{"title":"在实践中的性能:幻影与米格-21 -如何在3000英尺内在米格-21上进行劈裂s:未开发的低速机动性。(接触/ ordere-mail: arina.biblija@yahoo.com)。103页。画报。5欧元外加邮资/包装。ISBN 978 - 86","authors":"D. Poole","doi":"10.1017/S0001924000088436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"T his book, written by two aeronautical engineers from the former Yugoslavia, sets out to provide a comparison of the performance of the F4 Phantom II and the MIG 21. Early chapters are devoted to descriptions of both aircraft together with relevant weights, dimensions and configurations. Data on the F-4C, F-4E, F-4J, MiG21bis, MiG-21-MF and MiG-21-F-13 and their General Electric and Tumansky engines are provided for reference throughout the volume. The sources of data are not stated but simply described as ‘official and already available to the public’. This is followed by chapters devoted to the comparison of the aircrafts’ flight envelopes and performance during take-off, acceleration, climb, cruise, descent, landing and manoeuvring. Each element includes the statement, but generally not the derivation, of the basic well-established performance equations and many diagrams comparing the performances of the two aircraft types. In essence the book leads the reader through the processes normally carried out by engineers working on competitor aircraft analysis for marketing purposes and tactical evaluations by air arms. It does not cover the more difficult areas such as the determination of aerodynamic characteristics and engine installation effects, for example, which are essential to accurate comparisons without access to manufacturers’ configuration and performance data. In comparing the two aircraft types, the authors present many flight performance charts and flight envelopes and offer a number of reasons for the flight limitations included in them. For example, the limitation of the maximum speed of the MiG-21 to Mach 2⋅05 above an altitude of 11,000m is attributed to reduced directional stability rather than a lack of engine thrust. Particular emphasis is given to instantaneous and sustained turning performance culminating in the authors’ view as to how a MiG-21 could be observed to perform a splitS manoeuvre below 3,000ft a.g.l during combat when published data stated that 6,750ft were required this. The final chapter records the authors’ conclusions as to how the two aircraft compare and provides a number of photographs that illustrate their general features. The editorial style of the book could be improved for western readers. Commas are used instead of decimal points, figures are not generally referenced in the text, there is no single list of symbols and equations are presented in a format foreign to UK practice. In conclusion, the book gives an interesting insight into the quantitative comparison of fighter aircraft and the interpretation of the significance of the differences presented in the performance curves and flight limitation boundaries. It makes informative and entertaining reading for anyone interested in the assessment of the merits of competing fighter aircraft. Dick Poole, CEng, MRAeS","PeriodicalId":50846,"journal":{"name":"Aeronautical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance in Practice: Phantom versus MiG-21 — How to do split-S in MiG-21 within 3,000ft: Unexploited low speed maneuverability P. Pavlovic and N. Pavlovic Naucna KMD, Blegrade, Serbia. 2009. (Contact/ordere-mail: arina.biblija@yahoo.com). 103pp. Illustrated. €5 plus postage/packing. ISBN 978-86-\",\"authors\":\"D. Poole\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0001924000088436\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"T his book, written by two aeronautical engineers from the former Yugoslavia, sets out to provide a comparison of the performance of the F4 Phantom II and the MIG 21. Early chapters are devoted to descriptions of both aircraft together with relevant weights, dimensions and configurations. Data on the F-4C, F-4E, F-4J, MiG21bis, MiG-21-MF and MiG-21-F-13 and their General Electric and Tumansky engines are provided for reference throughout the volume. The sources of data are not stated but simply described as ‘official and already available to the public’. This is followed by chapters devoted to the comparison of the aircrafts’ flight envelopes and performance during take-off, acceleration, climb, cruise, descent, landing and manoeuvring. Each element includes the statement, but generally not the derivation, of the basic well-established performance equations and many diagrams comparing the performances of the two aircraft types. In essence the book leads the reader through the processes normally carried out by engineers working on competitor aircraft analysis for marketing purposes and tactical evaluations by air arms. It does not cover the more difficult areas such as the determination of aerodynamic characteristics and engine installation effects, for example, which are essential to accurate comparisons without access to manufacturers’ configuration and performance data. In comparing the two aircraft types, the authors present many flight performance charts and flight envelopes and offer a number of reasons for the flight limitations included in them. For example, the limitation of the maximum speed of the MiG-21 to Mach 2⋅05 above an altitude of 11,000m is attributed to reduced directional stability rather than a lack of engine thrust. Particular emphasis is given to instantaneous and sustained turning performance culminating in the authors’ view as to how a MiG-21 could be observed to perform a splitS manoeuvre below 3,000ft a.g.l during combat when