass (60mm-12,65kg)
-seat armor plate (16mm 305x450mm - 16kg)
-head armor plate ( bended armor plate 280mmx320mm)
-added an extra 2x wing pylons
-breaking parachute in Lim-6bis. Lim-6M has no parachute - the main visible difference between 6M and 6bis

4. .Original MiG-17F was NEVER armed with R-3S missiles - almost true.  I mentioned a modification pack called "AS" for MiG-17F. It was used used in CCCP only (it was offered to other WP members, but wasn't warm accepted, since new MiG-s were already available)

5. Thank you for correcting me. Yes I made a mistake - I mistaked A MiG-17PF (Fresco D) with MiG-17PM (Fresco E)
see fotos. Sorry . Had those pictures deep in my mind in "Technika Wojskowa" and I was sure they were Lim's. Thanks again for being precise.

6. At the beginning - yes it should be a MiG 15 with afterburner. First modification was a additional fuselage section. Very soon it became clear that it's not enough. Actual flight test took more time as development of MiG-19. Whole new Wing. new design implemented whole new - structure and aerodynamics . Wings are stiffer and have more swept angle. New Elevator - redesigned to keep effectiveness in transonic speeds (unlike MiG-15). - Leed to whole new design. (Aerodynamic and structure)

7. Thanks for the info.

Edited June 27, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[foxbat155]

22 minutes ago, 303_Kermit said:

Well... Lots of mistakes here:
1. Lim-5 was still a frontline fighter, (some say fighter-bomber) with added A2G capability (limited). Lim-5 = MiG-17F - that is true. MiG-21 bis also carry some bombs. In spite of it - it's frontline fighter
2. Lim-6M are rebuilt Lim-5M to standard of Lim-6bis (built in series. Lim-6 stayed as a trial)
3. It's actually opposite, as I wrote above. It's worth to mention that Lim-6bis in comparison to Lim-5M has:
-Syrena-2 and SRO-2 (RWR and IFF)
-Front armor plate 10mm (640x666 - 29,3kg)
-Front armor glass (60mm-12,65kg)
-seat armor plate (16mm 305x450mm - 16kg)
-head armor plate ( bended armor plate 280mmx320mm)

4. .Original MiG-17F was NEVER armed with R-3S missiles - almost true.  I mentioned a modification pack called "AS" for MiG-17F. It was used used in CCCP only (it was offered to other WP members, but wasn't warm accepted, since new MiG-s were already available)

5. Thank you for correcting me. Yes I made a mistake - I mistaked A MiG-17PF (Fresco D) with MiG-17PM (Fresco E)
see fotos. Sorry . Had those pictures deep in my mind in "Technika Wojskowa" and I was sure they were Lim's. Thanks again for being precise.

6. At the beginning - yes it should be a MiG 15 with afterburner. First modification was a additional fuselage section. Very soon it became clear that it's not enough. Actual flight test took more time as development of MiG-19. Whole new Wing. new design implemented whole new - structure and aerodynamics . Wings are stiffer and have more swept angle. New Elevator - redesigned to keep effectiveness in transonic speeds (unlike MiG-15). - Leed to whole new design. (Aerodynamic and structure)

7. Thanks for the info.

 

 

 

 

1. Lim-5 was a frontline fighter, but Lim-5M not, this was a dedicated light attack aircraft with secondary fighter capability due to much worse flight performance,

2, 3. Nothing was oposite, in early 70's commanders of communists PolAF decided that Lim-5P interceptors are already obsolete, but because aircrafts were quite young and in good condition they decided to rebuild them to Lim-6bis standard, those aircrafts were called after that rework Lim-6M, part of Lim-6M got AFA-39 camera in external underfuselage pod, those were called Lim-6MR, there is no difference in armor between polish MiG-17 variants, all of them had SPO-2, only early production Lim-5 had SRO-1, all rest SRO-2. Lim-5M's were rebuild to Lim-6bis standard as a series 1 and 2 and 3 (aircrafts with bort number start from digit 1 or 2 or 3), Lim-6's were rebuild as a series 4, new production aircrafts as a series 5 and 6,

Briefly:

Lim-5--> Lim-5M--> Lim-6bis series 1/2/3

Lim-6--> Lim-6bis series 4

Lim-5P--> Lim-6M or Lim-6MR

4. Nope, AS was a attack variant with added two pylons borrowed from MiG-21 and able to carry UB-16 pods, S-24 FFAR's and bombs, but NEVER any AA missiles, AS was created in half 70's, WP pact members had own attack variants already in service for over 10 years......

