Author Topic: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed  (Read 59070 times)

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #50 on: November 20, 2012, 03:10:27 AM »
Well, he had it listed as  MiG-21-93 conversion, but it effectively was a MiG-21 Bison.  I know it has the wingroot chaff dispensers among other goodies.

Offline Daryl J.

  • Assures us he rarely uses model glue in dentistry
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #51 on: November 20, 2012, 05:42:11 AM »
Double delta main wing on the earlier F series, hang Sidewinders on the wingtips.   Finn.  Of course. 
kwyxdxLg5T

Offline Cliffy B

  • Ship Whiffer Extraordinaire...master of Beyond Visual Range Modelling
  • Its ZOTT!!!
    • My Artwork
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #52 on: November 20, 2012, 07:38:30 AM »
Would a carrier version have been a possibility given its layout an characteristics?  Its not as easy as just adding a hook and beefing up the gear.  I know the French had massive issues trying to do it with a Mirage due to its wing layout and wound up scrapping the idea.  The two aren't exactly the same but they look close.  Would that have ruined its chances?  Its gear seems a little too narrow as well.  Thoughts?
"Radials growl, inlines purr, jets blow!"  -Anonymous

"Helos don't fly.  They vibrate so violently that the ground rejects them."  -Tom Clancy

"If all else fails, call in an air strike."  -Anonymous

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #53 on: November 20, 2012, 10:56:12 AM »
Would a carrier version have been a possibility given its layout an characteristics?  Its not as easy as just adding a hook and beefing up the gear.  I know the French had massive issues trying to do it with a Mirage due to its wing layout and wound up scrapping the idea.  The two aren't exactly the same but they look close.  Would that have ruined its chances?  Its gear seems a little too narrow as well.  Thoughts?
I doubt the narrow gear would've helped, but being a tailed delta, similar to the A-4, rather than a pure delta would've helped its carrier suitability.  I suspect you might have seen the double-delta, like China's F-7E, earlier to improve carrier suitablity.  For that matter, the Ye-8 configuration, with canards, might do even better there.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #54 on: November 20, 2012, 12:42:03 PM »
With a tread of 8' 9" to 9" 1", depending on sub-type, it's not much narrower than the A-7, so why would it be an issue at all?
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #55 on: November 20, 2012, 01:00:47 PM »
Actually, I was thinking of its narrow-ness relative to how it retracts.  The A-7's main landing gear is, like the F-8's, quite robust and while the MiG-21's is suitably robust for rough-field operations, that's not the same at all as being up for the pounding that carrier operations would give it.

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #56 on: March 03, 2013, 09:29:03 AM »
I've heard of a MiG-21 demonstrator powered by the RD-33...... but I've never seen any picture of that demonstrator.  Does anyone have a picture of it?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #57 on: March 03, 2013, 11:30:15 AM »
No, I've not heard of one, though the JF-17 is derived, loosely, from the MiG-21 and uses a RD-33.  I'm not sure if the MiG-21-93 testbed used one or not.  It's certainly a temptation to add to some of the other tweaks I was looking at.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #58 on: March 03, 2013, 12:18:25 PM »
I've heard memtion of a MiG-21-97 fitted with the RD33 though no real details.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2013, 01:29:36 PM »
Note to myself: MiG-21 Bison + RD-33 turbofan + some fixed/removable inflight refuelling probe = instant "evil" counterpart to the FC-1

(Okay, not necessarily the refuelling probe part since I haven't yet seen any FC-1 equipped with a refuelling probe......)

I once thought about a probe in the same style as the one used by some F-5E/F although I now wonder if the underwing-mounted type used by the F-100 Super Saber would be easier...... does anyone know how much drag such a probe might add to the MiG?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 02:18:11 PM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #60 on: March 03, 2013, 04:42:22 PM »
Why not adopt the same refueling probe arrangement as the Malaysian MiG-29s:



You could possibly even add in an IRST ball like the MiG-29.

