If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Regarding the Sand Foxbats
I read this at newsmax.com
"The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the West and is equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare devices." "The recovery of the advanced MiG fighter is considered to be an intelligence coup by the U.S. Air Force. The Foxbat may also be equipped with advanced Russian- and French-made electronics that were sold to Iraq during the 1990s in violation of a U.N. ban on arms sales to Baghdad." Which version is this since is has not been discovered by the west in 10 odd years, and in more detail what would the "sophisticated" electronics be ? Is it of any value to anybody today ? One would wonder how sophisticated anything on a 20-30 year old Foxbat would be. (i mean, the most sophisticated should kinda be on the MiG-31 Foxhound, shouldnt it?) Hope anybody can clarify a bit :-) And remember, im no military expert, so if anybody can keep it in near-laymans terms i would appreciate it, thanks :-) The link to the article: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/105528.shtml ------------- enlight |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
enlight wrote:
Which version is this since is has not been discovered by the west in 10 odd years, and in more detail what would the "sophisticated" electronics be ? Is it of any value to anybody today ? One would wonder how sophisticated anything on a 20-30 year old Foxbat would be. Just because the airframe itself is 20-30 years old doesn't mean the internal hardware has to be. I'm sure both the Russians and the Americans have done the same deal: since we're upgrading our forces, we can pull these older warplanes off the first line and have them rehabbed for export. Sweeten the deal by using the same radar sets and instrumentation as the newer planes, but it's still cheaper for the buyer than having to buy factory new. When America sold Phantoms to Greece and Egypt and Turkey and other nations in the late 70s/early 80s, the production line for them had already been switched over to Eagles. But all those Phantoms were overhauled and upgraded for the sale, so in some ways they were better machines than they were when the USAF was using them. So the Iraqi Foxbats might have internal electronics the same as maybe the Fulcrum or Flanker, with improved radar and fire control. During the embargo, since the Iraqis couldn't necessarily buy new planes themselves, they could at least get the electronics upgraded...perhaps smuggling them over the border in shipments of civilian goods? The Iranians have done all sorts of upgrades to their American-built warplanes over the decades since the Revolution there. Who's to say the Iraqis couldn't do the same with their Russian and French-made planes? Stephen "FPilot" Bierce/IPMS #35922 {Sig Quotes Removed on Request} |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Foxbat 'appears' to be a specialized reconnaissance version MiG-25RB
(possibly modified to include RBT sensor suite; which would be, by itself, of interest). As such, its unique value would be in its signals intelligence equipment. This is not your vanilla Victor Belinko Foxbat (an interceptor)!!!! Your correct in that a Foxhound would be of great interest, but that is an advanced interceptor as well. This is kind of like getting your hands on a fighter version of the Navy's EP-3E (a stretch I know, but just trying to get my point across). Unlikely it is supplied with the 'best' from FSU as it is an 'export', but of value none-the-less. To say it this is a completely unknown type is not totally correct (i.e. it is not newly discovered as you say), but it is a first (that is known in open-source) in terms of a hands-on-exploitation for its intelligence value (a relative term). Mark "enlight" wrote in message k... I read this at newsmax.com "The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the West and is equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare devices." "The recovery of the advanced MiG fighter is considered to be an intelligence coup by the U.S. Air Force. The Foxbat may also be equipped with advanced Russian- and French-made electronics that were sold to Iraq during the 1990s in violation of a U.N. ban on arms sales to Baghdad." Which version is this since is has not been discovered by the west in 10 odd years, and in more detail what would the "sophisticated" electronics be ? Is it of any value to anybody today ? One would wonder how sophisticated anything on a 20-30 year old Foxbat would be. (i mean, the most sophisticated should kinda be on the MiG-31 Foxhound, shouldnt it?) Hope anybody can clarify a bit :-) And remember, im no military expert, so if anybody can keep it in near-laymans terms i would appreciate it, thanks :-) The link to the article: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/105528.shtml ------------- enlight |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I read this at newsmax.com
"The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance pruned for brevity In the pix I've seen, it appears as if the aircraft was just buried under the sand - no attempt to prevent ingress of sand into the aircraft and its systems. If this is the case, there was obviously no intention to use the aircraft in the foreseeable future. Was the burial done: a. To remove a potential target, thereby safeguarding the area b. By people who were just told 'to conceal the aircraft', people with no expertise in aircraft maintenance c. Any other ideas? John Mackesy |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pictures on net show a fair amount of plastic sheeting was applied, but that
seems to be about it for 'protecting' the aircraft. Not the best of methods to ensure a quick (relative term) return to flying shape. Would guess maintenance types did the work since someone with more than just a shovel was responsible for removing the wings!!!!! Probably did the best the could given the circumstances (and lack of any previous experience or tech orders on burying aircraft properly). Suspect someone wanted to protect these aircraft from attack with the optimistic hope that over a period of months following a cessation of hostilities (in a situation similar to 1992), they could pull them back out. Just a guess.... Mark "John Mackesy" wrote in message ... I read this at newsmax.com "The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance pruned for brevity In the pix I've seen, it appears as if the aircraft was just buried under the sand - no attempt to prevent ingress of sand into the aircraft and its systems. If this is the case, there was obviously no intention to use the aircraft in the foreseeable future. Was the burial done: a. To remove a potential target, thereby safeguarding the area b. By people who were just told 'to conceal the aircraft', people with no expertise in aircraft maintenance c. Any other ideas? John Mackesy |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"enlight" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
k... I read this at newsmax.com "The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the West and is equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare devices." "The recovery of the advanced MiG fighter is considered to be an intelligence coup by the U.S. Air Force. The Foxbat may also be equipped with advanced Russian- and French-made electronics that were sold to Iraq during the 1990s in violation of a U.N. ban on arms sales to Baghdad." Which version is this since is has not been discovered by the west in 10 odd years, and in more detail what would the "sophisticated" electronics be ? Is it of any value to anybody today ? One would wonder how sophisticated anything on a 20-30 year old Foxbat would be. (i mean, the most sophisticated should kinda be on the MiG-31 Foxhound, shouldnt it?) Hope anybody can clarify a bit :-) And remember, im no military expert, so if anybody can keep it in near-laymans terms i would appreciate it, thanks :-) The link to the article: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...6/105528.shtml ------------- enlight The Iraqis have got four main versions of the MiG-25: - MiG-25PD(export) - interceptors still equipped with the Smerch radar, albeit with R-60/AA-8-compatibility - MiG-25PD/PDS - improved interceptors with the Sapheer-25 radar that had a limited "depressed" LD capability - MiG-25RBs - strike/recce version - MiG-25RBTs - improved strike/recce version, albeit with additional capability to use Kh-25 missiles. Of course, they have got also the two-seat MiG-25PU trainers. In addition, the Soviets have three times sent MiG-25BMs for testing against Iran to Iraq: two times the test ended abruptly with one of the Foxbats being shot down by IRIAF F-14s. The whole set of photos of the unearthing of that poor MiG-25RB, as well as general information about the MiG-25 in service with the (ex)IrAF can be found he http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_138.shtml The example dug out on 6 July and seen on these photographs was an MiG-25RB upgraded to the RBT variant, IrAF serial "25108", with additional RWR-blisters on the sides of the intakes. At the time this version was upgraded (1986/87) it presented the top Soviet high-tech on the fields of reconnaissance, RWR and ECM-equipment for Foxbats. Its worth as today is (at best) of "warbird" quality - if it will ever be made flyable again, which I strongly doubt. Tom Cooper Co-Author: Iran-Iraq; War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In addition, the Soviets have three times sent MiG-25BMs for testing against Iran to Iraq: two times the test ended abruptly with one of the Foxbats being shot down by IRIAF F-14s. "Flight testing has been delayed, however, evaluation of the ejection systems is ahead of schedule." G |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"John Mackesy" wrote:
Was the burial done: a. To remove a potential target, thereby safeguarding the area b. By people who were just told 'to conceal the aircraft', people with no expertise in aircraft maintenance c. Any other ideas? To place the a/c in their natural element, ready at a moment's notice. All you need is to add smoke, you already have them in a hole. ;-D ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Hey, Tom, did you ever find out anything about the mass jet/helicopter
fracas..? Curious to hear what open sources have to say about it, if anything. v/r Gordon ====(A+C==== USN SAR Aircrew "Got anything on your radar, SENSO?" "Nothing but my forehead, sir." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
If you mean such things happening during the IPGW (Iraq-Iran War), then yes.
The usual air battles were involving between ine and four Iranians and between 12 and 50 Iraqis: the "record" was a battle between seven Iranians and 75 Iraqis, fought in June 1988. In the sence of a "fracas" you ask about, involving also helicopters, I guess the air battle over the northern TO, on 21 November 1982 would be a good example: two F-14As vs four MiG-21s and four MiG-23s escorting a section of four Mi-8s and Mi-25s carrying two generals into front inspection. Two MiG-23s and a single MiG-21 were splashed (two by AIM-54s, one by AIM-7s) in exchange for no loss to Iranians. You can find the details in the article "Fire in the Hills", published in the volume 104 of the AirEnthusiast magazine. Tom Cooper Co-Author: Iran-Iraq; War in the Air, 1980-1988 http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/t...hp/title=S6585 |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|