5. I didn't said those are the same aircrafts, I just said 17 borrow a lot from 15, like whole front part of fuselage, undercarriage, control system, many electrical and pneumatical systems, almost all electronics, about 90 percent of cockpit equipment, whole catapult chair on the beginning, etc.

[303_Kermit]

1 hour ago, foxbat155 said:

Lim-5--> Lim-5M--> Lim-6bis series 1/2/3

Wrong:
Lim-5M, 5P -> Lim6M (Lim-5 wasn't modified to 6M standard. They were too old) (no new Tail)
Lim-6bis is new built (has new Tail ) -> see foto

Lim-6 was only prototype. Not sure how many built (if ever more than one) so "Lim-6--> Lim-6bis series 4 " is not possible. 6bis is new built, and 6 wasn't built in a numbers. After initial tests the extra tanks were removed. 

4. You're wrong. I'm not talking about AS varian't (never heard about one, wasn't that interested). It was MiG-17F with modification pack called "AS". it's not the same.
null

Edited June 27, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[foxbat155]

Again:

Lim-5M (50 aircrafts built)--> rebuilt into Lim-6bis, series 1/2/3,

Lim-6 (60 aircrafts built)--> rebuilt into Lim-6bis,  series 4,

Lim-5P (129 aircrafts built)--> survived aircrafts were rebuilt into Lim-6M (42 aircrafts rebuilt) or Lim-6MR (12 aircrafts rebuilt).

Lim-5M have NOTHING to do with Lim-6M. Here photo of Lim-5M, conformal tanks on the wings, double main undercarriage wheels.

Yes, "AS" was a rework package for MiG-17 "without letter" and MiG-17F, after those works both variants were called MiG-17AS. Only A-G ordnance on the new pylons. Sorry for that :).

 

No point argue, I spent life on study all those things.

 

[some1]

Foxbat is correct here. 

Lim-5M was a complex Polish modification that intended to turn Mig-17 into attack aircraft. And a failure.

Lim-6 was another attempt at such modification, or rather the next phase of the whole project. Also a failure, IIRC the batch did not enter service.

Lim-6bis was a much less ambitious modification that finally worked, and the previous variants were rebuilt to this spec, plus new batches were built.

Lim-6M were 5P's rebuilt to serve similar role after they became useless as interceptors. Radars were removed and A2G pylons were added. 

 

[303_Kermit]

48 minutes ago, foxbat155 said:

 

No point argue, I spent life on study all those things.

 

I'm proud to finish a Technical university in Rzeszow. My professors were engineers from M-18, TS-11, Lim-2/5/6. prof. Klepacki, prof. Kopecki. 
Of course. It doesn't make me an expert form Lim's, but I am an aircraft engineer. I may go wrong about small details, but nobody today can say about all the details regarding Lim production.

Sources about Lim's are terribly inconsistent. Many original documents aren't anymore. Most western books base on inaccurate sources. (it's enough to say that wikipedia says that there were 60 Lim-5M and 40 Lim-6). And I remember other books that mentioned whole different numbers (or saying that actually Lim-6 was only a prototype). 

The mess is even bigger when one realise that a tail part of Lim-5 .... was replaceable with the one from Lim-2. And in military bases in purpose of well... various other reasons (understandable only if you're born in comunism) they were replaced repeatedly. Such planes were called by its pilots as far as I recall Lim-2,5 (or something like that). I knew personally a pilot who stated, that they became such mutants from Mielec factory.
Many other planes were built not according to any mentioned above standards (like Lims without double carriage but with extra tanks). Also I know that there were at least couple variants of wing with conformal tanks. To make the matter more complicated, planes used to be rebuilt during main repairs (performed in WSK PZL Mielec) and according to current demand up- or downgraded.

