Worst Soviet Fighter

PoorMans180SX said:
Why are you judging a fourth gen fighter, which btw are in wide use around the world, including by the United States, by it’s stealth capabilities? It was never intended to be stealth, just like the F-16 and F-15, it’s peers. By what measure are you saying it has a subpar radar and avionics suite?
You can’t compare it to an F-22 or F-35.
Click to expand...
Here's a bit more in-depth take: https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-...st-overhyped-4th-generation-fighter-aircraft/
 
billt460 said:
The Mig 25 Foxbat was a good example. They made it out of Stainless Steel, instead of Titanium alloy. In order to withstand the heat of supersonic flight. This made it heavy as hell.
Click to expand...

I think titanium alloy is better at withstanding heat. I've heard legendary stories about how the US managed to get enough titanium to build the U-2 and SR-71 even though the USSR was the primary source of titanium ore back then.

Apparently they went with steel because they couldn't figure out how to properly weld titanium where it was strong enough for that application. That's not easy. It's apparently so hard that the US destroyed the titanium box in several retired F-14s that went to museums for fear that the Iranians might get their hands on them.
 
billt460 said:
And very long shelf life. Especially their ammunition. Most all of their 7.62 X 39 MM and 7.62 X 54 MM ammunition came in vacuum sealed and soldered steel tins. Packed in very sturdy wooden crates. (Most all of the Eastern Bloc ammunition was produced to these specifications).

I had read most all of this ammunition was packaged to last a century or longer. All were loaded with Mercury based primers, even well into the late 80's. While corrosive, Mercury based primers have a much longer shelf life. And are more impervious to moisture.

I still have a few cases of the stuff I bought years ago for cheap. Today if you can find it, the price has gone off the chart. It's good, dependable ammo.

duXX3vs.jpg
Click to expand...
A few cases???!!! I bought like 10 30 packs of Budweiser once and thought 🤔 I had a bit much 😂😆
 
y_p_w said:
I think titanium alloy is better at withstanding heat. I've heard legendary stories about how the US managed to get enough titanium to build the U-2 and SR-71 even though the USSR was the primary source of titanium ore back then.

Apparently they went with steel because they couldn't figure out how to properly weld titanium where it was strong enough for that application. That's not easy. It's apparently so hard that the US destroyed the titanium box in several retired F-14s that went to museums for fear that the Iranians might get their hands on them.
Click to expand...
The Russians had more Titanium than anyone. They just didn't possess the technology to work with it at the time. (Machining and welding Titanium is very tricky).

So they used Stainless Steel because they were more familiar with it. It worked, but made a very heavy airplane. They countered that with bigger engines and a larger fuel capacity.
 
Jackson_Slugger said:
Agreed. Some good designs get lost in the sticky wheels needing to be greased. I think one commentator said it looked like The Russian Air Force was designed for stunt flying to impress politicians more than to fight a near peer enemy...

My only contention is that the Ukrainian Air Force is still pretty active if limited, no one expected after one month much less one year...

I recall reading a while back that it was supposed to be the other way around as far as SAMS and MANPADS go. Russia was to have an initial firepower advantage in any conflict with NATO as they could restrict NATO sorties and Western reliance on airpower and overmatch Western artillery, at least at first. It seems so long ago that RAND so feared the 'little green (bogey) men" sacking the Baltics...
Click to expand...

I would argue that it's the ukranian sams that keep their air force in existence... A single S-300 system is not to be dismissed, but ukraine has hundreds of them apparently.
 
tyman said:
Russia tries to bill it as a 4.5+ gen fighter and it was introduced in 2014. When compared to 5th gen, it's pretty meh. When compared to 4th gen, it's decent. "Masterpiece" not found. The F-22 is a masterpiece. A Leopard 2A8 is a masterpiece. A Virginia-class submarine is a masterpiece. An Su-35? Not even close to a masterpiece.
Click to expand...

I think the latest Leopard standard is the 2A7+ with the A8 being a bit of a gamer fantasy tank at the moment...

The Su-35 as a "masterpiece"? IDK, but in capable hands of a well trained and supported air force, I think it would be pretty effective within its limitations...
 
billt460 said:
And very long shelf life. Especially their ammunition. Most all of their 7.62 X 39 MM and 7.62 X 54 MM ammunition came in vacuum sealed and soldered steel tins. Packed in very sturdy wooden crates. (Most all of the Eastern Bloc ammunition was produced to these specifications).

....
Click to expand...

Maybe, but many Russian conscripts were complaining their Kalashnikov AKM (AK-47) rifles were "rusty" and worn after being issued the old non-AK-74M variants that were in storage...
 
tyman said:
It is, but it's also a masterpiece.
Click to expand...

