cperlebe@encad.Wichita.NCR.COM (Chris Perleberg) (10/28/89)
From: cperlebe@encad.Wichita.NCR.COM (Chris Perleberg) Both of these questions have probably been asked before, but I don't recall seeing any followups, so here goes. OK, the US has the F-16 Falcon, the F-15 Eagle, the A-10 Warthog, er, Thunderbolt II. The Soviets have the Fishbed, Flogger, and so on. But these are NATO code names. Does the MiG-21 Fishbed have a Russian name? What do Soviet pilots call their Su-25 Frogfoots? Anybody know? What ever happened to the Soviet CVN Kremlin? The last I read (somewhere or other), it was supposed to enter sea trials in '87 or '88. Has that in fact happened? Is it still building? Are the Soviets flying anything off of it? If so, what? And aren't they going to have a problem with Carrier landings in the beginning, having no "tradition" or experience to fall back on? The U.S., French, and British have been operating fixed-wing aircraft on carriers for years (although the British gave it up). How hard will it be for the Soviets to develope the knack of carrier operations? Chris Perleberg cperlebe@encad.wichita.ncr.com
mjt@mcnc.org (Michael Tighe) (11/04/89)
From: Michael Tighe <mjt@mcnc.org> From: cperlebe@encad.Wichita.NCR.COM (Chris Perleberg) > OK, the US has the F-16 Falcon, the F-15 Eagle, the A-10 Warthog, er, > Thunderbolt II. The Soviets have the Fishbed, Flogger, and so on. But > these are NATO code names. Does the MiG-21 Fishbed have a Russian > name? What do Soviet pilots call their Su-25 Frogfoots? Anybody > know? There was a time when they referred to their planes as products, and gave them a number. For example, the MiG-25 was/is known officially as Product 84 (Viktor Belenko, "Mig Pilot"). In the age of Glasnost I am not sure if they still use this scheme though. This is not uncommon, since we referred to the first U-2 as Article 341. ------------- Michael Tighe Internet: mjt@ncsc.org