It looks good and clear only in the books I'm afraid.

Edited June 27, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[foxbat155]

Please be aware, that wasn't my intention to lecture you. I agree that many sources give misleading information, many names/designation are confusing. I spent a lot of time on reading books, manuals, studing photos, in order to gain knowledge about those aircrafts and I know how easy people can lost, I lost myself many times...
For those who interested with, from MiG company leaflet about AS package:

Edited June 28, 2023 by foxbat155

[dcn]

2023/6/27 PM9点56分，303_Kermit说：

Lim-5M / Lim-5P (frontline fighter / Interceptor) Lim-6M/Lim-6bis (ground attack capabilities expanded).

Lim-5 Day-fighter (licensed MiG-17F) 

Lim-5P All-weather interceptor (licensed MiG-17PF) the radar was RP-5

Lim-5R Reconnaissance version of Lim-5

Lim-5M Fighter-bomber developed from Lim-5,60 built

Lim-5MR Reconnaissance version of Lim-5M

Lim-6 Modified version of Lim-5M,40 built

Lim-6bis New fighter-bomber version developed from Lim-5,development began in 1962(A total of 70 Lim-6bis bombers were built, some previously built Lim-5M and Lim-6 aircraft were converted to Lim-6bis before Lim-6bis began mass production)

Lim-6R Reconnaissance variant of Lim-6bis

Lim-6M Fighter-bomber converted from Lim-5P since 1971(The RP-5 radar and all associated equipment were removed from the aircraft, but the radome remained,without drag parachute)

Lim-6MR Reconnaissance aircraft, conversion of Lim-5P

2023/6/27 PM9点56分，303_Kermit说：

MiG-17F has nothing to do with MiG-15

MiG-17F is MiG-17 with afterburner.

'The serial MiG-17 fighter had many differences from the prototype.  Don't forget that ordinary MiG-15bis have been converted into prototypes.  The prototype did not differ from the MiG-15 except for the wings and vertical tail.'

Though he said 'many differences' here,I think different people have different opinions of 'how many' should be called 'many'.

2023/6/27 PM9点56分，303_Kermit说：

It won't be in any way similar to MiG-15...

'The first production series of MiG-17 fighters began to leave the factory in August 1951.  In October, the aircraft entered combat units for operational testing.

The first MiG-17s were mainly used to perform air superiority missions and escort bombers in simple daylight weather conditions.  The flight characteristics and piloting techniques of the MiG-17 did not change much compared to the MiG-15, except for the behavior of the aircraft at high transonic speeds and in the transonic range.  For experienced pilots, mastering the MiG-17 after flying the MiG-15 is not a problem.  Only five weeks were allocated for retraining.'

2023/6/27 PM9点56分，303_Kermit说：

and G suit installation

Later batches of MiG-15bis had PPK-1 system.

2023/6/27 PM9点56分，303_Kermit说：

and one more thing. Lim-5p (MiG-17PF) on foto. do you see a cannon?

Yes,I do.MiG-17PF has 3*NR-23 cannons.

[303_Kermit]

7 hours ago, dcn said:

MiG-17F is MiG-17 with afterburner.

'The serial MiG-17 fighter had many differences from the prototype.  Don't forget that ordinary MiG-15bis have been converted into prototypes.  The prototype did not differ from the MiG-15 except for the wings and vertical tail.'

Though he said 'many differences' here,I think different people have different opinions of 'how many' should be called 'many'.

