RobertS Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 (edited) I would like to see these photos. Sorry! Those are very-unique never before published colour-slides, will publish in book... Edited September 20, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F4DPhantomII Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 (edited) RobertS Great pics of the SMT thanks. Edited September 20, 2011 by F4DPhantomII Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 (edited) The bis had some structural modifications, use of alternative materials (Titanium) Very few titanium parts(0?). Many steel parts in the airframe, where the earlier versions had aluminium alloy. Even some special modifications in the fuselage, because of the more dynamic altitude changes in low-level dogfight. Much stronger wing, horizontal stab etc. There were MiG-21UM's with the stronger 'bis-wing' and stab. These were prefered for check-flights in ACM. The MiG-21 bis was a brand new aircraft, I heard the same statement from an engineer, who worked with -21F13 -21MF -21bis but main improvements were the radar (RP-22) and the R-25-300 engine . This engine has a so called "special mode" (only on/off for short time due to the fuel consumption). With this mode the bis could achieve climb rates up to 225 m/s. The new engine had better response for the throttle movements, and it was a 'knock-kick' engine, with less restrictions for throttle-movements. This engine has a so called "special mode" (only on/off for short time due to the fuel consumption). This "special mode" was unknown for most of the export customers. Very few non-WP airforces trained their pilots with this 'ChR' mode. There were special exercises in the Soviet ACT program for the -21bis with the 'ChR'. Even the ally Polish, Hungarian etc. pilots did not get training for these on the conversion training in the Sovietunion. (only on/off for short time due to the fuel consumption). "short time' - this is very relative. Most of the real dogfights at the Mid-East and in Vietnam were very 'short'. In complex ACM's you do not need continously for the 'ChR', it is too much sometimes. I seen black-box(SARPP) tape with 14 minutes continous afterburner including 6 minutes discontinous 'ChR' 'Only 2 minutes' rule for peace-time training if I remember right. Also there was a special automatic control unit for this 'ChR-mode'in the VVS '21s. One of the Soviet instructors told: ' ChR is best for disengage from combat ' :) Edited September 23, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 ...will publish in book... When ? I want one ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 (edited) Many unpainted MiG-21SM -21SMT and early bis wore this light gray paint on the underside of the fuselage: Have you any photo with visible rear under-fuselage with same paint ? When ? I want one ! I will inform you. Thank you for your interest! Edited September 21, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's not simply grey paint! Best regards, Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) It's not simply grey paint! Best regards, Gabor If you think it - There is no any evidence for any contact of this paint with the nuclear-role :) I wrote it first on the Net many years ago. Currently I am in contact with people, who work on '21s with this paint, we have guess only. Edited September 21, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 One of the Soviet instructors told: ' ChR is best for disengage from combat ' :) Then again, perhaps not if trying to disengage from an opponent with IR missiles - the heat signature must be enormous. Great pics, folks! Cheers, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) Then again, perhaps not if trying to disengage from an opponent with IR missiles - the heat signature must be enormous. Do not forget the timeframe, when the MiG-21bis became operational in the VVS fighter force. Those IR-missiles were in a different league compare with current weapons. Escape was best with burner sometimes...eastern or western - all the sane... Nice reading, if you like this topic: Source - - ONE DAY IN A LONG WAR, by Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price " Vietnam, May 10 1972: Nearly out of missiles and starting to run short of fuel, the Phantoms went supersonic and sped toward the coast. "At that time we had strong intelligence that the MiG-21 could not do more than Mach 1.05 below five thousand feet. We were doing Mach 1.15 in combat spread, feeling cocksure as we headed towards the coast." Dosé recalled: "Then a MiG-21 came up behind, overtaking fast. He made it look effortless. When I saw the MiG it was about three-quaters of a mile behind Hawkins. I called for an in-place turn, and as we began turning the MiG fired an Atoll missile at Hawkins. Initially it guided, but it couldn't handle the Gs and it wasn't ever a real threat." After attacking the MiG broke away to the right. Instintictively Dosé turned after it, until McDevitt demanded incredulously, "What are you doing!" The back-seater's tone reminded Dosé that they had neither the missiles nor the fuel for another engagement. Chastened, the pilot reversed his turn and headed for the coast. Almost certainly the MiG-21 that