Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Look at what Saddam had hidden in the sand!
Military Magazine | April 2004 | Lawrence H. Boteler

Posted on 03/24/2004 11:37:02 PM PST by johnmorris886

An Iraqi jet, an advanced Russian MiG-25 Foxbat, was found in August 2003 buried in the sand after an informant tipped off U.S. troops. The MiG was dug out of a massive sand dune near the Al Taqqadum airfield by U.S. Air Force recovery teams. The MiG was reportedly one of over two dozen Iraqi jets buried in the sand, like hidden treasure, waiting to be recovered at a later date. Contrary to what some in the major media have reported, not all the jets found were from the Gulf War-era.

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 sophisticaed electronic warfare devices.

U.S. Air Force recovery teams had to use large earth-moving equipment to uncover the MiG, which is over 70 feet long and weights nearly 25 tons. The Foxbat is known to be one of Iraq's top jet fighters. The advanced electronic reconnaissance version found by the U.S. Air Force is currently in service with the Russian air force. The MiG is capable of flying at speeds of over 2,000 miles an hour, or three times the speed of sound, and at altitudes of over 75,000 feet.

The recover 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 UN ban on arms sales to Badhdad.

The buried aircraft at Al Taqqadum were covered in camouflage netting, sealed and, in many cases, had their wings removed before being buried more than 10 feet beneath the Iraqi desert. The discovery of the buried Iraqi jet fighters illustrates the problem faced by U.S. inspection teams searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is larger in size than California, and the massive deserts south and west of Baghdad were used by Saddam Hussein to hide weapons during the first Gulf War.

U.S. Intelligence sources have already uncovered several mass grave burial sites in the open deserts with an estimated 10,000 dead hidden there. In addition Iraq previously hid SCUD missles, chemical weapons and biological warheads by buring them under the desert sand.

UN inspection teams found those weapons in the early 1990s after detailed information of the exact locations was obtained. Former top U.S. weapons inspector Dr. David Kay is known to favor human intelligence as the primary means to finding Iraq's hidden treasure trove of weapons and secrets. While there are rumors of Iraqi chemical and biological weapons being shipped to nearby Syria, the weapons may very well still remain inside Iraq buried under the vast desert wastelands.

Some critics of the Bush Administration have claimed that the inability of U.S. Forces to uncover weapons of mass destruction is proof that the President mislead the nation into the war with Iraq. However in recent days the critics have fallen silent as word quietly leaked from Iraq that major discoveries have already been made and are now being documented completley. Bush Administration officials are keeping any such discoveries secret for the moment.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Russia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aerospace; altaqqadum; avionics; buried; electronics; foxbat; france; hidden; iraq; iraqiairforce; mig; mig25; mig25foxbat; reconnaissance; russia; saddam; saddamhussein; taqqadum; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
I just got a free copy of Miltary Magazine in the mail today and this was the lead story. There are several good pictures of the Foxbat being uncovered. I picked out that it is believed that FRENCH technology was on the advanced aircraft.

Anyone heard anymore about this?

1 posted on 03/24/2004 11:37:03 PM PST by johnmorris886
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
It's at least a 6 month old story. Or is this a new jet? I think the one they uncovered months ago was Russian made.

Also, any time some total pinhead (i.e. Democrat) whines about WMD's, tell them Saddam could put ALL of his stockpiles he had in one of those jets and bury it!

He could have put ALL of his anthrax stockpiles in his spider-hole.

You hear idiots (again, Democrats) often say, "but how could he have moved them without us seeing it?" Simple: you could fit enough to kill hundreds of thousands in the trunk of a mid-size car.

It's just amazing how stupid the left is willing to prove themselves to be just to make a point.
2 posted on 03/24/2004 11:40:09 PM PST by Fledermaus ( Frm ^;;^ says, "John Kerry is an admitted War Criminal and should thus be in jail"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886

3 posted on 03/24/2004 11:43:41 PM PST by johnmorris886 (It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot he free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
The buried aircraft at Al Taqqadum were covered in camouflage netting, sealed and, in many cases, had their wings removed before being buried more than 10 feet beneath the Iraqi desert.

Just screams 'accidental'. /sarcasm

Seriously, I remember the news articles from when they found the planes.