published data stated that 6,750ft were required this. The final chapter records the authors’ conclusions as to how the two aircraft compare and provides a number of photographs that illustrate their general features. The editorial style of the book could be improved for western readers. Commas are used instead of decimal points, figures are not generally referenced in the text, there is no single list of symbols and equations are presented in a format foreign to UK practice. In conclusion, the book gives an interesting insight into the quantitative comparison of fighter aircraft and the interpretation of the significance of the differences presented in the performance curves and flight limitation boundaries. It makes informative and entertaining reading for anyone interested in the assessment of the merits of competing fighter aircraft. Dick Poole, CEng, MRAeS\",\"PeriodicalId\":50846,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aeronautical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aeronautical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001924000088436\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aeronautical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001924000088436","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这本书由来自前南斯拉夫的两位航空工程师撰写,旨在提供F4幻影II和米格21性能的比较。早期章节致力于描述两架飞机连同相关的重量,尺寸和配置。关于F-4C, F-4E, F-4J,米格21bis,米格21- mf和米格21- f -13及其通用电气和图曼斯基发动机的数据在整个卷中提供参考。数据的来源没有说明,只是简单地描述为“官方的,公众已经可以获得的”。接下来的几章专门比较了飞机的飞行包线和起飞、加速、爬升、巡航、下降、着陆和操纵期间的性能。每一个要素都包括对基本的已建立的性能方程的陈述,以及比较两种飞机性能的许多图表,但通常不包括推导。从本质上讲,这本书引导读者通过通常由工程师进行竞争对手飞机分析的营销目的和空中武器战术评估的过程。它没有涵盖更困难的领域,例如确定空气动力学特性和发动机安装效果,这些对于在没有制造商配置和性能数据的情况下进行准确比较至关重要。在比较两种飞机类型时,作者提供了许多飞行性能图表和飞行包线,并提供了其中包含的飞行限制的一些原因。例如,米格-21在海拔11000米以上的最大速度限制在2·05马赫,这归因于方向性稳定性的降低,而不是发动机推力的缺乏。特别强调的是瞬间和持续的转向性能,作者认为,如何在战斗中观察到米格-21在3000英尺/小时以下进行分裂机动,而公布的数据表明需要6750英尺/小时。最后一章记录了作者关于如何比较这两架飞机的结论,并提供了一些说明其一般特征的照片。这本书的编辑风格可以为西方读者改进。逗号被用来代替小数点,数字一般不在文本中引用,没有单一的符号列表,方程以英国实践的格式呈现。总之,这本书对战斗机的定量比较和性能曲线和飞行限制边界所呈现的差异的意义的解释提供了一个有趣的见解。对于任何有兴趣评估竞争战斗机优点的人来说,这本书内容丰富,娱乐性强。迪克·普尔,硕士
Performance in Practice: Phantom versus MiG-21 — How to do split-S in MiG-21 within 3,000ft: Unexploited low speed maneuverability P. Pavlovic and N. Pavlovic Naucna KMD, Blegrade, Serbia. 2009. (Contact/ordere-mail: arina.biblija@yahoo.com). 103pp. Illustrated. €5 plus postage/packing. ISBN 978-86-
T his book, written by two aeronautical engineers from the former Yugoslavia, sets out to provide a comparison of the performance of the F4 Phantom II and the MIG 21. Early chapters are devoted to descriptions of both aircraft together with relevant weights, dimensions and configurations. Data on the F-4C, F-4E, F-4J, MiG21bis, MiG-21-MF and MiG-21-F-13 and their General Electric and Tumansky engines are provided for reference throughout the volume. The sources of data are not stated but simply described as ‘official and already available to the public’. This is followed by chapters devoted to the comparison of the aircrafts’ flight envelopes and performance during take-off, acceleration, climb, cruise, descent, landing and manoeuvring. Each element includes the statement, but generally not the derivation, of the basic well-established performance equations and many diagrams comparing the performances of the two aircraft types. In essence the book leads the reader through the processes normally carried out by engineers working on competitor aircraft analysis for marketing purposes and tactical evaluations by air arms. It does not cover the more difficult areas such as the determination of aerodynamic characteristics and engine installation effects, for example, which are essential to accurate comparisons without access to manufacturers’ configuration and performance data. In comparing the two aircraft types, the authors present many flight performance charts and flight envelopes and offer a number of reasons for the flight limitations included in them. For example, the limitation of the maximum speed of the MiG-21 to Mach 2⋅05 above an altitude of 11,000m is attributed to reduced directional stability rather than a lack of engine thrust. Particular emphasis is given to instantaneous and sustained turning performance culminating in the authors’ view as to how a MiG-21 could be observed to perform a splitS manoeuvre below 3,000ft a.g.l during combat when published data stated that 6,750ft were required this. The final chapter records the authors’ conclusions as to how the two aircraft compare and provides a number of photographs that illustrate their general features. The editorial style of the book could be improved for western readers. Commas are used instead of decimal points, figures are not generally referenced in the text, there is no single list of symbols and equations are presented in a format foreign to UK practice. In conclusion, the book gives an interesting insight into the quantitative comparison of fighter aircraft and the interpretation of the significance of the differences presented in the performance curves and flight limitation boundaries. It makes informative and entertaining reading for anyone interested in the assessment of the merits of competing fighter aircraft. Dick Poole, CEng, MRAeS
期刊介绍:
The Aeronautical Journal contains original papers on all aspects of research, design and development, construction and operation of aircraft and space vehicles. Papers are therefore solicited on all aspects of research, design and development, construction and operation of aircraft and space vehicles. Papers are also welcomed which review, comprehensively, the results of recent research developments in any of the above topics.