1. you're flag 2. what is the greatest fighter plane of

Didn't the Israelis blow all of them out of the sky during the Arab-Israel wars?

you mean mig 31

File: English Electric Lightning.jpg (221KB, 1600x908px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1600x908px

>>72775683
Always reminds me of our own English Electric Lightning.

File: 070828-F-6911G-515.jpg (685KB, 3000x1929px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 3000x1929px

>>72775683
>MiG-21
>Not the F-15
The Russians have some nice camouflage, shame their planes are crap.

>>72775916
>shame their planes are crap.
[citation needed]

>>72775984

>>72775724

File: 1489439229286.jpg (138KB, 1024x791px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x791px

>>72775984
Russian aircraft have a bit of a shit record after the MiG-15, but a decent amount of the losses here could be attributed to being export models.

File: de-Havilland-Vampire-T55-2.jpg (121KB, 1600x942px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 1600x942px

>>72776131
a cute.

File: bimono-1.jpg (22KB, 700x306px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 700x306px

>>72776274
>Brit
>Cute planes
>Not posting the Bi-mono

File: De_Havilland_Vampire_T.MK.11_FAM.jpg (631KB, 2304x1536px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 2304x1536px

>>72776274
Magnificent aircraft

>>72775683
>1. you're flag
>2. what is the greatest fighter plane of all time and why is it the MiG-21?
/k/nians would skin you for writing that.
Mig-21 looks sexy, but it's literally garbage.

File: MiG-21UM_16178_Serbian_Air_Force.jpg (789KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 2048x1536px

>>72777142
>/k/nians would skin you for writing that.
fuck them

File: mirage-2000_00300266.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

Mirage 2000-5

File: iaf-mig21.jpg (246KB, 1800x1118px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1800x1118px

>>72775683
Couldn't agree more

>>72775916
>be American
>takes 30 minutes just to get a plane off the ground

>>72776102
>Mig 25
>shitty rusty bucket filled with low quality electronic but piloted by ok pilots
>1:1
??

>>72777287

>E/F version supposed to fly last year
>so far only taxi tests

WTF Sweden, gib muh fighters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaHvY3hffcw

Still flying and fighting in Syria atm, that's pretty based tbqh.

>>72775724
Not a fair comparison swap the equipment and the same result would have happened, Arabs can't fight for shit.

>>72777673
I thought thirty minutes was about the best you could get with a quick scramble with no warning. Is that wrong?

1. Celtica
2. It's the F15

File: 14902717_1239869762741563_5763629087144354429_o.jpg (537KB, 2048x1352px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 2048x1352px

>>72778484

MiG-25 is honestly an amazing aircraft. Its service record makes no sense. It was able to hold its own against F-15's, the very plane designed to kill it.

There are plenty of stories of MiG-25's getting launched on by 8+ missles and the MiG-25's simply run away and make it home safe. One of them hit an F-15 with a missile during Desert Storm, but didn't kill it. This is the closest the F-15 has ever been to getting shot down by another aircraft.

On the first night of Desert Storm, an Iraqi MiG-25 killed an F-18. A 3rd gen aircraft designed in the 60's killed a modern 4th gen fighter. This was the only Iraqi Air-to-Air kill of Desert Storm, and the last one the US has suffered.

>>72778890
Anyway it was rusty bucket filled with primitive electronics
Everything what matters is pilot/luck and tactic
Technical superiority in the end

>>72778890
Not really.

>US intelligence in their typical Cold War-era overestimation of Soviet capabilities were shitting their pants over this monster-sized jet fighter
>then some Soviet pilot defected to the US in the 70s with his MiG-25
>turned out that the thing needed large wings because of its weight (Soviet manufacturing wasn't able to make as lightweight components as US manufacturing).

>>72778933
Yes sometimes you just get stupidly lucky like the B-1 shot down in Serbia because of pilot error.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (179KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1600x900px

>>72775683
>Implying

File: 15000141_1254822794579593_8149364839537402083_o.jpg (175KB, 1022x724px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 1022x724px

>>72778933

It was, like I said, that's why its service record is an actual miracle.

Russian aircrafts biggest problems were always avionics. Aerodynamics wise the Russian planes were also top of the line, just as good as the Americans. But Radar and weapons were always way behind.

