|
Psion posted:Personally, I think they got it right the second time around with the MiG-31: The -31 is pretty cool also. Mr. Despair, thanks for the extra information about Pegasus/Orbital Sciences.
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
What's the difference between the -25 and the -31? Avionics upgrades and stuff like that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
Mike-o posted:What's the difference between the -25 and the -31? Avionics upgrades and stuff like that? The MiG-31 is a two-man cockpit (most -25s are one-man) with somewhat newer gear in a lot of respects. IIRC the engines are more durable, the radar is better, and so on. It's actually slower, since going Mach 3+ in a MiG-25 usually melted the engines before too long anyway. It's also more specifically an interceptor and AWACS hunter, whereas the MiG-25 was intended to also be a reconnaissance aircraft or even a bomber.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Also, he's 6'1" which is probably pretty big for Soviet air assault troops. I'm 5'11" and not fat and could literally not fit in various Russian tanks/APCs I played around with and still close the hatch, wearing no gear at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
The biggest difference though, is that the -31 is an entirely different airframe. It's smaller by volume in any case. They may look like the same aircraft, but no two measurements are the same. And who cares if the -31 is somehow a better kite, the MiG-25 is the most  machine in history. It goes so fast that it Melts, ffs. Fastest fighter everrr...
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:45
|
|
|
Also probably the worst fighter ever, because it's not really a fighter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
A low low price for
ThisIsJohnWayne fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Also probably the worst fighter ever, because it's not really a fighter. Counterpoint: F-102/106, F-111
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I'm 5'11" and not fat and could literally not fit in various Russian tanks/APCs I played around with and still close the hatch, wearing no gear at all. The issue of space inside Soviet fighting vehicles was a legitimate issue. The T-55 and T-62 both had godawful rates of fire something like 1/2 to 1/3rd that of NATO tanks like the M48/M60/Chieftain/Leopard 1 even in optimal conditions with a great crew and a full load of ammunition simply because the crew compartment made it extremely difficult for the loader to do his job. The solution to the rate of fire issue was the autoloader first introduced in the T-64 but the Soviets still found that the crews tired out pretty quickly due to the cramped conditions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 03:28
|
|
|
Some of the FSU IFVs that carried a squad or fire team had an entry hole roughly 3.5 feet off the ground that was a square, maybe 18" on a side at most. You know what's loving awkward? Crawling through an 18x18" hole 3.5 feet off the ground.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Everyone here has watched "The Day After" right? The 1983 made for TV movie? It's probably the best of the 80's Nuclear Apocalypse movies. The complete movie is on Youtube and available in 480P at 1.75:1 ratio which is about as good as you'll ever find. I have the original VHS because I'm a giant post-appoc nerd.. I still break out my VCR once or twice a year to watch it with folks who haven't seen it before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUEINQCKLHc Also, there are just a ton of great 40's - 70's DoD / U.S. government produced training films and documentarys that cover everything about coldwar USA all over youtube. I've been thinking about trawling all the various ones that have been uploaded and creating a comprehensive "Neat original cold war video's" playlist. Any interest? Or better yet, anyone interested in helping me?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 05:08
|
|
CISNAZI WEEDHITLER posted:Everyone here has watched "The Day After" right? The 1983 made for TV movie? It's probably the best of the 80's Nuclear Apocalypse movies. Oh my god look at how loving wrong you are. http://youtu.be/_MCbTvoNrAg
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
Smiling Jack posted:Oh my god look at how loving wrong you are. And if you favor the depressing over the frightening, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9aHT-IlkHo
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Counterpoint: F-102/106, F-111 F-117 It baffles me why that or the aardvark was given a fighter designation. Were either of them wired up for any air to air weapons at all? mlmp08 posted:I'm 5'11" and not fat and could literally not fit in various Russian tanks/APCs I played around with and still close the hatch, wearing no gear at all. 5'6" supremacy  literally the only thing where that is really an advantage...well, that and dodgeball
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
Might have been even ok with an A designation. It drops bombs, but veeery few of them at a time. drat thing maxes out at 2x2000 lb bombs. Edit: The 117 designation is also really weird. Since it was developed after they switched the numbering system. Wiki claims it was the random call number they used during trial flights and it somehow stuck. Alaan fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
I remember seeing a documentary on the f-117 and I'm sure someone was saying they gave it an f designation to attract fighter pilots who wouldn't otherwise want to fly a bomber.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 07:55
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:It baffles me why that or the aardvark was given a fighter designation. Were either of them wired up for any air to air weapons at all? It was always meant to be a fighter-bomber type aircraft, with the Navy variant being an interceptor carrying Phoenix missiles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 08:10
|
|
|
I thought the F-117's designator was intended as another throwoff, part of keeping it secret, so that if anyone came on the name they'd be looking in the wrong places for what it was. Everything else F-112+ is some variant of missile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
The F-111's designation came out of the pre-1962 system, and with it being planned as a multi-role plane, the fighter moniker was the only logical thing to attach to it (since of course pilots don't want to fly anything else than the fastest, pointiest, shooting-downest of aircraft). The same kind of thinking might have prevailed with the Nighthawk but seeing as Wikipedia quotes a 2006 ~History Channel~ show on it, I'd rather pass up on that particular explanation (even if it was said by someone involved in the project they might as well have been shooting the poo poo anyway). Surely the simplest and most rational explanation is the Tonopah Test Range radio callsign/4477 TES usage thing: secretprojects.co.uk forum posted:[...] the USAF has continued to use the old three-digit series unofficially for secret evaluation of foreign types and a few black programs. Designations such as YF-110 (a MiG-21), YF-113G (a secret US prototype), YF-117A (which became the Nighthawk), YF-117D (a Northrop program, the Tacit Blue I think) for instance have been identified. Apart from the now public F-117, Tacit Blue and Bird of Prey, and the declassified YF-110, none of these has been publicly ackowledged. Here's the YF-110 story: http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2010/June%202010/0610doughnut.aspx e: Of course, designation-systems has had it figured out for years and I forgot all about it 
