8 ms·
A pilot who stole a secret Soviet fighter jet
- thesnowdog 10y ago"You must think in Russian"
- jlebrech 10y agohttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/
- ravenstine 10y agohaha, yes, I was thinking the same thing.
- rangibaby 10y agoI have to admit this was exactly the first thing that came to mind. However, it works in this case because the defecting pilot was Russian. lol
- wazoox 10y agoThe book is an extremely good,fast-paced thriller. The movie, not so much.
- CatsoCatsoCatso 10y agoAnother very interesting aircraft is the experimental Su-47, with only one ever being built. Its forward-swept wing design make it a treat for the eye. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47
- at-fates-hands 10y agoI saw in the article they mentioned new prototypes in the near future. You think they'll have something to unveil in the next few years?
- CatsoCatsoCatso 10y agoThe accepted and very informed answer to to a similar question on StackOverflow concludes that it is unlikely. http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/2360/what-are-the-advantages-of-a-forward-swept-wing-over-a-rearward-swept-wing http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/2360/what-are-th... See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-swept_wing#Return_of_the_fast_jet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-swept_wing#Return_of_t... They do look incredibly cool though.
- earcaraxe 10y agoI love that the Japanese sent it back to Russia with a bill for shipping and the damage to the airfield.
- tracymorgan8520 10y agoJust Japanese things.
- ptha 10y agoHard to believe the Soviets were using vacuum tubes instead of transistors In hindsight, the MiG 25, which the West had been so worried about, turned out to be a ‘paper tiger’. Its massive radar was years behind US models because instead of transistors it used antiquated vacuum tubes (a technology that did, however, make it impervious to electromagnetic pulses from nuclear blasts). The huge engines required so much fuel that the MiG was surprisingly short-ranged. It could take-off quickly, and fly in a straight line very fast to fire missiles or take pictures.
- atemerev 10y agoWe were _really_ preparing for nuclear war. While US military adopted the MAD doctrine, considering their nuclear weapons just the ultimate deterrent, Soviet generals thought that nuclear war can actually be fought — and won. I am quite surprised that we are not living in Fallout by now.
- arethuza 10y agoPretty sure the US and NATO had "flexible response" where they would have options other than MAD. NB I'm having a binge of reading novels about WW3 scenarios in Europe at the moment, my favourite being "Chieftans" by Bob Forrest-Webb, mind you it doesn't end well. [NB Rather hoping WoT gets to Challengers/Chieftans/M1s vs T-80s at some point...]
- digi_owl 10y agoMaybe after the Cuban Crisis. But Kennedy basically had to tell his advisors to shut up, because they were slavishly following RAND's escalation policy.
- nickff 10y agoKennedy repeatedly dismissed other opinions and had to change his positions after being proven wrong. He accused Eisenhower of allowing the Soviets to accumulate more missiles than the USA, and found out he was wrong after getting elected. Kennedy then supported the Bay of Pigs assault, but pulled back at the crucial moment when the rebels needed support, and the whole affair was a disaster. Kennedy even refused to admit that he had agreed to all of Kruschev's terms in relation to de-escalating the Cuban missile crisis, and pretended that it was a victory of American diplomacy and intimidation. Castro was also a troubled character who actually advocated using nuclear weapons against the USA, and had to be persuaded that it was a bad idea because the fallout would hit Cuba.
- jkot 10y ago> The Soviets had not built the ‘super-fighter’ the Pentagon had feared, says Smithsonian aviation curator Roger Connor, but an inflexible aircraft built to do a very particular job. There is no mention what MiG-25 was designed for. Its task was to intercept nuclear bombers flying over Soviet Union and it did this task pretty well. Because it used steel it was cheap and easy to service. At that time soviets had lot of experience with titanium (space, submarines), but expensive plane similar to SR-71 would not cover entire Soviet Union.
- rangibaby 10y agoI think a good lesson to learn is that primitive doesn't mean archaic. Most Soviet designs favored being cheap, hardy, and easy to maintain over using the latest or rare technology. The best example is of course the AK-47, but the same philosophy is seen throughout all of their designs. Their planes are all designed to use poorly maintained or damaged airfields, or even just dirt strips.
- draugadrotten 10y ago"With the MiG-25, you could take off from a grass strip, climb to FL800 and fly at Mach 3, and land on that grass strip again. Fascinating!" http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/7485/can-jet-airplanes-operate-on-rough-airfields http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/7485/can-jet-air...
- arethuza 10y ago"Most Soviet designs favored being cheap, hardy, and easy to maintain" I think it was Max Hastings who pointed out in the context of WW2 that there isn't much point in having tanks that are six times better than your enemies if they have ten times as many tanks as you do!
- rangibaby 10y agoTheir battle strategy (slow the enemy down for as long as possible) and weapons were informed by their experience in WW2. At the beginning of Barbarossa the USSR had many wacky, complex vehicles and arms that were prone to breaking down, if they even worked at all.
- nikcub 10y agoOne big difference between Soviet technology and American - the former was designed to be cheap, rugged and to survive a nuclear war. Unlike similar American jets, you can find Mig-25's in private hands today being maintained and flying. It is one of the only private experiences where you can break Mach 2 and get close to 90,000' feet[0]. I love the Mig-25 - like the AK-47 there is something very admirable in a plane that is designed to both perform so well but to also be so easy to maintain and with such longevity. [0] http://www.rusadventures.com/tour6.shtml http://www.rusadventures.com/tour6.shtml [1] "edge of space" flight - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVMuxx7YKY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCVMuxx7YKY
- adrianm 10y agoWhat about B-52s, T-38s, and come to think of it, isn't the F-16 pushing 40?
- 001spartan 10y agoThe F-16 is close to 40 years old, and the F-15 has been in service for 40 years as of 2016.
- hx87 10y ago> Unlike similar American jets, you can find Mig-25's in private hands today being maintained and flying. That's more because post-Soviet military establishments were more willing to sell surplus aircraft to private buyers than because of any quality of the aircraft themselves.
- avmich 10y ago> post-Soviet military establishments were more willing to sell surplus aircraft to private buyers Completely agree. Some people in Russia in 1990-s were pretty inventive. Another reason could be the number of MiG-25 produced.
- greedo 10y agoSoviet jets and technology wasn't really meant to survive a nuclear war. That would have increased complexity and cost. Everything was really designed more around being disposable.
- to3m 10y agoInteresting interview with Viktor Belenko, not terribly deep but worthy of your time: http://www.videofact.com/english/defectors2_4en.html http://www.videofact.com/english/defectors2_4en.html
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoAh, thank you, I was really more interested in what happened to Belenko than the jet itself.
- neoCrimeLabs 10y agoFor a second I thought this was the story behind the 1977 book and 1982 film Firefox which were about the MiG-31. Might have been inspired though. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_(novel) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_(film)