The MiG-29 is a perfect example. Amazing piece of aerodynamics. Extremely fast, huge thrust to weight ratio, exceptionally maneuverable. But its radar was horrible, its RWR is horrible, no displays for situational awareness, etc. That's why its done so poorly in every conflict. A good flying airplane only goes so far in modern combat.

>>72778977

I am well aware of the fact that the US overreacted. The F-15 was made as good as it is thanks partially to the US thinking the MiG-25 was way more than it was.

It was very good at was it was designed to do, go super fast and kill bombers at high altitude. The fact that its service record is as good as it is when it literally never did what it was designed to do is impressive. Just because the MiG-25 wasn't what the West thought it was, doesn't mean it wasn't an extremely impressive aircraft for the time.

File: FlygandeTunnan.jpg (2MB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x854px

Back the fuck off?!

>>72779071

>Overpriced
>New version (F4) will only debut fly in 2023.

>>72779072
SU>F>MiG anyway

>>72779097
>Is literal flying sex

File: 1489978678469.jpg (631KB, 1125x900px) Image search: [Google]

631KB, 1125x900px

The F-22 deserves a mention here, despite the lack of action it has seen. I'm personally interested in seeing how it measures up to the J-20 and the T-50 PAK-FA.

>>72779117
J-20 is 4++ gen

ITT aircrafts that never participated in real wars.

>>72778977
It's no different than the early 60s Missile Gap when they were fully convinced that the Soviet Union had 100 or something ICBMs all ready to launch at any moment when we had like 10 of them that had a 50% chance of blowing up in flight. When in reality, the Soviets had like three missiles deployed and they were no better or more reliable than ours and couldn't even hit the US.

File: 1489108779229.png (3MB, 1506x1000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1506x1000px

>>72779101

The Flanker is also an amazing aircraft. There is a reason Russia decided to go with Flanker and Flanker variants for the bulk of its airforce.

Su-27 was one of the first Russian planes to have avionics that were up to standard. A great radar, and a datalink that was pretty ahead of its time.

One of the first Soviet planes that actually trusted the pilot to have some sort of independence, where as every other Soviet plane and pilot was basically a ground control's slave.

Fun Fact: Ethiopian Su-27's were 5-0 against Ertrian MiG-29's. There are rumors that some of the Ethiopian Su-27's were actually flown by their Russian advisers/instructors.

>>72775683
F35

>>72779115

>sex

Yeah, that whore that charges too much just for a blowjob when for the same price you could go even anal with a junkie one.

File: 1459728320783.jpg (421KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1920x1080px

F-16 is not just a plen, it's a lifestyle. All your missions are belong to us.
t. roach

>get hueg custom fuel tank, almost longer than the plen, cuz why not
>also strap some conformal ones lel
>we strategic bomba now
>it's a big cruise missile, for f-16
>oh shit a SAM
>launch HARM
>see a radar contact
>spam latest gen AMRAAMs like ur F-22
>omg a merge
>press emergency jettison
>flick store config switch
>suddenly the best dogfighter in the sky
>HMCS + AIM-9X
>i-it's not like i needed to turn in the first place or anything, b-baka

>>72779072
>The MiG-29 is a perfect example. Amazing piece of aerodynamics. Extremely fast, huge thrust to weight ratio, exceptionally maneuverable. But its radar was horrible, its RWR is horrible, no displays for situational awareness, etc. That's why its done so poorly in every conflict. A good flying airplane only goes so far in modern combat.

Problem being that every war that a MiG-29 has been used in involved some Third World cunt with export versions that had the advanced hardware stripped out. The domestic Soviet version was never actually tested in a real combat situation.

>>72779215
Yeah, but it wouldn't be a French prostitute so it's not really worth it senpai

>>72779121
True, but I doubt we'll be seeing much of the J-31 or any other possibly competitive airframes for a while. The J-20 also seems to be a point to point interceptor, rather than the heavy fighter the F-22 is, so it probably wouldn't be a very fair fight.

>>72779243

As a Russian I've always been a huge fan of Russian planes ever since I was a child... but even that wouldn't matter.

The MiG-29 used by the Soviets did have a slightly better radar, but even the best version of the original MiG-29 wasn't anywhere close to even the F-16 in terms of avionics.

The saddest thing is that the MiG-29 had a variant called the MiG-29M that was a fully multirole fighter with a much better radar, two MFD's, datalink, 8 pylons vs 6, etc.

It was basically Russia's F-16. The order for mass production was sent, and 2 days later the Soviet Union fell apart.

Russia only in the last 5-10 years has brought at least some of its Air Force to modern standards.

>>72779243
>The domestic Soviet version was never actually tested in a real combat situation
No but we did get our hands on one when Moldavia sold us a couple of MiG-29s in 1997. Ostensibly we wanted to prevent the planes from going to Iran or North Korea or someshit, but in reality it was a huge opportunity to get ahold of a MiG-29, especially the ultimate prize, which was the domestic model that had the full compliment of advanced, top-secret hardware.

>>72779189
There was (obviously) a huge interest in any Soviet military/aerospace hardware in those days and generally, whenever we did get a look at their equipment, we ended up finding out that it was invariably not up to the same level of quality or sophistication as our equipment. Didn't stop the military-industrial complex from demanding $$$ to counter the Soviet boogeyman.

They kept the aging Titan II missiles in service long past their expiration date to counter the R-36 missile, but eventually accidents like the Arkansas silo explosion in 1980 convinced the Pentagon that it was time to retire the things.

>>72778977
>US intelligence in their typical Cold War-era overestimation of Soviet capabilities were shitting their pants over this monster-sized jet fighter

IAF, the CIA became more competent and professional from the 70s onward and reported more facts and not just what the Pentagon wanted to hear.

File: 03 Starfighter_26+70 F-104G MFG 2 1985_Stefan Petersen.jpg (204KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1600x1067px

>>72775683
WRONG

>>72779072
Aerodynamics are not hard to work out, it just takes some basic mathematical knowledge. The avionics issue _was_ a big problem because they couldn't produce anything nearly as good as what the American planes had.

File: A29 Super Tucano.webm (2MB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 854x480px

Pls buy.

>>72778890
>able to "hold its own" against the F15
>couldnt destroy a signle F15
Are you dislexic and/or retarded?

File: very_fast_mig.png (81KB, 400x357px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 400x357px

>>72779994

Yes, it held its own, considering the F-15 was a state of the art super fighter designed to kill the MiG-25, and the MiG-25 was a 1960's built interceptor.

Just surviving encounters with the F-15 is considered a win for an aircraft that was completely out of its element and time period.

MiG-25's proved to be hard to kill simply due to its speed, allowing it to disengage at will.

It caused a lot of frustration. It famously flew over the Sinai and at the time nothing in the IAF could do a single thing about it. Same with Iran.

How good (or bad) are the Su-35S and MiG-35?

>>72785957
SU-35 have superior radar even to f35
Mig 35 is for 3rd world customers

File: F-22-and-F-35.jpg (2MB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2100x1500px

F35. Stupid question.

File: mig29.jpg (31KB, 736x588px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 736x588px

thats not the Fulcrum

>>72786381
+0.15$ Lokheed shill

>>72786397
cringe

>>72777287
The facts that we even have our own jets, let alone fairly decent ones blows my fucking mind. Especially considering that the rest of our army can barely afford new fucking uniforms and rifles.

File: 1482828428001.png (57KB, 658x714px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 658x714px

>>72786414
F22 is good too but F35 is more modern.

File: usaf_ov10a_flying_no_13554.jpg (42KB, 605x296px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 605x296px

US Bronco's a cute

File: img.jpg (31KB, 457x351px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 457x351px

>>72786618

File: 1281594973319.jpg (307KB, 1800x1394px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1800x1394px

>>72775683

File: yak 3 normandie niémen.jpg (113KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1280x1024px

>>72790268
Pls

>>72775683
you posted Su-22 dumbfuck

File: Amx International FAB.jpg (421KB, 1280x862px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 1280x862px

Love Italy :3

File: image.jpg (124KB, 1024x734px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1024x734px

>>72791656
https://theaviationist.com/2013/10/03/mig-21-eglin/