4 posted on 03/25/2004 12:10:14 AM PST by GeronL (http://www.ArmorforCongress.com......................Send a Freeper to Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
If there weren't any Western technology aboard the warplane, calling a 1966-vintage MiG-25 an ADVANCED plane is really far-fetched.
5 posted on 03/25/2004 12:20:01 AM PST by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
If there wasn't advanced western technology on the F-117, it'd be, for all practical purposes, a brick.
6 posted on 03/25/2004 12:31:46 AM PST by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
OK, so WHY did Saddam bury his planes?
7 posted on 03/25/2004 12:34:44 AM PST by GLDNGUN (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GLDNGUN
During Gulf War 1, he had some jets flown to Iran, arguably to make sure they were not destroyed and render the Iraqi air force unequipped. The Iranians decided to hold on to the jets and did not return them until the war was declared over.

May be this time Saddam thought he could stretch the war long enough to re-deploy the jets at some moment, without having them in "safe-keeping" out of reach.
8 posted on 03/25/2004 12:43:31 AM PST by Bazooka (What goes up....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
Like I said, I hadn't heard about this before, but this story states specifically:

The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an [b]advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the West and is equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare devices.[/b]

Apparently this MiG-25 is different than your run of the mill version. What I thought was interesting was the FRENCH technology reference. I wonder if one of the reasons the French were so opposed to the war, Other than being Anti-American, was that they were afraid many of their arms would turn up, arms that they illegally supplied Iraq.

9 posted on 03/25/2004 12:56:32 AM PST by johnmorris886 (It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot he free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
The only French that can go on this plane is bit of French perfume in the cockpit and that is it.

Planes electronics are either one set (russian) or some other. It is hard to mix and match.

Actually the Chinese are doing lots of mix and matching using Russian airframes and israeli radars and missiles.
10 posted on 03/25/2004 12:58:50 AM PST by Makedonski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Makedonski
I notice that you voted against it, before voting for it.

Then again, I was easily able to fire Taiwanese paperclips with Indian rubber bands.

I'll wait until the jury reports on this, while hoping something besides perfume sticks t the Frogs.
11 posted on 03/25/2004 1:19:45 AM PST by ApplegateRanch (The world needs more horses, and fewer Jackasses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886

12 posted on 03/25/2004 1:34:51 AM PST by Nick Danger (If you don't disagree with me, how will I know I'm right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
If I recall correctly, the MIG that others are thinking of was found by Aussie Spec Ops not the USAF as this story points out.
13 posted on 03/25/2004 2:33:38 AM PST by Broadside Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
Hussein was clearly expecting either a protracted war that would give him ample time/opportunity to recover these aircraft, or he anticipated that his army would crack (again) as it did in GW1 after the USAF unceasingly carpet bombed them to h*ll (what the Muslims call Paradise). Making those aircraft flyable again and getting all the sand out of sensitive crevices will be a lengthy endeavor.

It was NOT going to ba an overnight exercise to get them back into the air again.
14 posted on 03/25/2004 2:45:43 AM PST by DustyMoment (Repeal CFR NOW!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886

Former Defense Secretary William Cohen holds up a five-pound bag of sugar on ABC's This Week, Nov. 16, 1997. Cohen used the sugar to illustrate that a similar amount of Anthrax could destroy half the population of Washington.

BUSH LIED!!!!!!!!

/sarc

15 posted on 03/25/2004 2:52:35 AM PST by American_Centurion (Daisy-cutters trump a wiretap anytime - Nicole Gelinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
Any of you Air Force / Air Wing / Naval Aviation types want to comment on what it'd take to make this bird combat-ready after it had been buried under 10 feet of sand with no apparent protection? Sand in EVERYTHING and possible airframe damage from the weight of it maybe?
16 posted on 03/25/2004 3:15:08 AM PST by Riley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
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 UN ban on arms sales to Badhdad.

Paging John Kerry....Nice allies ya got there, Johnny.

17 posted on 03/25/2004 4:57:29 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piasa
But a brick designed to be an advanced stealth bomber. Even if it was sexed up with more modern electronics, I doubt the MIG-25 would stand a chance, even against 1980-vintage fighters.

What I would like to know is if the Iraqi MIG-25s, initially interceptor aircraft, had been turned into something else. They would make decent recon aircraft given their high-speed capacity, but could they also be used in a bomber role, in which case they could have been the designed aircraft to carry unconventional ordnance ?

If a USAF Freeper lurks in the immediate surroundings, I'd like to discuss the possibility.
18 posted on 03/25/2004 5:15:30 AM PST by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Makedonski
You are incorrect, sir. WHO makes the electronics on an aircraft is irrelevant. What is important is that a) the electronic equipment is designed to fit within the airframe and b) said electronics conform to certain design specifications (i.e. voltage and stress requirements, radio interference guidelines, etc, etc). All this requires is co-operation between manufacturers. Very often, it is a matter of an aircraft requiring some modification of electronics or airframe in order to be able to use certain weapons or systems sold by another nation.

