ED Team Groove Posted September 30, 2010 ED Team Share Posted September 30, 2010 (edited) Just reading a book about SR-71 and soviets were certainly able to shot down the SR-71 using their MiG-31s. Some times even visual contact with the SR-71 were made, but this was rather rare. Some interesting details: The Infrared Search and Aquisition Module was able to pickup a SR-71 around 100 km away because of the huge IR signature of the SR-71. On SR-71 intercept missions the the QRA Mig-31s intercept profile was calculated for exactly 16:00 minutes from crews running to their planes to the interception point. Immediately after a Alarm was sounded, maintenance crews put the R-60 off the Mig-31s because of R-60 being useless above Mach 1.65 (stated by russian Mig-31 driver). After the intercept the Mig-31 had to cool down at mid angels because if they would have descented too fast, structural damage or even catastrophic damage to the plane was possible. Edited October 1, 2010 by Groove 1 Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikoyan89 Posted September 30, 2010 Share Posted September 30, 2010 Very interesting.Book title? YouTube Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Groove Posted October 1, 2010 ED Team Share Posted October 1, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-Blackbird-Missions-General-Aviation/dp/1846038464 Very detailed and well written book. Published by the makers of the SR-71. Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diveplane Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 (edited) imo russian aircraft are more robust and stand out in the elements for long periods, where a western f16 or f22 would take a big fart, subjected to the elements for long periods of time and low maintance. imo russian tech has always been more hands on and a mechanical approach due to cheaper costs in building, simple running and designs. video below on russian aircraft, example below of the su25 robust simplistic design. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2mKSgvLmhI&feature=related Edited October 1, 2010 by diveplane https://www.youtube.com/user/diveplane11 DCS Audio Modding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 ^^^^ Bull. Huge number of Russian aircraft do NOT work precisely because what you said above was done due to budgetary reasons; maintenance was not performed. This 'ruggedness' thing is one of the biggest myths around. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscode Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 no, the myth that the ruggedness is a myth is a bigger myth :) Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikoyan89 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-Blackbird-Missions-General-Aviation/dp/1846038464 Very detailed and well written book. Published by the makers of the SR-71. Thanx YouTube Blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 imo russian aircraft are more robust and stand out in the elements for long periods, where a western f16 or f22 would take a big fart, subjected to the elements for long periods of time and low maintance. imo russian tech has always been more hands on and a mechanical approach due to cheaper costs in building, simple running and designs. video below on russian aircraft, example below of the su25 robust simplistic design. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2mKSgvLmhI&feature=related FALSE, sorry. As GG mentioned, they have been negleted. Aircraft like F-16, GRIPEN and Mirage-2000 are the most maintenace friendly fighter aircraft you will find. Plus they require less overhauls and have bigger service life than any russian fghter. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscode Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 false, sorry you just forgot to include the airfield maintenance Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 If airfield maintenance is your criteria then the harrier and F-35 win hands down. ;) [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Jaw Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 false, sorry you just forgot to include the airfield maintenance Having crappy and ill-kept airfields like Russia's is NOT a good thing. ;) "You see, IronHand is my thing" My specs: W10 Pro, I5/11600K o/c to 4800 @1.32v, 64 GB 3200 XML RAM, ASUS RTX3060ti/8GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Groove Posted October 1, 2010 ED Team Share Posted October 1, 2010 Comparing two absolutely different approaches for military doctrines - im wondering you guys still do it after thousands of posting on this topic. Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Jaw Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Comparing two absolutely different approaches for military doctrines Fully aware of that. We may never know which one is superior. "You see, IronHand is my thing" My specs: W10 Pro, I5/11600K o/c to 4800 @1.32v, 64 GB 3200 XML RAM, ASUS RTX3060ti/8GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Groove Posted October 1, 2010 ED Team Share Posted October 1, 2010 Hopefully, history shows that the one which is more expendable with their Human Ressources will win over the one with superior technology. But that might have changed with the introduction of ICBMs. Thank god :D Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Jaw Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Hopefully, history shows that the one which is more expendable with their Human Ressources will win over the one with superior technology. Didn't help Iran in the 1980s. ;) With respect to WW2, the Soviets simply outnumbered the Germans. As Keitel said after the war, the Germans were rarely if ever outfought, they were simply outnumbered. "You see, IronHand is my thing" My specs: W10 Pro, I5/11600K o/c to 4800 @1.32v, 64 GB 3200 XML RAM, ASUS RTX3060ti/8GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Groove Posted October 1, 2010 ED Team Share Posted October 1, 2010 Iraq got some help in the 1st Gulf War :D after it became clear that Iran might get too strong. The situation up to 1987 wasn't that favourite for Iraq. Nobody asks if you have outfought your enemy or outnumbered, after you have won. I give you partially right Mower, this is a topic which can fill hundreds of forums pages ;) Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 History does NOT show this to be true; it shows it to be true under particular circumstances only. Hopefully, history shows that the one which is more expendable with their Human Ressources will win over the one with superior technology. But that might have changed with the introduction of ICBMs. Thank god :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscode Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Didn't help Iran in the 1980s. ;) With respect to WW2, the Soviets simply outnumbered the Germans. As Keitel said after the war, the Germans were rarely if ever outfought, they were simply outnumbered. they also had technology that was utterly inapropreate for the circumstances. from uniforms, gun oil to tank construction. saying that they were simply outnumbered is oversimplification, that would bite the ass of anyone who depended on it. Never forget that World War III was not Cold for most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPTIDE Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Didn't help Iran in the 1980s. ;) Actually it did. And I think you'll find the Soviet tactics in WW2 to be far more complex than what you are fed. Nevermind... it takes you 15mins to start your Ka-50. :helpsmilie: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Jaw Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 Nevermind... it takes you 15mins to start your Ka-50. :helpsmilie: LMAO. :thumbup: "You see, IronHand is my thing" My specs: W10 Pro, I5/11600K o/c to 4800 @1.32v, 64 GB 3200 XML RAM, ASUS RTX3060ti/8GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPTIDE Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 (edited) LMAO. :thumbup: HAH. Damn I was hoping you'd bite harder. :thumbup: Anyway on topic. Keitel would say that after the war. He was outnumbered 5:1 on the Western front and similar on the Eastern. Keitel probably should have been more nice with his words. They might have given him the honourable death of firing squad instead of the rope. Edited October 1, 2010 by RIPTIDE [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPTIDE Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 imo russian aircraft are more robust and stand out in the elements for long periods, where a western f16 or f22 would take a big fart, subjected to the elements for long periods of time and low maintance. imo russian tech has always been more hands on and a mechanical approach due to cheaper costs in building, simple running and designs. video below on russian aircraft, example below of the su25 robust simplistic design. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2mKSgvLmhI&feature=related Correct. Everything from the cannon to the wheel brakes. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikoyan Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 http://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-Blackbird-Missions-General-Aviation/dp/1846038464 Very detailed and well written book. Published by the makers of the SR-71. you made me spend 22 dollars!:thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronsightSniper Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 You'd also see that Raptors hate rain :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 They don't. They're parked outside in snow and rain. Lots of wishful thinking from its opponents there though ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts