Your favorite post-war aircraft

Don't forget to wipe.

My favorite post-war aircraft are those from the Israeli Independence War - Avia S-199 Sakin (Czechoslovak built Bf 109G/K), Spitfires, G.55's... cause they still have the touch of warbirds.

Also KAW planes are worthy eye-candies: P-51's, Sabres, MiG-15...

As to the jet-planes - MiG-17, MiG-29, Su-27, F-111D, F-4, TSR.2,

My favorite civil transportesrs: Lockheed L-1049G Super Constellation, Dakota.

Post war aircraft:

hmm...
Su-7 goddamned fast fighter for its day, less useful as a ground attack due to a hopeless range but would dropkick supersabres like they were going out of fashion in its original form as a fighter. Capable of some Mach 1.6 in 1955 and evolved into the excellent Su-17 ground attack variant.

MiG-21 absolutely annhiliates starfighters and dassaults of the day

MiG-25 Foxbat. What can one say, a reconnaissance-bomber Ye-155R prototype was reputedly clocked by US intelligence doing Mach 3.2 between two Soviet ground stations. It was later suggested after examination of Belyenko's Foxbat in Japan the aircraft was probably made immediately unairworthy by the inherently dangerous effort. It should be noted the only evidence I have seen of these claims is anecdotal at best.
The MiG-25RB derivative however is documented as capable of doing its top speed of Mach 2.82 with a full bomb load (Jane's Information Group), delivering them in precision strikes. A development of the interceptor variant, the MiG-25PD gained its improved engines.
Airframe limit is Mach 2.82 due to construction materiels, however as can be encountered among certain high performance Soviet aircraft, it is possible these engines may be overdriven by anything up to 40% max.aug.thrust although this would hardly be standard operation unless in the midst of a US cruise missile strike, which is one of the scenarios the Foxbat was specifically designed to combat (and to reach 80,000ft Mach 3.2 cruise Blackbirds with its missiles). The Foxbat was probably one of the key reasons the XB and YB-70 Valkyries were cancelled, restarted as a transport-reconnaissance concept then cancelled again. If the Blackbird could be reached, the circa. 75,000ft Mach 3 cruise Valkyrie was no sweat.
Only problem is the Foxbat would be a one shot-single use deal when used like that.
ICBM's and greater range AAM developments changed everything anyway (but AAMs at long range are still very vulnerable to ECM, interceptors much less so).

Unfortunately the Foxbat is designed for high altitude operation and cannot withstand the stresses of low altitude combat performance.
The MiG-25MP variant however, was designed specifically to alter this engineering restriction, but became renamed the MiG-31. It was known as the SuperMiG during the 80's and the mystery surrounding its development inspired the movie "Firefox," shortly before it was finally publicised to the west. We know it as the two-seat Foxhound and it has to be one of the finest performance pieces of the 20th century, combining better overall performance than an Eagle with the weapons system of a Tomcat.

Here's a Foxbat:


Here's a picture from the cockpit at about 80,000 feet:


And here's a Foxhound:

I guess my favorite post war aircraft would have to be the AC-47 "Spooky" It was a great aircraft used in Vietnam.

Although it didnt have speed, it was a great gunship able too give heavy fire power to attack Vietnamese held areas. It also had that cool smokescreen effect so that Anti Aircraft guns had a hard time locating it.

And talk about the Fire Power! Having 20mm miniguns on both sides along with these special flash bombs they would use.

The Foxbat was fast but was not very maneuvarable.

My favorite post war aircraft are:

F-86 Sabre
F-4 Phantom
F-14 Tomcat
Skyraider
UH-1 Huey
AH-1 Cobra
UH-60L Blackhawk
A-10 Warthog
AC-130 Spectre

Hey P-38 if you like the 47 why not the AC-130. Same concept but much more fire power. Puff the Magic Dragon....

Favourite post-war aircraft; the English Electric Lightning. From a 1947 design it was the greatest interceptor of the Cold War and served until 1989 in the RAF.

The MiG-17 is probably my favourite.

The Foxbat was fast but was not very maneuvarable.

Click to expand...

Yeah they designed the Foxhound to fix that. The Foxbat's construction didn't translate well to performance down where the air is thick, it's not even supersonic at sea level.
At high altitudes it is very manoeuvrable indeed, with an airframe limit of 4.5g supersonic. US fighters have high subsonic g-limits in preference and concentrate on transonic performance at medium altitudes, with supersonic dash.

The MiG-25MP/MiG-31 Foxhound however has a much tougher airframe for dramatically increased low altitude performance and manages a comfortable Mach 1.4 on the deck and a high altitude performance of Mach 2.82 which is limited only by airframe restrictions. It is listed as an engineering guideline for safety reasons rather than an actual speed top-out.

Back when the US had cancelled the YF-12A Mach 3.2 interceptor programme due to ridiculous costs and gone with the F-15 as the Air Force front line of defence (which was ridiculously expensive anyway), it could not be understood how the Soviets had managed to develope such performance in a mass produced interceptor.
It was assumed the Russians had developed some kind of new technology unavailable to the US and they resigned themselves as being unable to match the performance of the Foxbat, concentrating their engineering doctrine instead on high, mid-altitude transonic performance in the hope the Foxbat's performance was orientated solely to high altitude operations. The gamble paid off.

When the US technicians finally examined Belyenko's Foxbat in Japan in the 70's they were actually quite disappointed and realised the F-15 in fact superceded it at most combat altitudes.
But Belyenko had warned them of a new Foxhound variant which was far more likely to justify their earlier fears.

The MiG-25MP or MiG-31 Foxhound has astonishing performance from near space altitudes to sea level and the second generation MiG-31M subvariant, state of the art avionics and weapons systems.
Its development has been domestically outshone by the world class performance and very public mishaps of the Sukhoi Flanker programmes, an airframe which itself holds no less than 27 world records, including rate of climb (which used to be the Foxbat's territory).

On the battlefield however, a MiG-31M is easily one of the most dangerous aircraft you can come across today at any altitude and under any conditions. In 1990 it was probably the most powerful aircraft in service in the world.

vanir said:

The Foxbat was fast but was not very maneuvarable.

Click to expand...

Back when the US had cancelled the YF-12A Mach 3.2 interceptor programme due to ridiculous costs and gone with the F-15 as the Air Force front line of defence (which was ridiculously expensive anyway), it could not be understood how the Soviets had managed to develope such performance in a mass produced interceptor.

Click to expand...

They YF-12 was canceled because there simply wasn't a threat for it to intercept. It was impractical but did assist in the development of the Phoenix missile system. The F-15 was developed under a whole different military doctrine nearly a decade later. The USAF didn't go with the F-15 in lieu of the YF-12, that's plain nonsense!!!

The F-15 will turn out to be one of the most cost effective weapons platforms when it is finally retired. 25 years of great service, an airframe that could take (and will continue to take) numerous modifications, numerous missions undertaken, successfully completed with close to a 100 to zero kill ratio. I don't know what you would consider expensive, but with a record like that and a good 10 years worth of service left (which gives it 35 years of service), the F-15 gave and will continue to give more than a "bang for its buck."

vanir said:

On the battlefield however, a MiG-31M is easily one of the most dangerous aircraft you can come across today at any altitude and under any conditions. In 1990 it was probably the most powerful aircraft in service in the world.

We know it as the two-seat Foxhound and it has to be one of the finest performance pieces of the 20th century, combining better overall performance than an Eagle with the weapons system of a Tomcat.

Click to expand...

NOW THAT'S A JOKE! Are you sure you don't mean the SU-27???? The Mig-31 has a big powerful radar that could still be jammed, flies real fast and carries BIG missiles. BIG DEAL! Other than that it's a pig! It's still built out of steel, it cannot maneuver out of it's own way, has a 600 hour engine, drinks fuel like a whale, has a turning radius comparible to an SR-71 and is (was) a logistical nightmare. There was no big secret during it's development. Why do you think the Russians and other former USSR nations have gotten rid of their MiG-31s? It's a brick with wings! I think just about any modern western fighter (F-15, F-16, Tornado, F-18 ) if deployed properly, will feast on the Mig-31 without mercy! 8)

I could see this stated when comparing an SU-27, but the MiG-31 IS NOT Russia's finest!

vanir said:

The Foxbat was probably one of the key reasons the XB and YB-70 Valkyries were cancelled.

Click to expand...

You got it Backwards - The Mig-25 was developed to counter the XB-70. That was mentioned several times in the book "MIG PILOT." The XB-70 was cancelled because of Soviet SAM development (1964, the program ended several years later when an F-104 collided with one of the prototypes east of Edwards AFB, California). The USAF changed it's stategic strike doctrine and developed low-level tactics and eventually coupled that with Stealth technology.......

TSR2

trackend said:

TRS2

Click to expand...

OK Track, you made your point!

Enough said FBJ ok I got the letters the wrong way round

There ya go!

FLYBOYJ said:

vanir said:

The Foxbat was probably one of the key reasons the XB and YB-70 Valkyries were cancelled.

Click to expand...

You got it Backwards - The Mig-25 was developed to counter the XB-70. That was mentioned several times in the book "MIG PILOT." The XB-70 was cancelled because of Soviet SAM development (1964, the program ended several years later when an F-104 collided with one of the prototypes east of Edwards AFB, California). The USAF changed it's stategic strike doctrine and developed low-level tactics and eventually coupled that with Stealth technology.......

Click to expand...

Several versions of why the Foxbat was initially designed exist. I like the one adopted by Jane's Information Group, which I've always found to be among the most reliable technical sources available anywhere, in some cases I trust them more than I do official military release information.

Design started 1959 as Ye-155P supersonic high-altitude interceptor to counter all potential threats, from cruise missiles to A-11 (SR-71A reconnaissance aircraft) under US development; programme launched officially February 1962.

(Russian air forces): MiG-25RB (Mikoyan Type 02B; `Foxbat-B'): Single-seat high-altitude reconnaissance-bomber, derived from Ye-155R-1 prototype; production began as MiG-25R (Type 02), for reconnaissance only, in 1969; bombing capability added to redesignated RB in 1970; able to fly long distances at cruising speed of Mach 2.35, maximum speed of Mach 2.83 with full bomb load.

Click to expand...

Here is one provided by an independant author for an aviation publication:

The MiG-25 high altitude, high speed interceptor was initially developed to counter the Mach 3 XB-70 Valkyrie bomber under development in the US in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Although the XB-70 as a bomber was cancelled in 1961, work on the new high speed interceptor and reconnaissance platform continued.
Initial 'Foxbat' production was of the MiG-25P interceptor. Service entry was in 1973.

Click to expand...

The inconsistency I've highlighted is to show the somewhat questionable credibility in the source.

And one from the aviation.ru website on the MiG-25:

The MiG-25 was originally designed to counter the A-11, not the B-70 as we all believed.

Click to expand...

According to the best sources I can find:

The MiG-25 was designed in 1959.
Design of the XB70 also began in 1959.
The CIA Blackbird (A11) was designed in 1957.

You do the math.

Point two:
The Valkyrie project was cancelled in 1961. The official debate was the shooting down of a U2 in 1960 by a SAM diminishing the viability of high altitude high Mach overflights of enemy territory. However through the backchannels of military expediture the CIA was continued funding for a fleet of 12 high speed high altitude reconnaissance aircraft to directly overfly the USSR that same year, the Blackbirds.

It should be noted that during this period of the Cold War in particular, military technologies were institutionally shrouded in the utmost secrecy and elaborate misinformation.

The reluctance towards the Valkyrie programme might more likely be attributed to a Mach 3 dash rather than cruise inital capability, for which the proposal was completely redesigned and tendered again but required the development of all new technologies, including construction methods.
It was given clearance as a technological development testbed.

First flight was in 1964. Later, a transport/reconnaissance use was proposed for the defunct design.
Around this time Foxbats had flown at Mach 3.2 and 112,000 feet and were about to enter front line production, known to the US as a "reconnaissance-interceptor of unknown technology" (the US was unaware of the specific details such as individual variants).
The CIA Blackbird A11/12 had flown Mach 3.3 cruise at an uspecified altitude (on its very first flight with both J58 engines in 1963 the A11 did Mach 3.2). A YF-12A interceptor/bomber variant to counter the Foxbat was proposed and funded.

The Valkyrie was already earmarked for the cancellation of funding when NASA took up the contract for further development testing, just prior to the 1966 fatality. It was finally backlogged and cancelled for the last time in 1969 as an unsuccessful, if revolutionary design.

If the project had continued it would have been only as a transport/reconnaissance vehicle, as its strategic capabilities were obviously clearly outclassed by the Foxbat and YF-12A designs. It was a bit expensive for such a secondary role and its development value had been all but superceded.


I also found more information about Foxbats doing better than Mach 3 speeds at the same aviation.ru MiG 25 website.

The MiG-25 that was clocked at Mach 3.2 by the Israelis achieved this speed while running from an intercepting F-4 (which can barely manage Mach 2 on a good day--before running out of fuel). Upon landing, both engines in the MiG had to be replaced.
Mach 2.83 is a theoretical stability limit on the airframe (which has been safely exceeded on numerous occasions by test pilots). At speeds greater than Mach 2.6 however, throttle control must be precise to keep the engines from overspeeding.

Click to expand...

And more about the Foxbat's interception performance.

The F-16 can just barely squeak past Mach 2.0 with a pair of wingtip sidewinders. The F-14 can only manage Mach 1.81. And the mighty Eagle is only good for Mach 1.78 (Mach 2.5 clean). The Foxbat can outclimb all of these fighters by a healthy margin, and has a mauch better supersonic endurance than the best Western fighter (F-22 notwithstanding).

Click to expand...

vanir said:

Design started 1959 as Ye-155P supersonic high-altitude interceptor to counter all potential threats, from cruise missiles to A-11 (SR-71A reconnaissance aircraft) under US development; programme launched officially February 1962.

(Russian air forces): MiG-25RB (Mikoyan Type 02B; `Foxbat-B'): Single-seat high-altitude reconnaissance-bomber, derived from Ye-155R-1 prototype; production began as MiG-25R (Type 02), for reconnaissance only, in 1969; bombing capability added to redesignated RB in 1970; able to fly long distances at cruising speed of Mach 2.35, maximum speed of Mach 2.83 with full bomb load.

Click to expand...

Here is one provided by an independant author for an aviation publication:

The MiG-25 high altitude, high speed interceptor was initially developed to counter the Mach 3 XB-70 Valkyrie bomber under development in the US in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Although the XB-70 as a bomber was cancelled in 1961, work on the new high speed interceptor and reconnaissance platform continued.
Initial 'Foxbat' production was of the MiG-25P interceptor. Service entry was in 1973.

Click to expand...

The inconsistency I've highlighted is to show the somewhat questionable credibility in the source.
[/quote]

How is that inconsistent? You are reading bits and scanning the rest. Read the WHOLE quoted section and you will see the verbage not only describes different versions, but different terminologies.

The first quote states that the 25R was derived from the prototype and production began in 1969. This means when they first started building the airplane.

The second quote that you showed 25P, but look at the statement above that. It clearly states that there was a recon and an interceptor version. Then it states that service entry was in 1973. Makes sense to me, there is a big difference between when production begins and service entry.

plan_D said:

Favourite post-war aircraft; the English Electric Lightning. From a 1947 design it was the greatest interceptor of the Cold War and served until 1989 in the RAF.

Click to expand...

While I agree that it is a great interceptor and one of the best ever built. I dont see how you can say it was better than a Tomcat. The F-14 could take out multiple targets before a Lightning even got off the ground.

vanir said:

If the project had continued it would have been only as a transport/reconnaissance vehicle, as its strategic capabilities were obviously clearly outclassed by the Foxbat and YF-12A designs. It was a bit expensive for such a secondary role and its development value had been all but superceded.

Click to expand...

There was never any intensions to use the XB-70 as a transport. Lockheed started on a SST and TRADED most of that technology to Boeing for "S" duct technology used on the B727 and later on the Lockheed L1011. Boeing cancelled their SST program as government support dwindled. I know this for a fact cause I worked at Lockheed with people who worked on the YF-12A and were involved in this technology swap.....

vanir said:

I also found more information about Foxbats doing better than Mach 3 speeds at the same aviation.ru MiG 25 website.

The MiG-25 that was clocked at Mach 3.2 by the Israelis achieved this speed while running from an intercepting F-4 (which can barely manage Mach 2 on a good day--before running out of fuel). Upon landing, both engines in the MiG had to be replaced.
Mach 2.83 is a theoretical stability limit on the airframe (which has been safely exceeded on numerous occasions by test pilots). At speeds greater than Mach 2.6 however, throttle control must be precise to keep the engines from overspeeding.

Click to expand...

And more about the Foxbat's interception performance.

The F-16 can just barely squeak past Mach 2.0 with a pair of wingtip sidewinders. The F-14 can only manage Mach 1.81. And the mighty Eagle is only good for Mach 1.78 (Mach 2.5 clean). The Foxbat can outclimb all of these fighters by a healthy margin, and has a mauch better supersonic endurance than the best Western fighter (F-22 notwithstanding).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Again these points are pointless - the Foxbat has been beaten in battle on numerous occasions and only ONE MiG-25 kill has ever been confirmed aganist a western fighter - A Mig-25 shot down an F-18 over Serbia, the F-18 pilot survived....

Your numbers on the Foxbat must have come from a sales brosure. Even if the Mig-25 is flown at Mach 2.8, it has to be able to maneuver, it will slow down. Hang those lumbering "Aphid" missles on the machine and it turns into a brick

2 Mig-25s were shot down by F-15s during the Gulf War, the Isrealis destroyed another 3 or 4, all with the F-15. Bottom line, the MiG-25 and the MiG-31 are both bricks and will probably corrode themself to destruction while sitting on the ground because they are built pooly and are a nightmare to maintain....

Very well put FBJ.

Are you kidding me, Adler? The Lightning could far out-climb the F-14 from standstill. In fact, the Lightning is the fastest interceptor from stand-still to airborne! Even the F-15 with greater thrust:weight ratio cannot climb as quickly from standstill! It only gains the advantage after the first few hundred feet but by then the Lightning is already up in the air.