Looking at the engine side you could go RD33 or RD93 or even F404 or F414.  Give it a thrust vectoring tail similar to the MiG-29OVT even...


All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #61 on: March 04, 2013, 01:12:31 AM »
Possibly fit a refuleing probe to teh MiG-21 similar to those fitted to Canadian F-5s?  If memory serves me correctly, the MiG-21 has a very packed fuselage and adding a refueling probe would almost require it to be external and you'd want it to be away from the intake just to prevent problems.

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #62 on: March 04, 2013, 01:47:35 AM »
Why not adopt the same refueling probe arrangement as the Malaysian MiG-29s...

You could possibly even add in an IRST ball like the MiG-29.

Looking at the engine side you could go RD33 or RD93 or even F404 or F414.  Give it a thrust vectoring tail similar to the MiG-29OVT even...


This one is only intended as a quick fix for the "Good Guys" FC-1.  Higher up the ladder would be based on J-7FS (attachment #1).

But, hum...... your suggestion should be interesting for an "Aces' Machine"......

Otherwise I'd like to reserve the title of Super MiG-21 for the tailless ones (attachments #2-#4) or the J-7MF (see my earlier post).  And they are too cool to be bad guys.  ;)

===========================================================

Possibly fit a refuleing probe to teh MiG-21 similar to those fitted to Canadian F-5s?  If memory serves me correctly, the MiG-21 has a very packed fuselage and adding a refueling probe would almost require it to be external and you'd want it to be away from the intake just to prevent problems.


The F-5-style one was the idea that I first had.

The MiG-29-style one seems external to me, like a package that includes a fairing that the probe can extend out of and then retract back into.  I'm wondering if the F-5-style scheme would be lighter though.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2015, 10:37:31 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #63 on: March 04, 2013, 11:10:44 AM »
Would a carrier version have been a possibility given its layout an characteristics?  Its not as easy as just adding a hook and beefing up the gear.  I know the French had massive issues trying to do it with a Mirage due to its wing layout and wound up scrapping the idea.  The two aren't exactly the same but they look close.  Would that have ruined its chances?  Its gear seems a little too narrow as well.  Thoughts?

I doubt the narrow gear would've helped, but being a tailed delta, similar to the A-4, rather than a pure delta would've helped its carrier suitability.  I suspect you might have seen the double-delta, like China's F-7E, earlier to improve carrier suitablity.  For that matter, the Ye-8 configuration, with canards, might do even better there.


After also thinking of the possibility of a navalized MiG-21 and realizing that I missed this discussion......

There is a version of the JL-9 allegedly including features for carrier-borne training......

(Originals found at China Defense Forum)
« Last Edit: March 04, 2013, 11:14:44 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #64 on: March 04, 2013, 11:18:52 AM »
Mig-23 always seem like a starting point for navalized Mig.
Is take off and landing speed much lower than Mig-21 ?      I dunno.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #65 on: March 04, 2013, 11:34:50 AM »
Regarding refueling probes, I'd take a look at those fitted to the FJ-3 and FJ-4.  Very much equivalent in size and engines ('cept that the J65's in the FJ-3 & FJ-4 don't have afterburner).

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #66 on: March 07, 2013, 06:26:23 AM »
For that matter, the Ye-8 configuration, with canards, might do even better there.

I have seen another, seemingly simpler canarded development in Ye-6T/3.

It was said to be unsuccessful; is it merely an incorrect execution of the idea, or would canards on MiG-21 with minimum (if any other) fuselage alterations just not have worked?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #67 on: March 07, 2013, 10:03:25 AM »
For that matter, the Ye-8 configuration, with canards, might do even better there.

I have seen another, seemingly simpler canarded development in Ye-6T/3.