You forget to add that a fuselage has also changed. It's longer than in MiG-15. And no - it's not obvious and easy job to do.
As for amount of job:
-One has to calculate vertical stability from the beginning. (basic)
-mass distribution changes (that's hard problem, since it affects stability and requires other work)
-Recalculate wings durability, and stiffness (complicated, requires static tests - expensive, + huge amount of difficult work for engineers team. It's easier to built new plane sometimes)
-New swept wings = new stall behaviour, new flatter behaviour, whole new aeroelastic characteristics, changes in stability. (Huge amount of work for engineers, great risk of failure, and a lot of test : static and in flight)
-New horizontal stab. and elevator (flatter tests, once again recalculate stability, redefine steering range, new transsonic characteristics) - big job. Lot of tests in tunel and in flight.
-new behaviour by transsonic (much bigger than in MiG-15) speeds -> wing airflow affects elevator in completely new way. Characteristics in subsonic range of speeds, and transonic speeds must fulfill requirements. Some changes that help in one range of speeds - disturb other characteristics by o other range of speeds. Crucial milestone of work - and in many cases a place of many failures (like in F-100 or F-104). Trials, calculations, wind tunnel tests, flight tests.

All tasks and changes are impossible for me to point out , but it's well described in couple publications. Those that I pointed out aren't even all the most important ones. I just wanted to show you briefly the amount of job done "just to change wings and horizontal stab."  

There are no (and can't be) different opinions about the temperature by which the water boils. MiG-17 was a complicated task for engineers, and they were pioneers in their job. Nobody done it before. Nobody to ask for advice. MiG-15 and MiG-17 look similar, but are not.

 

7 hours ago, dcn said:

Later batches of MiG-15bis had PPK-1 system.

... any sources for that info? What MiG's or what Lim's ? When and were produced?
 

 

7 hours ago, dcn said:

The first production series of MiG-17 fighters began to leave the factory in August 1951.  In October, the aircraft entered combat units for operational testing.

The first MiG-17s were mainly used to perform air superiority missions and escort bombers in simple daylight weather conditions.  The flight characteristics and piloting techniques of the MiG-17 did not change much compared to the MiG-15, except for the behavior of the aircraft at high transonic speeds and in the transonic range.  For experienced pilots, mastering the MiG-17 after flying the MiG-15 is not a problem.  Only five weeks were allocated for retraining.'

That is not what I meant, when I wrote "It won't be in any way similar to MiG-15..." I sense that you never flew DCS MiG-15bis. otherwise a sentence "MiG-17F is allowed to dive with full thrust without any limits" - would be enough for you to know that they're completely different animals. Yes. From 15 to 17 you can jump easily. and Yes - MiG-17F isn't just a MiG-15bis with afterburner. It's a huge jump

 

7 hours ago, dcn said:

Lim-5 Day-fighter (licensed MiG-17F) 

Lim-5P All-weather interceptor (licensed MiG-17PF) the radar was RP-5

Lim-5R Reconnaissance version of Lim-5

Lim-5M Fighter-bomber developed from Lim-5,60 built

You're just repeating what was already written here. @foxbat155 had cleared the subject beyond doubts. Read posts before you write something.
About numbers built - was already spoken here. In many aspects
About variants and their porpoises - was already spoken here. In many aspects

My best regards

Edited June 29, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[dcn]

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

You forget to add that a fuselage has also changed. It's longer than in MiG-15.

Attention,that's the text I quoted.Of course I know MiG-17 is longer.

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

There are no (and can't be) different opinions about the temperature by which the water boils. 

Maybe I didn't express it accurately enough.I think the appearance difference beween MiG-15bis and MiG-19 is big/huge,but the appearance difference beween MiG-15bis and MiG-17F isn't big/huge enough.

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

any sources for that info?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://i.4pcdn.org/tg/1508239255358.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwid-OWzk-z_AhWBKX0KHSe1DBIQFnoECCYQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0sGtnjwlruDgF4Skjq5uRN

https://arsenal-info.ru/b/book/1198779448/27

http://flibusta.site/b/500730/read

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

That is not what I meant, when I wrote "It won't be in any way similar to MiG-15..." I sense that you never flew DCS MiG-15bis. otherwise a sentence "MiG-17F is allowed to dive with full thrust without any limits" - would be enough for you to know that they're completely different animals.