If you should doubt this, I can tell you from personal experience that at least half the guts of your typical AMERICAN avionics package are made in Taiwan (circuit boards and such) or similar places.

As for mixing and matching electronics and aircraft, it is done all the time. Every European fighter design of the last 30 years has done so (I submit the Tornado FR.1 for example, Italian radar, British fire control), so have the Israeli's (F-15's and 16's with some home-grown modifications).
19 posted on 03/25/2004 5:35:51 AM PST by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
I won't comment on any involvement of my government, but French firms have already been found with their hands in the cookie jar in the past, like ordnance producer Luchaire in 1985, which did illegal business with Iran, at the height of the Iran-Iraq war.

I think the US forces should specifically mention what French systems have been found in the MIG (if any), so French authorities find themselves in a position to either confess or rule out any embargo violation. The same should be done for EVERY advanced system found, be it French, German, Russian, American, Chinese, etc.

If, for example, this MIG contained an electronic system that went into production after 1991, then my government would be forced to act and to punish the firm responsible for the sale (along with any officials that gave a green light to the sale). Even if the system was pre-1991 and thus could have been sold way before any embargo, its serial number should tell when the sale really occurred.

I hope there'll be a follow-up on this story.
20 posted on 03/25/2004 5:35:54 AM PST by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
That seems a sensible enough course of action.
21 posted on 03/25/2004 8:07:02 AM PST by Riley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
"Even if it was sexed up with more modern electronics, I doubt the MIG-25 would stand a chance, even against 1980-vintage fighters."

I have to disagree with you there. A P51 Mustang equiped with the latest air to air missiles and electronics to use them would be extremely deadly, it's biggest problem would be a lack of defensive capabilities, small payload, and not being able to get in-theater quickly.

22 posted on 03/25/2004 8:29:16 AM PST by Outlaw76 (Citizens on the Bounce!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
I haven't been following Russian aerospace work in a long while- wonder what they have been up to lately in R&D? I'm sure they've been busy and I have to wonder if they and the French have been cooperating, seeing as how the French seem to think we're the biggest threat to their culture since corn on the cob.
23 posted on 03/25/2004 1:56:58 PM PST by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
"What I would like to know is if the Iraqi MIG-25s, initially interceptor aircraft, had been turned into something else."

Yes there is a variant that was made for ground attack but with a different number designation ie: not a MIG 25 but a MIGxx. I think it may have been a 2 seater like an F-15 Strike Eagle.
24 posted on 03/26/2004 6:20:08 AM PST by Broadside Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
"Yes there is a variant that was made for ground attack but with a different number designation ie: not a MIG 25 but a MIGxx. I think it may have been a 2 seater like an F-15 Strike Eagle."

Ooooops scratch that I was thinking of the MIG 23 with it's ground attack version the MIG 27.

25 posted on 03/26/2004 6:43:04 AM PST by Broadside Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: piasa
As I see it the French aircraft builders (and aerospace firms in general) have important partnerships with both Russian and US counterparts. A friend of mine has recently enjoyed a trip to Norfolk to make a lecture to your Navy about French results in "pulse reactors" (I'm not sure it translates exactly that way, though).
26 posted on 03/26/2004 7:35:35 AM PST by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw76
Would a Sidewinder-equipped P-51 stand a chance if confronting similarly-equipped F-16s ?
27 posted on 03/26/2004 7:36:49 AM PST by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
Russian and French-made electronics

We must get the support of the world

Let's put cowards in the White House.

28 posted on 03/26/2004 7:39:58 AM PST by bmwcyle (<a href="http://www.johnkerry.com/" target="_blank">miserable failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
Depends on the situation and literally who can see and shoot first. I think the P-51 would stand an excellent chance against a similarly equipped F-16.

Neither machine can outrun the missile.
Neither machine can effectively 'hide' from detection.

If both could somehow have the same avionics packages and countermeasures:
The F-16 has speed and acceleration as it's two main benefits.
The P-51 has maneuverability and the ability fly extremely low and slow.

I think it would make for an interesting encounter.
29 posted on 03/26/2004 9:06:49 AM PST by Outlaw76 (Citizens on the Bounce!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101
The Tornado FR.1 has MIL-STD-1553 standard??

I am by profession Electrical Engineer and although I haven't had defense industry experience I know what system integration is and one has interface standards to which manufacturers comply. A western aircraft is made with same interface standard for different manfacturers to bid for equipment like radar and fire control. Ok so that is exactly what I am saying. French manufactured radar interfaced to a russian fire control system in a russian airframe is not worth while doing. Either have the whole thing french made (electronics) or not. There is a chance of having external pods that might carry IR imaging or external pod that even is fire control but it is not that easy. All I am saing is just someone to say a Mig-25 is thought to have a french technology is either YES or NO.

30 posted on 03/27/2004 4:29:38 AM PST by Makedonski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Makedonski
The Tornado will have whatever standard the designers decided was the most efficient, regardless of what designation you give it. After the decision is made on a standard, and as an engineer you should know this, it is not often difficult to adopt (existing) technology to conform to that standard.

French technology (for example) interfacing with a MIG (for example) is certainly worth doing if:

a) The French technology is superior to anything in the Russian inventory.
b) The French technology can be adapted with little or no loss of functionality or capability due to different voltages, space requirements, electrical bus, etc (Intel does this, BTW, with Pentium and Celeron processors, for example).
c)The modifications required to mix and match airframe to technology would not require unreasonable changes to be made to one or the other or both.
d) You believe that French Engineers and systems techs are capable of adapting their technology to Russian standards and vice-versa. I believe they are. The principles of engineering, electronics and computers do not miraculously change due to geography.
e) It makes economic sense to buy someone else's technology rather than devote the resources to developing your own.

Taking all of those factors into account, not only is it possible to adapt French aviation technology to a Russian airframe, it's probable that this is the case when we're talking about Iraq, which has no indigenous aircraft industry of it's own, but which had enough oil money to make it worth someone's time to figure these issues out.

This aircraft, and many more like them, were buried for a reason:

a) To hide a valuable asset that otherwise might be destroyed for future use.
b) To hide evidence of violations of UN sanctions.
c) To cover (possible) French government involvement in circumventing sanctions and supplying an American enemy with weapons and technology that could kill Americans in the field, or innocents in an act of terrorism.
d) The supply of parts had dried up and rather than lose a capital investment in such an aircraft, it was buried to prevent it's destruction in an American attack, just waiting for the day when the flow of parts, engineers, etc would resume.
e) Saddam Hussein is an idiot and the people in charge of his armed forces were even more so.

31 posted on 03/27/2004 7:44:38 AM PST by Wombat101 (Sanitized for YOUR protection....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Wombat101
First of all it is the last e).

Saddam and his people were idiots. Full stop.

There is more Yugoslav/Serbian equipment in Iraq than French. The Yugos were there big time.

A standard is not introduced per aircraft a standard last for a long time and it is implemented on all aircraft to reduce cost and maintainance time. Also to allow for future upgrade.

The MIL-STD-1553 was introduced in 1978 and it is standard in all US military aircraft (fighting aircraft not transports). Also the VME bus standard is very common.

Do you know what a bullshit story is because that is what the French Iraqi military help accusation is. Nothing more nothing less.

In 2002 the Ukrainian government was accused of selling Kolchuga Air Defence system that was able to detect Stealth planes.

The US even went to Ukraine for inspection and now were in Iraq and have you heard anything about it?? NOOO. Because it was bullshit. The Ukrainian president was pressured for some short term political goal.

Then the story about Chinese experts installing fibre-optic equipment for air defence in Iraq. Well the US in Iraq. Where are the fibre-optics??

Don't argue over a B.S. Story.

Oh buy the way the later model Russian planes use 486 processors :)). Go figure!!

32 posted on 03/28/2004 4:46:39 PM PST by Makedonski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
It's at least a 6 month old story.

It was on NewsMax last August!

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/8/6/105528.shtml

33 posted on 04/23/2004 5:47:49 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
There are some pretty sophisticated 1955-era B-52s flying around.
34 posted on 04/23/2004 5:50:12 PM PDT by Petronski (I'm not always cranky.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Makedonski
One shudders to think what the Chinese are doing with our statellite technology, courtesy of Clintax...
35 posted on 04/23/2004 5:54:10 PM PDT by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

.
36 posted on 04/23/2004 5:55:36 PM PDT by Mo1 (Make Michael Moore cry.... DONATE MONTHLY!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus
Or is this a new jet?

No, it's a pile of junk.

37 posted on 04/23/2004 5:55:51 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
This was posted shortly after it was found last year. If not mistaken Diogenisis posted it from one of the wire sevices but it never made the news.
38 posted on 04/23/2004 5:55:57 PM PDT by eastforker (The color of justice is green,just ask Johny Cochran!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
Once France and Russia provided arms and technology to Iraq in violation of any number of UN resolutions Saddam had their ass, so to speak. A form of blackmail or extortion, sorta kinda. No wonder nobody wanted to topple Saddam, they were all in up to their necks dealing with this guy..

