MIG-23 Crashes in Michigan

I just checked, they are 104's and they are still based there. I have a friend that has a hanger condo a few doors down from them.

In reply to pheller :

While I get what your are saying and I consider the Mig-23 a pretty big dud of an airplane, I would still be interested in seeing one in person and fly.  I can see US stuff in a lot of places, but foreign stuff is rather hard to see and unique in a variety of ways.  I would also say Russian stuff can be basic but it's generally also made to be serviced and rugged, and being basic works to you advantage when you have to maintain them.

The contemporary of the Mig-23 would likely be the F4 Phantom (a bit earlier), but I would probably be more confident of the flying condition of a privately owned Mig-23 than an F4 because the F4 is a lot more complex (although has the advantage that you might be able to find people who actually worked on them). 

There may be one privately owned (not military contractor) F4(?), and they made crap ton of them!  The operating cost of this plane has to be pretty steep:

https://silodrome.com/mcdonnell-f4h-1f-phantom-ii/

Of note, if given the option between an flying F-104 and a Mig23, it would be F-104 all they way, being that they are the most bitchenest' airplane every to fly!  

aircooled said:

Small tidbit of info:   If you listen to the video, the ejections make a "pop" sound, not the "thrrssssst" sound you would expect.  This is apparently because those seats (which apparently are original to the plane) essentially use an explosive, not a rocket like the typical Martin Baker style seat.  I would expect they are rather violent (rocket seats are violent enough!) and considering the age of the people that typically own and fly such planes, I would expect there are likely notable ejection injuries involved.

You are correct that the explosive catapult of early seats injured the crew. This was because they needed a very powerful charge to not only get the seat out of the cockpit, but also to clear the aircraft (if in flight) and to try and save the crew should they be at low altitude or on the ground. Once they added rockets to the bottom of the seats, they were able to reduce the initial instantaneous explosive impact transmitted to the crew, clear the tail(s) of the aircraft, and allow pilots to eject at zero airspeed and zero altitude.

Most ejection systems designed after the 50's are explosively actuated and rocket-assisted, including the seats. There are two primary reasons for this; the flame from the rocket would burn the crew if they were still in the cockpit, and the initial acceleration of the rocket is too great and would injure the pilot. 

There is an explosive charge firing a catapult that starts the seat moving upwards. The initial impact g's of this charge is much less than what the rocket would provide at ignition. The rocket assists the catapult, and provides the needed thrust to ensure the seat moves away from the aircraft. The seat rockets trigger once the seat is clear of the aircraft.

The seats in the incident aircraft were rocket assisted as seen in the pic. For safety concerns I would assume they were not using the OEM seat and were replaced with a Martin Baker or something similar. EDIT: The seats are the original seats.

The attached pic is of the incident in question. The rear canopy is farthest from the aircraft, the forward canopy is close to the starboard wing, and the front seat rocket is firing.

pheller said:

Am I the only who could kinda care less about other countries sorta junky war planes? 

 

It's one thing to resurrect a historic jet like Me 262.  

 

If the Russians want to celebrate their war equipment history, let them, or maybe park one next to an F5 or F16 to compare. 

 

Otherwise lets keep the junkers errr Floggers out of our airspace lest they hurt someone. Put that money into stuff into American taxdollars paid for. 

On the local news they showed an interview with the pilot of this particular MiG from about a year ago. He's retired Navy and is a commercial pilot now. He said he missed flying high performance stuff, and that the US-made planes are prohibitively expensive, hard to find, and harder to maintain, whereas old MiGs like this one are comparatively easy to locate.

In reply to pheller :

Why do you hate Spitfires?

pheller said:

Am I the only who could kinda care less about other countries sorta junky war planes? 

 

It's one thing to resurrect a historic jet like Me 262.  

 

If the Russians want to celebrate their war equipment history, let them, or maybe park one next to an F5 or F16 to compare. 

 

Otherwise lets keep the junkers errr Floggers out of our airspace lest they hurt someone. Put that money into stuff into American taxdollars paid for. 

It's not as if our tax dollars were being used for this. Some rich guy bought a MiG-23. More power to him for keeping it in the air.

In reply to Appleseed :

He's a philistine.

All this talk of ejection seats  reminded me of a story/memory.  In the military you're taught to do something over and over so that it's second nature.  When getting into an A10 we always had to check "Safety T" which was a T pattern of pulled circuit breakers that disabled systems not need on the ground but first you always and I mean always made sure the pins were in the ejection seat.  Theory was an Airman wouldn't survive ejecting 1) not strapped in and 2) inside a haz gen.  I remember one day a new guy I was training went up first and got into the seat.  I went up and by habit looked for the pins even though I wasn't getting in.  The pins weren't there.  Yeah the crew chief screwed up but I chewed that guy out.  

That is what MIG 23s do best. 

In reply to aircooled :

I once read that the Collings Foundation's F-4D costs over $10K per hour to operate. That F4H-1 in your link has been under restoration for years. As much as I'd love to see it in the air, I don't think it's anywhere near flyable, yet, and probably never will be. 
 

A lot of these jet warbirds have had their ejection seats disabled. I'm not sure I'd want to fly in an ex-Soviet jet without one.

There are MiG-29s and Su-27s in civilian hands. These are 3rd generation fighters. That's why junky Soviet jet are here. There are no 3rd generation American jets in civilian hands. The F-15, F-16, and F-18 are still being flown by their respective services.

The Su-27s were for sale for $4 million. Where can you get that kind of performance for 4 mil?

For the question of military jets in civilian hands, this argument has been around for 50 years. When a bunch of F-86s were dumped in the market, cheap, they were often purchased by rank amateurs and crashed accordingly.

One of the first Su-27's on the private market mysteriously disappeared after being sold. Talk was that a shell corporation bought it for the US govt. Then pics leaked of an Su-27 doing BFM over the Nevada desert. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/its-not-every-day-you-see-an-f-16-and-russian-su-27-dogfight-above-area-51-2074360f31b3

If I remember correctly it was this aircraft that was lost in a mishap not too long after. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/area-51-test-pilots-mysterious-death-happened-heroically-flying-an-su-27-report

There are F-16's in civilian hands at Top Aces. https://www.topaces.com/our-fleet

And F/A-18's too (although current details are hard to come by): https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32869/this-man-owns-the-worlds-most-advanced-private-air-force-after-buying-46-f-a-18-hornets

pheller said:

Am I the only who could kinda care less about other countries sorta junky war planes? 

 

It's one thing to resurrect a historic jet like Me 262.  

 

If the Russians want to celebrate their war equipment history, let them, or maybe park one next to an F5 or F16 to compare. 

 

Otherwise lets keep the junkers errr Floggers out of our airspace lest they hurt someone. Put that money into stuff into American taxdollars paid for. 

It's still part of the history of the US. Russia has been the "boogeyman" of the US since the end of WWII. Our military aircraft have fought against multiple variations of MiGs in various wars and proxy wars since the 40s. I for one think it's cool to see people flying old MiGs, Sukhois, etc and it allows us to see what our fighters were up against. They are also privately owned jets so as someone else noted, it's not our tax dollars keeping them airworthy. 

I've had the opportunity to sit in the cockpit of one. Build quality is what you would expect from Soviet Era equipment, not sure you'd ever see my ass piloting one but more power to those that invest their time and money into keeping things like that flying. 

As I've said before, aviation isn't inherently dangerous, but it is terribly unforgiving of carelessness and neglect.

In reply to myf16n :

I have no doubt that the Red Eagles are still flying out at Tonopa. I've met Col. Gail Peck, the first CO of the outfit. The things they had to do to keep the 17s, 21s, and eventually the 23s flying was incredible.

History of the 4477th

"The pilot of the Russian-made fighter jet that crashed earlier this month during the Thunder Over Michigan air show in Belleville was trying to land the plane while the backseater acknowledged to investigators he likely pulled the ejection handles for both of them, a preliminary investigation found."

Yahoo.com: Michigan air show crash report suggests pilot, backseater out of sync on whether to eject

The backseat guy may have saved both their lives.  It's not uncommon for pilots to kill themselves trying to save the plane (e.g. trying to make it to a runway or road rather then a field). 

Of course, pointing the plane in a good direction (if even possible in this case) before punching out is certainly a good idea also.

It does remind me a bit of a story I remember of a Phantom pilot in Vietnam who told his RIO that if they needed to eject he would say "three, two, one, eject" and they would pull the handle then (it's really something you want to be prepared for).  After getting hit and being on fire and heading out over the gulf of Tonkin he decided they needed to get out and said "three," and the RIO ejected!  I guess the whole on fire thing made him a bit jumpy.

Reminds of a Bob Hoover story.  Flight testing F-100s for North American,  he lost all hydraulics, thus all movable controls. Average pilots would assess the situation,  and punch out.

Bob Hoover is not an average pilot.

He noticed he was in an ascending turn (can't remember if it was a left or right.) He also noted he still had throttle. And he's over populated Los Angels. If he abandons the Hun, it crashes, uncontrolled into downtown LA.

So he keeps flying the plane.

By opening and closing the throttle, he shortens and elongates the circle he stuck in to slowly move the jet over the ocean. Only then does he eject.

“If you’re faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the crash as possible.”

— Bob Hoover

Appleseed said:

For the question of military jets in civilian hands, this argument has been around for 50 years. When a bunch of F-86s were dumped in the market, cheap, they were often purchased by rank amateurs and crashed accordingly.

YIL that this guy had an F-86.

The F-86 was a nice little plane.

In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :

It's funny you would mention him!

  I noticed a T6 doing circles in my area on Friday (just out for a pleasure flight obviously) so I looked it up on ADS-B and the I noticed the registered owner, Micheal Dorn.   So I guess he has a T6 now, based out of Van Nuys airport.

I know years ago he had a T-33, that he would fly into Oakland sometimes (where my step father had a flight school).

AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:

has anyone here flown in an airshow?  does the pre-flight info include places to ditch to minimize casualties?  on one hand, i don't want to see the pilot die in the crash.  OTOH, it's pretty irresponsible IMO to eject in suburbia.

and i'm gonna IBTL my own post, just because.

When I started flying cargo in Twin engine cessnas and lear 24s the owner of the company stressed the importance of always picking a place to crash on takeoff. Once in the air always be looking for the safest spot to crash and always try to not injure anyone on the ground.

This morning my dad read in the Detroit news that the engine was running but only at low power. As they approached the airport the backseater ejected both of them.