 

Attention,that's the text I quoted.My original intention is appearance,there is nothing to do with performance.

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

"MiG-17F is allowed to dive with full thrust without any limits"

Time for me to ask the source.

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

MiG-17F isn't just a MiG-15bis with afterburner

I have never said this.

[303_Kermit]

10 hours ago, dcn said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://i.4pcdn.org/tg/1508239255358.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwid-OWzk-z_AhWBKX0KHSe1DBIQFnoECCYQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0sGtnjwlruDgF4Skjq5uRN

https://arsenal-info.ru/b/book/1198779448/27

http://flibusta.site/b/500730/read

It would be nice if you point out the proper page with info. I have of course first of mentioned books - and whole series of them  It's nice lecture, but its no valid source. There's many failures in it. It's not a "First hand source" - as for example flight manual or exploitation manual. I have such books for MiG-17 - and I assume that's the single really valuable source. The other fact is, that ... I can't recall where is says about MiG-15bis being produced with G-suit installation?

in the second source you mentioned I just found that:
quote:
"Еще два месяца активных боев с F-80, F-86 и В-29 позволили пилотам 64 ИАК сформулировать требования по улучшению МиГ- 15бис, впервые появившиеся в документах Корпуса. Главным образом летчики требовали от создателей самолета:

[...]

— оснастить самолет противоперегрузочным костюмом;" end quote

and later:
quote:
"Некоторые из ранее высказанных пилотами корпуса пожеланий уже удовлетворялись. Взамен автомата регулирования топлива АРТ-1К на двигателях МиГов 64 ИАК появился АРТ-8В, тот самый «автомат минимального давления топлива», который просили еще летчики 151 ГвИАД, в Корпус стали поступать самолеты, оснащенные «Барием-М» — ответчиком системы госопознавания. 3 января 1952 г. Министерство авиационной промышленности выпустило приказ №10 «О самолете МиГ-15бис», который предписывал окрасить истребители 64 ИАК матовой краской, оснастить МиГ- 15бис тормозными щитками увеличенной площади, установить дублирующее управление катапультой и обязывал завод №153 до 15 февраля 1952 г. оснастить трехканальными УКВ радиостанциями РСИУ-ЗМ «Клен» 60 «бисов» и направить их в 64 Корпус."

it rather proves my point. G-suit wasn't the feature onboard MiG-15bis... maybe in War Thunder?
The other problem with these publication is lack of any given sources. In good quality publication , author is obliged to point out the source on which one or another fact was presented.


As for third "source"
Again - the same case. It's not the first hand source. The text is long and very interesting. Thank you for that. I like such stories. I took my time and red google translation, and still I didn't found anything about MiG-15bis being produced with G-suit installation.
-Again as previous: problem with these publication is lack of any given sources. In good quality publication , author is obliged to point out the source of presented facts. Otherwise it's just pointless work. I can also made a website and write down any given storie. Without sources it has no value, other than fun.

As for other statements starting from word "Attention". 
I really try to understand your point, but I still failed. Can you please consider posting here in less emotional way? These place is made to exchange opinions and informations. It's natural that there are people who'll disagree with you.

However - 

10 hours ago, dcn said:

Attention,that's the text I quoted.My original intention is appearance,there is nothing to do with performance.

I see your point. It's simple truth, that we don't see the planes the same. It's all natural. I would call it "professional bias", but I don't know if it means the same in englisch as in my native language. MiG-17 and MiG-15 are for me so different as Ferrari 458 from Audi R8... "Some say" - they look the same. Just the two supercars. But if you came to Italy and say that in public you'll be ... Like sgt. Hartmann used to say "I a world of s..t" and you better run fast 
I tried - it's fun

With my best regards, and hope that you see my poing
Green Ugly Fellow 
 

Edited July 1, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[dcn]

14小时前，303_Kermit说：

It would be nice if you point out the proper page with info.

Page 27

14小时前，303_Kermit说：

G-suit wasn't the feature onboard MiG-15bis... maybe in War Thunder?