It was said to be unsuccessful; is it merely an incorrect execution of the idea, or would canards on MiG-21 with minimum (if any other) fuselage alterations just not have worked?
If memory serves me correctly, the canards on the Ye-6T/3 were more or less just stabilizers for high speed (much as the ones tested on the Ye-150 series) whereas the ones on the Ye-8 were more active.

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #68 on: March 07, 2013, 11:34:06 AM »
What-if fodder or not: what if Albania could come up with the money to have Israel upgrading their F-7As instead of having to retire them?  What would the products have looked like?

============================================================

If memory serves me correctly, the canards on the Ye-6T/3 were more or less just stabilizers for high speed (much as the ones tested on the Ye-150 series) whereas the ones on the Ye-8 were more active.


Do you mean the ones on the Ye-8 are part of the control surfaces rather than mere stabilizers?

Now the use of canards doesn't necessarily mean flight control replacement (as in from mechanical to fly-by-wire, for example), does it?

I mean if all the Ye-6T/3 needs to work out is some tweaks...... "bad guys" carrier aircraft in my storyline......  ;D
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 11:44:15 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #69 on: March 07, 2013, 12:06:22 PM »
Well, I think they went for more on the Ye-8.  I'm thinking that the controls for a fully active canard would be a problem in the Ye-6T/3 as the structure isn't going to admit of much extra room.  If you're doing a carrier-based MiG-21 derivative, I'd go with the reduced sweep outer wing leading edges of the later F-7/J-7 variants, but leave the trailing edge where it is.  You could either extend the tip out farther to get the same final tip chord or you could keep the span the same and add wingtip IRAAM launchers.
You might also look into picking up the blown flaps that certain versions of the MiG-21 used for the more "austere" fields (MiG-21PFS for example).

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #70 on: March 07, 2013, 12:33:27 PM »
Which one do you see as the better basis, the original MiG-21F or the "fat-spine" later type?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #71 on: March 07, 2013, 12:59:04 PM »
Which one do you see as the better basis, the original MiG-21F or the "fat-spine" later type?
It depends on timeframe.  If it's available as a basis, I'd go with the MiG-21bis.  Slightly earlier and I'd go with the MiG-21SM/MF.  If you could mix in the small inlet of the MiG-21F/F-13, it would give a bit better over-the-nose visibility which helps in carrier approaches.  Fitting a suitable radar to that nose would be the challenge, though the Grifo in the F-7PG seems to do well.  I could see that nose fitted to a MiG-21bis with the modified wings we discussed earlier.  OTOH, you could always adapt the nose and inlet of the J-7FS.  Depending on where you can get engines from, there was an interesting P&W proposal for the Grumman/Chengdu F-7MF Sabre II, it was an afterburning J52-P-409/PW1212 with 12, 000 lbt dry and 16,000+lbt in afterburner.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 01:08:00 PM by elmayerle »

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #72 on: March 07, 2013, 11:48:11 PM »
If you could mix in the small inlet of the MiG-21F/F-13, it would give a bit better over-the-nose visibility which helps in carrier approaches.  Fitting a suitable radar to that nose would be the challenge, though the Grifo in the F-7PG seems to do well.  I could see that nose fitted to a MiG-21bis with the modified wings we discussed earlier.

I suppose that technically we can also fit a periscope on top of the wind shield frame?

How well did periscopes work out for aircraft that have them though?

Or maybe we can use a non-podded variant of Kopyo-25 radar in the smaller nose instead......
« Last Edit: March 08, 2013, 01:03:47 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #73 on: March 09, 2013, 07:30:02 AM »
Crude rendition of an idea I may or may not be working upon ;):

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline ChernayaAkula

  • Was left standing in front when everyone else took one step back...
  • Global Moderator
  • Putting the "pro" in procrastination since...?
Re: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 Fishbed
« Reply #74 on: March 09, 2013, 11:19:53 AM »
^ That's clever!  :) I think I may need another Art Model Ye-8 and a Condor MiG-21UM.
Cheers,
Moritz

"The appropriate response to reality is to go insane!"