had caught up with the Phantoms was the new MF sub-type. It was the first time American crews had encountered this version, and its much improved low-altitude performance came as an unpleasant surprise. As the survivors of Oyster Flight sped out of North Vietnam at low altitude, a MiG-21MF arrived to cause consternation for the second time that day. Oyster 2 ran out alone, 3 and 4 stayed together. Chuck DeBellevue, in Oyster 3, watched with disbelief as the Soviet-made fighter closing from behind seemed to join formation on the pair. "We were running out at seven hundred to seven hundred fifty knots(Mach 1.06 to 1.13), the F-4 wouldn"t go any faster that low. And we had a MiG-21 chasing us and keeping up-that surprised the hell out of us!" To DeBellevue, the MiG's ability to keep up was disconcerting, to Captain Larry Pettit in Oyster 4 it was terrifying: "He was at our eight-thirty position(left quarter), one hundred feet above and about three hundred feet out to the side. He caught up with us and was staying with us! I don't know if he saw us, but he had a gun and he could have strafed the s.it out of us." Larry Pettit's next move did nothing to lessen the danger but was understandable in the circumstances: "I lowered my seat to the floor, to hide from him! He banked towards us and I thought, Oh no, he's going to let us have it with cannon....But he turned and went off in the opposite direction, Tommy Feezel and I thanked our lucky stars and got the hell out of there." In the combat reports these 21's were MiG-21MF. Vietnam became MiG-21bis operator after the war. The MiG-21bis has bigger inlet, R-25 engine + 'ChR-mode' for the afterburner. Edited September 21, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's not simply grey paint! Best regards, Gabor You guys lost me on that one. Is the insinuation that the grey paint shown is some sort of anti-flash paint used to protect the underside of the MiG from the effects of it's just dropped nuke? On a semi-related note, are there any pictures out there of the SMT with the IAB-500 nuclear training weapon mounted? Regards, John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Huh? I don't know what the manual says, but the glossy light grey paint covers the area where the a/c would get dirty from the gun being fired. I don't think it's any more complicated or mysterious than that. The gun fairing and an area of the lower fuselage ahead of and around the gun muzzles is painted. Pretty simple... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) Do not forget the timeframe, when the MiG-21bis became operational in the VVS fighter force. Those IR-missiles were in a different league compare with current weapons. AFAIK the main progress in IR weaponry since the first Sidewinder prototypes scuttled about in the China Lake air is in the area of all-aspect target acquisition. Even the first generation AIM-9B would, it seems, have no trouble homing in on the six o' clock spot of a fighter in full burner within range. Escape was best with burner sometimes...eastern or western - all the sane... Good war story, thanks. Cheers, Andre Edited September 21, 2011 by Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ya-gabor Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Dear Jennings, It has nothing to do with the gun blast. Have you ever seen a fighter fire its gun? Especially in flight? The steal gun blast panel in front of the muzzle is 20-30 cm only. If ouy want I will measure it for you exactly. It is similar myth as the role of the deflectors on the side of the MiG-21 under the auxiliary air intakes!!! Dear Andre, The Cherezvuchajnuj mode of the MiG-21 bis was very effective and they only used the same tactic with this as did any Western fighters, to disengage from a fight! The MiG-21 also had dog fight AAM so it would have been the same with any Western fighter. Fortunately it never came to this on big scale! And what works on paper ( both missiles and tactics) in practice are very different as both sides had to learn in many conflicts. Best regards Gabor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Dear Jennings, It has nothing to do with the gun blast. Have you ever seen a fighter fire its gun? Especially in flight? The steal gun blast panel in front of the muzzle is 20-30 cm only. If ouy want I will measure it for you exactly. It is similar myth as the role of the deflectors on the side of the MiG-21 under the auxiliary air intakes!!! So what was it for?? The plates below the aux intakes are to prevent stuff from being sucked into the engine when running on the ground. No question there! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) The plates below the aux intakes are to prevent stuff from being sucked into the engine when running on the ground. No question there! Yes and it's funny that the two-seaters don't have them. Edited September 22, 2011 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 (edited) Ahh, misunderstanding. We were talking about SMT, so I have refereed to SMT(and SM). when I speak about old pitot ТП-156. My mistake, I was not precise enough. According to information I have collected, MiG-21SM and SMT already were issued with pitot (ПВД) 18-5М и PVD(ПВД)-7. Two from the few public photos of MiG-21SM's, yet with the old pitot: Edited September 23, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Those were the days for the '21.