Please read it carefully.

'В апреле-мае 1953 г. все МиГ-15бис 64-го Корпуса были оснащены СПО, в июне на них начали устанавливать новые катапультируемые сиденья с улучшенной бронезащитой. В последний месяц Корейской войны МиГи начали дорабатываться под использование противоперегрузочных костюмов ППК-1. Так же, к концу войны, на сдвижных частях фонарей самолетов корпуса появились перископы ТС-27, улучшившие обзор задней полусферы.'

14小时前，303_Kermit说：

I took my time and red google translation, and still I didn't found anything about MiG-15bis being produced with G-suit installation.

Besides the same content above.

'Введение противоперегрузочного костюма ППК-1 - -Апрель 1953 г. - на всех МиГ-15бис.'

14小时前，303_Kermit说：

Can you please consider posting here in less emotional way?

I'm surprised you consider 'attention' as emotional word.

14小时前，303_Kermit说：

I see your point. It's simple truth, that we don't see the planes the same. It's all natural. I would call it "professional bias", but I don't know if it means the same in englisch as in my native language. MiG-17 and MiG-15 are for me so different as Ferrari 458 from Audi R8...  Audi R8... "Some say" - they look the same. Just the two supercars. But if you came to Italy and say that in public you'll be ... Like sgt. Hartmann used to say "I a world of s..t" and you better run fast  fast  
I tried - it's fun

I don't think it's necessary to go any further.My original intention is the appearance difference between MiG-15bis and MiG-19 is big/huge,but the appearance difference between MiG-15bis and MiG-17F isn't big/huge enough,there is nothing to do with performance.

23小时前，dcn说：

Time for me to ask the source.

I'm waiting for your reply.

Edited July 1, 2023 by dcn

[303_Kermit]

9 hours ago, dcn said:

Page 27

Yes. There is an Infor that:
"The PPK-1 system (-1.75 to +8 G) was added
only to the later batches of the MiG-15bis after the Korean
War had ended"
-it still lacks for any sources - on which the revelation is based. 

 

 

9 hours ago, dcn said:

В апреле-мае 1953 г. все МиГ-15бис 64-го Корпуса были оснащены СПО, в июне на них начали устанавливать новые катапультируемые сиденья с улучшенной бронезащитой. В последний месяц Корейской войны МиГи начали дорабатываться под использование противоперегрузочных костюмов ППК-1. Так же, к концу войны, на сдвижных частях фонарей самолетов корпуса появились перископы ТС-27, улучшившие обзор задней полусферы.'

It says: That [OKB Mikoyan] started to develop G-suit. Again lack of sources, but more important no info on about actual series production. It's not that easy to convert production line to built something new. I may also make no sense, in the light of new - improved constructions. MiG-17 and MiG-19. 

 

9 hours ago, dcn said:

Time for me to ask the source.

Source of what exactly? I'm not the one who tries to prove something. Logical conversation demands, that statement must be proved. If it would be otherwise , the world would be very hard place. One could then write "I say that in galaxy Andromeda flies an great pink magic unicorn. Prove me that there isn't."

With my best regards
Kermit

Edited July 2, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[foxbat155]

8 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

Yes. There is an Infor that:
"The PPK-1 system (-1.75 to +8 G) was added
only to the later batches of the MiG-15bis after the Korean
War had ended"
-it still lacks for any sources - on which the revelation is based.

I'm entirely sure this info is not true or in best case is some misunderstanding. All MiG-17 without letter didn't had PPK system during production, some of them got this system during overhauls, so why 15bis would get this and then further MiG-17 not?. Probably MiG-15bis had use as a PPK's testbed and this gave info about it. Manuals dated 1953/54 says nothing about PPK system, and this publishing date is after MiG-15 production end in USSR (1952).

[dcn]

2023/7/2 PM3点35分，303_Kermit说：

-it still lacks for any sources - on which the revelation is based. 

I don't think I need to talk to you anymore.It is really boring to talk with a stubborn person.

2023/7/2 PM3点35分，303_Kermit说：

It says: That [OKB Mikoyan] started to develop G-suit. Again lack of sources, but more important no info on about actual series production. It's not that easy to convert production line to built something new. I may also make no sense, in the light of new - improved constructions. MiG-17 and MiG-19

PPK-1 is g-suit,not aircraft component

2023/7/2 PM3点35分，303_Kermit说：

Source of what exactly? I'm not the one who tries to prove something. Logical conversation demands, that statement must be proved. If it would be otherwise , the world would be very hard place. One could then write "I say that in galaxy Andromeda flies an great pink magic unicorn. Prove me that there isn't."

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

"MiG-17F is allowed to dive with full thrust without any limits" 

Ok,now I know this is made up by you.

Edited July 3, 2023 by dcn

[some1]

7 hours ago, dcn said:

PPK-1 is g-suit,not aircraft component

To make gsuit work, you need a lot of extra aircraft components. Pneumatic pipes, regulators, electrical connections. Its not like you hop in and plug into cigarette lighter in the cockpit.

Here's a picture from red star facebook 

 

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0Cavw4RdKYs9Ecsc4BjCsPMHAHNxdo5Ao9iqb41Gq4Qkn7Yt5GuRd1g67Ha1dd5wfl&id=106049571612972

Edited July 3, 2023 by some1

[303_Kermit]

7 hours ago, dcn said:

Ok,now I know this is made up by you.

Here you go:
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB443/docs/area51_52.PDF
and here:
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB443/docs/area51_51.PDF

Those are USAF & USN made tests in flight of Lim-5 serial number 1C-07-18, built in Poland in 1956-57. The LIS-5 engine was serial number 559128 

Personally I enjoy such statements:
"Every Navy pilot engaged in the project lost his first engagement with the Fresco C. The Fresco's overall performance in the ACM {Air Combat Maneuvering) environment surprised all crews concerned with the project. The AlB on the Fresco engine gives it a performance level that cannot be duplicated or realistically simulated by U.S. airplanes with similar turn capability. Thus U.S. pilots were not accustomed to fighting an airplane with such an engine/turn performance combination. The relative age of the Fresco also led to a general overconfidence by U.S. crews prior to their first engagement. "

and here:
"There are no U.S. Navy airplanes that can simulate the
performance of the Fresco C. Consequently, the aircrews
who fought the Fresco during the test had no ACM training
against this type airplane. The great improvement in U.S.
Navy aircrew performance after only on simulated ACM
engagement dramatically illustrated the lack of realistic
ACM training"

In wikipedia (unfortunately only in english) there is a very good article with many sources given on it. Between them there's a statement:
" The afterburner doubled the rate of climb and greatly improved vertical maneuvers. But while the plane was not designed to be supersonic, skilled pilots could just dash to supersonic speed in a shallow dive, although the aircraft would often pitch up just short of Mach 1."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-17
Below the article there's very rich compilation of sources on which the article was created. You can check them out.

And finally here: from original flight instruction: The range of speeds.

There are various other statements, to confirm was I wrote, but that what I gave is enough. One has to apply aerodynamic laws for transonic range of speeds. (My advice is Арзанников Аэродинамика - I use polish translation of it). 
MiG-17 accelerates to it's maximum speed in horizontal flight, or in shallow dive. By reaching about Ma~1 as a result of built a shockwave on wing surface plane becomes tail heavy, and exits dive. The steeper the dive, the more vigorous pitch up reaction for it.

 

My best regards

Edited July 3, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[dcn]

17小时前，303_Kermit说：

Here you go:
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB443/docs/area51_52.PDF
and here:
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB443/docs/area51_51.PDF

I didn't find the same sentence in the pdf.

17小时前，303_Kermit说：

to confirm was I wrote

17小时前，303_Kermit说：

" The afterburner doubled the rate of climb and greatly improved vertical maneuvers. But while the plane was not designed to be supersonic, skilled pilots could just dash to supersonic speed in a shallow dive, although the aircraft would often pitch up just short of Mach 1."

Of course I know this.