Yes. But any masterpiece is crap if not properly supported by infantry and combined arms. Granted, they were Leo2A4's, but the Turks lost a lot of them in Northern Iraq during their incursion a few years back. I don't know if a Russian T-90M is a masterpiece, but it is a viable, good tank wasted when sent off alone or in distended columns with few infantry guarding their flanks...
 
Jackson_Slugger said:
Yes. But any masterpiece is crap if not properly supported by infantry and combined arms. Granted, they were Leo2A4's, but the Turks lost a lot of them in Northern Iraq during their incursion a few years back. I don't know if a Russian T-90M is a masterpiece, but it is a viable, good tank wasted when sent off alone or in distended columns with few infantry guarding their flanks...
Click to expand...
You don't need to have something battle tested for it to be a masterpiece.
 
Jackson_Slugger said:
Yes. But any masterpiece is crap if not properly supported by infantry and combined arms. Granted, they were Leo2A4's, but the Turks lost a lot of them in Northern Iraq during their incursion a few years back. I don't know if a Russian T-90M is a masterpiece, but it is a viable, good tank wasted when sent off alone or in distended columns with few infantry guarding their flanks...
Click to expand...

I don't think any tank design will do significantly better against atgm equipped infantry without the proper support troops. That's why reactivating old T-62 makes as much sense as sending the latest and greatest.

active kill protection could work, but how reliable is that against the atgms used?
 
Jetronic said:
I don't think any tank design will do significantly better against atgm equipped infantry without the proper support troops. That's why reactivating old T-62 makes as much sense as sending the latest and greatest.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if you watch any Chieftan (Anthony Moran) or Redwrench on Youtube (tanker specialists) they'll say with either go the most modern or use old stuff like the 62. The biggest killer for tanks in the Ukraine War seems to be artillery even more than ATGM or other tanks as tank-vs.-tank clashes are rare (and always have been). But using the mothballed T-62 indicates a serious weakness as they've lost a lot of the T-72B3 and other variants, T-80's, and a few T-90's and are only building about 20 new ones a month. But of course the Ukrainians have also suffered losses but on the whole maintain about what they've had since the beginning with reinforcements like the Polish PT-91 Twardy (a highly modified T-72 on par with the T-90).

Jetronic said:
active kill protection could work, but how reliable is that against the atgms used?
Click to expand...

I haven't heard much about this in Ukraine. Supposedly in Syria it saved some Russian types but other times didn't work as the hatches were open (automatically disengaging it) since there was no A/C in the blistering heat. But a lot of the AT missile shot kills seem to be AT-4/RPG/Carl Gustav middling weapons that can be fired into the roadwheels as tanks drive by infantry kill teams completely making AKP worthless. But it hasn't stopped many Javelins or NLAWs either. This could be the Russian are full of **** and do not have working AKP on the tanks supposedly using it as even their reactive armor plates are often just rubber dummies. The US is installing the Israeli influenced system in the M-1A2 SEP v2, but I doubt it will stop multiple swarm fires...
 
Jackson_Slugger said:
Yeah, if you watch any Chieftan (Anthony Moran) or Redwrench on Youtube (tanker specialists) they'll say with either go the most modern or use old stuff like the 62. The biggest killer for tanks in the Ukraine War seems to be artillery even more than ATGM or other tanks as tank-vs.-tank clashes are rare (and always have been). But using the mothballed T-62 indicates a serious weakness as they've lost a lot of the T-72B3 and other variants, T-80's, and a few T-90's and are only building about 20 new ones a month. But of course the Ukrainians have also suffered losses but on the whole maintain about what they've had since the beginning with reinforcements like the Polish PT-91 Twardy (a highly modified T-72 on par with the T-90).



I haven't heard much about this in Ukraine. Supposedly in Syria it saved some Russian types but other times didn't work as the hatches were open (automatically disengaging it) since there was no A/C in the blistering heat. But a lot of the AT missile shot kills seem to be AT-4/RPG/Carl Gustav middling weapons that can be fired into the roadwheels as tanks drive by infantry kill teams completely making AKP worthless. But it hasn't stopped many Javelins or NLAWs either. This could be the Russian are full of **** and do not have working AKP on the tanks supposedly using it as even their reactive armor plates are often just rubber dummies. The US is installing the Israeli influenced system in the M-1A2 SEP v2, but I doubt it will stop multiple swarm fires...
Click to expand...
Did you really mean to start a thread on fighters?

All your posts are about tanks...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GON
United's newest livery "The Future is SAF"
2 3
Replies
45
Views
1K
GON
GON
DEF in AVN fuel, causing engines to fail in flight
Replies
4
Views
211
Drifter
T
Mix ATF conventional and synthetic?
Replies
12
Views
310
meep
Carlostrece
Cheapest version Supertech
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Carlostrece
supton
F9F vs MiG-15s
Replies
8
Views
3K
Hohn
Back
Top Bottom