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 (edited) Escape was best with burner sometimes...eastern or western - all the sane... Even the first generation AIM-9B would, it seems, have no trouble homing in on the six o' clock spot of a fighter in full burner within range. " Designed to intercept lumbering bombers, the AIM-9B was ill suited to knife-fights with MiG-17s at low level. Its launch load factor limit of 2G hampered aircrew, while its seeker very often locked on to the sun or clouds, subsequently sending the missile ballistic. The range limit of 2.6 NM meant that the launch aircraft had to be quite properly positioned for a shot, and the pilot very careful about closure rate and range " I guess - in a same situation like in the quoted from Vietnam - the AIM-9B had the same difficulties with the G's like the 'rubbish' Soviet R-3S... Do not forget the timeframe, when the MiG-21bis became operational in the VVS fighter force. Those IR-missiles were in a different league compare with current weapons. AFAIK the main progress in IR weaponry since the first Sidewinder prototypes scuttled about in the China Lake air is in the area of all-aspect target acquisition. Yes. " The next major advance in IR Sidewinder development was the AIM-9L ("Lima") model, introduced in 1978. This was the first "all-aspect" Sidewinder " At the Soviet fighter-regiments in the 'frontline' in GDR the MiG-21bis entered service in 1973(Damgarten, Altes-Lager). In the period 1973-77 most of the Soviet fighter-units in GDR were rearmed with MiG-23M('73 Finow, Köthen, '75 Zerbst, Falkenberg, '76 Merseburg etc.),soon came to the theatre the MiG-23ML. Non-Soviet WP airforces was an other story... I think the mid '70s was an interesting period for 'what IF' in Central-Europe(see the Israeli surprises in 1973 with the newer Soviet hardware which were not 'tested' by the West in Vietnam). But soon the AWACS, F-15, F-16, AIM-9L arrived to the theatre... And the MiG-21bis was not a major player in the VVS in CE in the mid '70s, especially in numbers. For me the 'updated' MiG-21SM's and SMT's are more interesting at 16.VA then. One of the Soviet instructors told: ' ChR is best for disengage from combat ' :) :) !'ChR' for acceleration, climb, ACM...was in common practice for takeoff with heavy bombload in heat etc... And sorry, too many offtopic comments from me on a modeller-forum. Edited September 27, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 (edited) Typical Soviet camo from the mid-late '70s > ex-16.VA MiG-21bis from 833.iap. Edited September 24, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 24, 2011 Share Posted September 24, 2011 (edited) Many unpainted MiG-21SM -21SMT and early bis wore this light gray paint on the underside of the fuselage: Have you any photo with visible rear under-fuselage with same paint ? Looks like this gray was nearly white on MiG-21SM -21SMT > But on the MiG-21bis it was darker gray > Edited September 24, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) For the engineers of Eduard Pleeeease....for your new MiG-21bis make tool for the ASO-2I 'flare-container' too > Edited September 27, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) For the engineers of Eduard Pleeeease....for your new MiG-21bis make tool for the ASO-2I 'flare-container' too > How many countries used this equipment ? it was only used in the bis version ? Edited September 27, 2011 by Laurent Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 How many countries used this equipment ? it was only used in the bis version ? Good question. For me hard to answer. Our regular problem with this topic - very few photos from 'front-line' units from the Cold-War era, very few wartime shots from Syria, Iraq etc.... Some WP airforces had these in the wartime stocks only. It was easy to fit and if I remember right it used the wires for the RATO(?) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 If it were very commonly used, you would see it commonly in photos, and you simply don't. I'm sure they were used, but it wasn't something frequently seen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RobertS Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 (edited) If it were very commonly used, you would see it commonly in photos, and you simply don't. I'm sure they were used, but it wasn't something frequently seen. Just for 'sample' > MiG-21SM,SMT, bis were commonly used in the 16.VA in GDR... Can you show me many public photos from those airbases in East-Germany, on which we can see clearly the rear lower part of the fuselage of these later subtypes ??? The available best few shots(here MiG-21R only): My link And some 'fresh' from the archives of a Soviet pilot, 1977 730.apib. Neuruppin > Same unit on one of the wartime grassy airstrip How many Soviet MiG-21s stationed in GDR only ? About 1000-1500(?) different subtypes in a 25 year period ? The few pictures above are something like 50% of the available public photos.... Edited September 28, 2011 by RobertS Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.