An excellent book with a completely misleading title

[bf109xxl]

Thanks for the translations.

Have you run across any MiG-23 series speed envelope graphs?

I have only graphs for the M and ML/UB mods - all the sources I am familiar with state that the aerodynamics at supersonic speeds was practically identical for all variants following the S.

The graphs clearly demonstrate that the aircraft had a substantial thrust reserve - the speed was limited for stability reasons.

 

[ThomasP]

Thank you for the speed envelope graphs.

re

I would be interested to hear the arguments that cast doubt on the Soviet records registered by the FAI - personally, I find it hard to imagine that the Soviets would risk such a blatant forgery, since the damage to their reputation in case of exposure would far outweigh any conceivable benefits. But I cannot completely rule out that possibility. It would be enough for me to have just one instance of fraud on the part of the Soviets in the registration of altitude or speed records for aircraft.

FWIW I do not think they were lying, and I believe the Soviet records as pertaining to the Vmax of the MiG-23 (as well as thir other aircraft for the most part).

Somewhere, in some declassified Cold War document (from the early-1970s), I ran across discussions analyzing the Soviet practice of using materials/construction in their canopy/windscreen that exceeded the normal US practice relative to aerodynamic heating. IIRC the MiG-23 and MiG-25 were the airframes under discussion. The use of high strength heat resistant glass in their canopies was talked about, in comparison to the tougher but significantly less heat resistant plastics used in the service models of the US aircraft. The high speeds of the MiG-23 and MiG-25 were of significant concern to the US higher-ups at the time, and it was wondered if the trend would continue, with a focus on what the US should be looking at for future designs.

The F-106 originally used glass in its windscreen, while the F-4 used glass in the center section of the windscreen, but both switched to full plastic windscreens at some point.

 

[bf109xxl]

Somewhere, in some declassified Cold War document (from the early-1970s), I ran across discussions analyzing the Soviet practice of using materials/construction in their canopy/windscreen that exceeded the normal US practice relative to aerodynamic heating. IIRC the MiG-23 and MiG-25 were the airframes under discussion. The use of high strength heat resistant glass in their canopies was talked about, in comparison to the tougher but significantly less heat resistant plastics used in the service models of the US aircraft. The high speeds of the MiG-23 and MiG-25 were of significant concern to the US higher-ups at the time, and it was wondered if the trend would continue, with a focus on what the US should be looking at for future designs.

The F-106 originally used glass in its windscreen, while the F-4 used glass in the center section of the windscreen, but both switched to full plastic windscreens at some point.

This may come as a surprise to you, but the problem of heat resistance in the MiG-25's cockpit canopy (and, to a lesser extent, in the MiG-23's) was never actually resolved. According to Alexander Garnaev (a test pilot), during training flights, the MiG-25's speed was limited to M=2.65; otherwise, the canopy's service life would be drastically reduced due to cracks, and the maximum flight time at M=2.83 was limited by 3 minutes. Garnaev himself experienced high-altitude decompression during a flight in a MiG-31 when the canopy shattered while the aircraft was decelerating from 2.8 to 2.5 M at an altitude of about 17.5 km.

 

[MIflyer]

Couldn't I have a book about my airplane entitled "World's Fastest and Longest Ranged Aircraft" if I was referring to 1910?

 

[bf109xxl]

Couldn't I have a book about my airplane entitled "World's Fastest and Longest Ranged Aircraft" if I was referring to 1910?

Sure, if you had explicitly specified the year for which your statement would be true. Otherwise you would be misleading the reader. Not everyone has mastered the art of telepathy.
In this particular case, however, we're dealing with plain carelessness - the authors didn't bother to thoroughly research the issue. The authors categorically assert that, at the time the book was written, the F-106 remained the fastest single-engine jet aircraft in the world, which is not true.
On a website dedicated to the F-106, this viewpoint is defended with arguments such as "Soviet claims are unsubstantiated" and "no mentions found" thereby ignoring the authority of the FAI and demonstrating a lack of knowledge of Soviet sources.

 

[Dimlee]

Couldn't I have a book about my airplane entitled "World's Fastest and Longest Ranged Aircraft" if I was referring to 1910?

View attachment 883685

And the world's cutest, indeed.

 

[GrauGeist]

Couldn't I have a book about my airplane entitled "World's Fastest and Longest Ranged Aircraft" if I was referring to 1910?

View attachment 883685

I spent a good many hours in this A2 - these ships are a blast to fly.

 

[MIflyer]

I spent a good many hours in this A2 - these ships are a blast to fly.

I've never flown an Alon but various sources say you can't fly it with the canopy open.

 

[GrauGeist]

I've never flown an Alon but various sources say you can't fly it with the canopy open.

It has a "stop" that will hold it partially open: about 12 inches or so, but flying with the canopy fully open will damage the canopy.
If you look at my picture, you can see why. Unlike the Ercoupe's streamlined canopy design and function, the Alon design has the canopy slide upward and away from the fuselage in the fully retracted position making it one bigass airbrake.

 

[MIflyer]

Unlike the Ercoupe's streamlined canopy design and function,

I have found it almost impossible to fly my Ercoupe without having the canopy part way open. And with the new plastic window slides those windows go down so fast even on their own that it looks almost like an ejection system at work.