Koesj fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Aug 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
CISNAZI WEEDHITLER posted:Everyone here has watched "The Day After" right? The 1983 made for TV movie? It's probably the best of the 80's Nuclear Apocalypse movies. The complete movie is on Youtube and available in 480P at 1.75:1 ratio which is about as good as you'll ever find. I have the original VHS because I'm a giant post-appoc nerd.. I still break out my VCR once or twice a year to watch it with folks who haven't seen it before. Lol, you silly-dilly, that's not THREADS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
joat mon posted:And if you favor the depressing over the frightening, There's also an Uzbek animated adaptation of Bradbury's story "There Will Come Soft Rains": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfI69DC_jaw
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:I thought the F-117's designator was intended as another throwoff, part of keeping it secret, so that if anyone came on the name they'd be looking in the wrong places for what it was. Everything else F-112+ is some variant of missile. I thought that was the skipped F-19 designation when the Tigershark was built? It fooled Tom Clancy, heh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
quote:They wanted to redesignate the F-5G as F-20A, because they preferred an even number. The Soviet competitors in the export fighter market of the early 1980s all used odd numbers, and Northrop wanted to stand out from these. *Fighter marketing*
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
Well it didn't work because Reagan did the smart thing by letting people buy the F-16 anyway. Would have been kind of cool if it had gone into ANG service though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Counterpoint: F-102/106, F-111 F-106s were actually pretty drat good interceptors. The other two stand, though. Koesj beat me to the punch on the Tonopah/4477th TES thing with the -117...it's still really amusing to me how we crafted a cover story inside a cover story, in that the plan for the Red Eagles from the beginning was to be a cover for the F-117. They started flying random poo poo up around Tonopah prior to starting up the Red Eagle program to serve as a "cover" for that, but from the beginning the plan was to use that "black" program to serve as cover for building up Tonopah to support the F-117. As they transitioned the Red Eagles from a black world to grey program in the mid '80s the F-117 program ramped up and the extra activity at Tonopah was explained away as supporting the MiGs that weren't officially there. It was never really a secret that we had the MiGs, what was secret (and remained secret until the program was declassified) was what we were doing with them...the thing that really needed to be kept completely secret was the F-117. If you all haven't read Davies' Red Eagles, you need to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Also probably the worst fighter ever, because it's not really a fighter. World's fastest mobile anti-aircraft missile site?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:F-106s were actually pretty drat good interceptors. Air to air nukes is just cheating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 03:57
|
|
|
CISNAZI WEEDHITLER posted:Everyone here has watched "The Day After" right? The 1983 made for TV movie? It's probably the best of the 80's Nuclear Apocalypse movies. The complete movie is on Youtube and available in 480P at 1.75:1 ratio which is about as good as you'll ever find. I have the original VHS because I'm a giant post-appoc nerd.. I still break out my VCR once or twice a year to watch it with folks who haven't seen it before. Yes, I watch way way too many of those things. For a good "bomber era" one look for A Day Called X. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueEl7A7KaHA MX Missile fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VACjHMrvJXM SAC Global Shield 1980 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFQQB-Dn5CQ Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Aug 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9be_1376591341 I'd like to imagine some eccentric Russian billionaire was out enjoying his Cold War play-set. The music just makes it even more awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:F-106s were actually pretty drat good interceptors. The Army in a shocking display of competence actually managed to keep a lid on the T-80U they had tooling around Aberdeen. It took nearly a decade for photos of it to leak out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
falen55 posted:From right to left (SU-100, IS-2, SU-152, the rest I don't know)
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 11:54
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:That "SU-152" looks to actually be an ISU-122; the casemate looks too tall for an SU-152 and the gun appears to be a 122mm not a 152mm. I think you're right. The gun looks very similar to the IS-2 right beside it. Also seems like the ISU-152 had either the short stubby arty gun like in one of the other pics, or the long death cannon that was added after WW2, like this: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
Frozen Horse posted:World's fastest mobile anti-aircraft missile site? It's a like comparing a top fuel car to an F-1 car. If you use it in the right situation, the top fueler is going to own bones. But anywhere else, it's worthless. The way the MiG-25 shot down that old F/A-18 (not super hornet) was to run the gently caress away, slow down so it could turn around, then catch back up and shoot from behind. That's not a very sound tactical doctrine for a fighter. Edit: V I can't even bring myself to respond. Godholio fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Aug 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Counterpoint: The MiG-25 is the coolest looking plane ever. It just looks completely badass from any angle. If I could take a ride in any plane, that would be the one. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Counterpoint: The MiG-25 is the coolest looking plane ever. It just looks completely badass from any angle. If I could take a ride in any plane, that would be the one. Save your pennies! rusadventures.com/tour6.shtml
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
I had a dream last night that I watched one of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu-160 crash into my parents' front yard. Soviet markings and everything. I took pictures, too, so I was kind of disappointed when I woke up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
Admiral Bosch posted:I had a dream last night that I watched one of these: Do you read old issues of Soviet Military Power before you go to bed? It's okay I do too sometimes, lots of fun vintage Cold War DOD publishing. Very nice art too
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Air to air nukes is just cheating. All's fair in love and global thermonuclear war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:Yes, I watch way way too many of those things. For a good "bomber era" one look for A Day Called X. Oh thanks man, these are 3 really good additions to my playlist. If anyone else has suggestions for awesome cold war / nuclear war youtube video's to add to the playlist please lemme know!
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:All's fair in love and global thermonuclear war. The only way to win is not to play.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 21:31
|
|