17小时前，303_Kermit说：

but that what I gave is enough

2023/6/29 PM2点34分，303_Kermit说：

"MiG-17F is allowed to dive with full thrust without any limits" 

I'm still confused where do the 'full thrust' and 'without any limits' come from.

[303_Kermit]

5 hours ago, dcn said:

I'm still confused where do the 'full thrust' and 'without any limits' come from.

Terribly sorry to hear about your confusion.

[foxbat155]

7 hours ago, dcn said:

I'm still confused where do the 'full thrust' and 'without any limits' come from.

Well, actually this is very simple, some engines have compressor/turbine revolutions speed limitations, some aircrafts have speed limit during diving, so in MiG-17 you don't have to worry about the engine and aircraft itself during the dive.

[dcn]

2小时前，foxbat155说：

Well, actually this is very simple, some engines have compressor/turbine revolutions speed limitations, some aircrafts have speed limit during diving, so in MiG-17 you don't have to worry about the engine and aircraft itself during the dive.

MiG-17's maximum mach limit is M 1.03

[ciekma]

On 7/2/2023 at 1:32 AM, dcn said:

I don't think it's necessary to go any further.My original intention is the appearance difference between MiG-15bis and MiG-19 is big/huge,but the appearance difference between MiG-15bis and MiG-17F isn't big/huge enough,there is nothing to do with performance.

I don't want to put the same information from earlier posts, but you take a wrong way

Therefore, just check the link below: 
https://www.roadrunnersinternationale.com/migs_area51.html 

There is a post from T.D. Barnes about "MiGs in Area 51". All limits, which Kermit gave you, are included in page. Author wrote:

2 hours ago, dcn said:

MiG-17's maximum mach limit is M 1.03

Being serious, it's only number for memorize which you can't cross. My questions are:

1) How many times you will fly with this speed ?
2) How do you want to reach this speed without diving? Excluding height...

For example, here's a table from "МиГ-15Бис - Техническое описание - Книга I":

Flying on MiG-15 above V = 0.98Ma is associated with pulling to the left side of your wing. Greenhorn couldn't control the plane with this speed without training and practise. But remember, the control above V = 0.85Ma is much harder than under. The best maneuver results you will get with V = 0.6Ma. 

Diving in MiG-15 isn't possible without reducing V with airbrakes. It's strongly connected with very heavy reaction on steering above V = 0.85Ma. Following your way of thinking, we can fly V = 1Ma without any imagination... It doesn't work like that... 

 

Regards,

Maciek

Edited July 4, 2023 by ciekma

[dcn]

1小时前，ciekma说：

I don't want to put the same information from earlier posts, but you take a wrong way

I don't want to say the same words again and again.

As for MiG-17's dive,I just want to say there are limits for MiG-17's dive,that's all.

[303_Kermit]

2 hours ago, dcn said:

As for MiG-17's dive,I just want to say there are limits for MiG-17's dive,that's all.

I have an Impression that you just like to argue. No matter the reason or person.
We presented you an arguments on why MiG-17 could dive without limits. However, to understand them you need, a knowledge of high speed aerodynamics, and shockwave mechanics at least. To understand that, you need a knowledge of thermodynamics and fluid mechanics. To understand that you need higher mathematics; like inverse Laplace transformations to begin with,  vector calculus, and conformal mappings to understand basic language of aerodynamic.

Then your statements will matter, you will understand what we're talking about, and people will care about:

 

2 hours ago, dcn said:

,I just want to say

With my best regards
Kermit

[foxbat155]

8 hours ago, dcn said:

MiG-17's maximum mach limit is M 1.03

 

Of course every aircraft have some limitations, in case of MiG-17 limitations are so small that can be ignored in some conditions, 1,03 Ma is a limit during normal service, peace time, because of increased flatter over that speed and decreased elevator efficiency, during war this limit is secondary, during dive on max. trust without afterburner aircraft is no able to cross speed of sound, so from this point of view pilot have no limitations in aircraft's handling during dive.

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by foxbat155