Pretty sad. Meanwhile, everyone screams "Bush Lied" (TM); ya just gotta love that guy. The harder right, versus the easier wrong.
39 posted on 04/23/2004 6:00:11 PM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
However, in recent days the critics have fallen silent as word quietly leaked from Iraq that major discoveries have already been made and are now being documented completely. Bush administration officials are keeping any such discoveries secret for the moment

////////////////////////////////////////////

well, if this story was posted last August, I am sorry there wasn't more of an outcry about found WMDs, as I first hoped was true and within the last week, as the story reads .

But I STILL believe the WMD is hidden in the sand or is stored in Syria, or has already found it's way into AQ hands (shudder0.
40 posted on 04/23/2004 6:20:21 PM PDT by bitt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
Pretty sad, indeed...especially when we have a presidential candidate running around practically apologizing for our so-called deception. When you see what's happening with these countries who broke the embargo...and the fraud in the UN's Oil For Food Program, it is amazing that Kerry could find comfort in letting any of these people run anything in Iraq.

What people like Kerry seem to forget, is that both Chirac and DeVillipane(sp) gave Bush and Powell assurances that they would support the war, if need be. Not only did France break their promise, they began their own campaign to lobby other countries against us. But even still with all this deception from our so-called allies, it is Kerry who seeks to apologize for our president's behavior.
41 posted on 04/23/2004 6:25:07 PM PDT by cwb (Kerry: Sadr is a legitimate voice in Iraq being silenced by America..and Hamas are sorta terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886

42 posted on 04/23/2004 6:25:17 PM PDT by Porterville (Kerry has no gravitas!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porterville

43 posted on 04/23/2004 6:25:57 PM PDT by Porterville (Kerry has no gravitas!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886

Look at the missiles.... now what would Saddam need with missiles?? And who would he get them from?

44 posted on 04/23/2004 6:27:10 PM PDT by Porterville (Kerry has no gravitas!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Makedonski
Oh buy the way the later model Russian planes use 486 processors :)). Go figure!!

Well I hope they don't run on Windows 95 ;-) in which case I'd stay up as high as possible and always drive like it was time to reboot.

45 posted on 04/23/2004 7:12:19 PM PDT by Sender (It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen. -Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Sender; Makedonski
Oh buy the way the later model Russian planes use 486 processors

Seems to me so was NASA until recently.

46 posted on 04/24/2004 1:14:44 AM PDT by yhwhsman ("Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small..." -Sir Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: johnmorris886
Sorry, but none of the equipment found on this FOXBAT B was French. Standard Soviet supplied photo recce and SIGINT gear was onboard. The aircraft, like all the MiG-25s that have been discovered in Iraq, are all from the 1980s deliveries during the Iraq/Iraq conflict. French Mirage F.1s have also been recovered and all of these are from the Iran/Iraq period. The stories are all good from the media perspective. Insert a few "maybes" and suddenly it turns into "New French equipment found".
47 posted on 04/26/2004 2:22:30 PM PDT by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Broadside Joe
The Aussies disovered FOXBAT C (Two-seat trainer version of the MiG-25). This one was discovered wing-less, covered in cammo netting and placed under palm trees.
48 posted on 04/26/2004 2:27:16 PM PDT by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
That MiG-25 being dug out of the sand is a dedicated recce version. It was built that way. The aircraft does not carry air-to-air radar, but a package/combination of cameras and signals intelligence gear. Iraq also received the standard interceptor version. Some of the recce versions also had an air-to-ground capability. The Iraqis used the recce version in this dual role during the Iran-Iraq war in which they carried out high-level bombing raids.
49 posted on 04/26/2004 2:35:05 PM PDT by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Porterville
"Look at the missiles.... now what would Saddam need with missiles?? And who would he get them from?"


Your image #1 and #2 are standard interceptor variants of the MiG-25. Iraq was supplied with these and the ACRID air-to-air missiles that are on shown on these examples. Iraq had thousands of air-to-air missile stockpiles from the Iran/Iraq war. The last time an Iraqi MiG-25, and their air-air-missile inventory was used, was December 2002. During this confrontaton with Coalition force patrolling the South No Fly Zone and Iraq MiG-25 shot down a US Predator UAV.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73927,00.html
50 posted on 04/26/2004 2:58:21 PM PDT by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson