The Soviet Fighter That Couldn’t Shoot Its Guns | The MiG-9 Story 

I think it looked good on paper as mounting huge gun in a centre of fuselage would allow to use it without rocking and tearing the plane apart with recoil.

@@090giver090 Jup, I feel like it's a logical mistake to make when you are designing your first jet aircraft.

To be fair such gun mounting positions was really good for piston driven aircraft, so if you are unfamiliar with jets, like these engineers were, it would make sense.

@@matthiuskoenig3378 yeah, they failed to gauge how delicate the air intake was to debris and the stress the higher speed had on the materials used. It feels they reached a point where they were committed to the design and either pride or government pressure kept them from a full redesign.

Even the A-10, which was designed twenty-odd years after the MiG-9, struggled with choking the engines and covering the canopy in soot. They solved the choking by wiring the ignition to the trigger, so if the engines do flame out, they’ll start right up immediately after fresh air flows into the engine.

The US would never build a plane that is so ineffective that it cant fly in rain or near thunderstorms. Or build a flying abortion that has killed more US troops than enemy engagements like the osprey 😅

It is like Rheinwiesen and Guantanamo.

well it was either that or somebody goes to Gulag, and nobody wanted to go to Gulag

no one find "this is find" it were one of the first fighter jets and it were so good that it started to produce in 1947 and ended in 1949 and were out of service like in 51 quickly changed by mig-15 which started to design in end of 1946 even before mass production of mig-9 started, so yes they understood that mig-9 is shit and need better fighter

And yet this WASN'T the Sovietiest Soviet aircraft that ever Sovieted. That was the Tu-22 Backfire. That bird had all of the cons of the B-58 Hustler and none of the pros.

I say grounding planes because the lack of boots for the maintenance crew rivals it.

Bring engineers to court say "you is accused of anti soviet behavior" shot them

@@magnemoe1 wait what

It truly amazes me that these problems in leadership are still so prevalent

@@innacrisis6991 Makes you wonder what kind of, almost idiotic stories, are behind things like Su 57 Felon or the T-14 Armata.

Russian culture seems to have created a very long history of such events, even now in 2023 it is on full display in their war in Ukraine.

I about died when he said that!

While this video can seem amusing it does seem to ignore that the mig 9 was basically a test bed for the jet technology used in the mig 15 and was never intended for use in combat by the Soviet military at any point.

"this is fine" the leadership said calmly

@@parkerlong2658 Lucky they had the Yak-15 available if any sort of conflict had broken out. 🙄 And that was fine. 😶‍🌫

For that same reason, I've always wondered how the german Gotha 229 Flying Wing could have fired her MK-108 cannons without flaming out her engines at the first round...

@@razorback20 The guns were outboard and behind the engine intakes.

​@@anzaca1 but the muzzle brakes were in front of the air Intakes and yes although to the sides still were close to the intakes

@@geoff-lukebihler6157 The Horton 229 was NEVER actually fitted with any guns. If fitted, they would've been without muzzle devices, like on the Me 262.

​@@geoff-lukebihler6157 German 30mm aircraft cannons didn't use muzzle breaks. Look at the Me 262. It used the same cannons, and they don't protrude from the fuselage.

this isnt advanced incompetence, this is soviet/russian incompetence

This is just another day in russia

Yeah, it's sadly how Russia works. They sincerely only ever seem to make genuine, sometimes even edge leading, progress during an active war. Other wise, they always think they know what's best, they get into a war, get utterly curbstomped and then pick up on NATO or enemy tactics and use those. Their equipment, kit, leadership, structure, it all sees this type of fart smelling behavior. They just can't accept, at least not openly, that they need help with designs, modern tech, etc. They just plug their ears screaming "LA LA LA LA" until they have no choice but to adapt or be shot/go to gulag.

I might be completely wrong about this, but i think i remember a presentation about restoring and flying a mig 21 and i swear they mentioned something about the mig 21 (and earlier designs) not having fuel indicators either. I think it was partially because of the relative complexity of actually making and adding the sensors, but more because of how little fuel some of the smaller jets could carry and how short the flight time was on a full tank (i think under 30 minutes) it was far cheaper and almost as effective to rely on a timer to figure out how much burn time you had left instead of a fuel gauge.

@@restitvtororbis5330 MiG-21, obviously, did have an in-cockpit fuel gauge, it just was designed differently from a typical fuel gauge in a WWII fighter or a pre-2000s car. The latter would be usually connected to a float that raises and lowers with the level of liquid in the fuel tank(s); whereas in a MiG1 -21, the ground crew had to accurately input the amount of fuel filled in. Then, when the engine is running, flow meters in the fuel lines are used to measure fuel consumption. The fuel gauge here is essentialy an electro-mechanical downcounter which deducts the amount of fuel consumed from the initial set up value and gives you an estimation of fuel remaining.

That is total bullshit, the fuel indicator was on the lower right part of the panel

There was one in MiG-15, there was one in 19. Same goes to 23 and 25. So, those people said there was no fuel indicator in the 21?

@@sdpg_spad Cars still use the same float system for the most part.

Classic communist L

@@TonyBustaroni Depends on the variants compared

Ok the F-15 wasn't the Soviets fault, they made an interceptor to do interceptor shit and advertised it as such, it was the Americans that saw it, thought it was this super fighter, then went ballistic and made the F-15

One of the events that spurred the West into action, was when a reconnaissance version of the Mig-25 flew over Israeli airspace at approximately Mach 3.2. What western intelligence services didn't know at the time was that this particular plane landed at its base with the engines trashed, and the pilot lucky to make it back alive.

It also reminds me of the Su-57, the modern day parade fighter. It looked intimidating, it barely functions, they built only enough to show off at parades, and it encouraged western governments to approve upgrades to the F/A-18, F-35, Typhoon, and Rafale, all of which were already superior to the Su-27.

Automatic disengagement system. Shoot a burst, then glides back to base. Prevent pilots from defecting.

@@dudududu1926 Ah, modeled on the operational doctrine the Germans developed for their rocket-powered interceptors during the war.

I think the key decision parameter was always: "If we don't pull this off, Stalin will be furious!"

Hindsight is always 20/20

​@@onebronx It's almost likely putting an exhaust next to an intake.

if i may ask, currently, what content are Nebula exclusive?

Any chance you'll be able to do a video about the history of the Ukrainian Air force and the other post-soviet air forces? Would be interesting to see how they all evolved in the years since 1992

Hey man great video as always do you think there is enough material on the mig 19 for a standalone video? It's my favorite looking jet of the era.

What a noble goal! One question: Where is the footage of the development of the MiG-9 from? Looks like an early documentary film on the subject and I'd love to see the whole thing.

I'm presuming the footage is from "They Conquer the Air"? If so, do you know where it can be found and streamed, ideally with English subs?

There's been two rookie mistakes... this (throttle back a lot before shooting) and tailstriking on takeoff by pulling too hard :D

Well, the Sputnik and then the second rocket with the satellite containing Laika, the dog, were only launched because Nikita Chrustschow was a massive fanboy of the head of the russian space and carrier rocket program, Sergej Koroljow. When the first russian H-bomb meant to be carried in a rocket was ready to be integrated into the rest of the weapon system, the russian carrier rocket developed for this bomb failed time and again. One time it exploded, another time it failed to separate the freight from the engines. In the end, the developers of the H-bomb simply declared that they would not trust this rocket system and that they would not hand over the bomb. In the end, the design of the carrier rocket got a complete overhaul and redesign, but Koroljow now had two spare rockets, so... In the end, he palavered Chrustschow into allowing something that was little more than a pet project for Koroljow. Fun fact, Koroljow started his career as rocket engineer in a russian gulag at the polar circle. His work with self-made rockets made him suspicious as a supposed saboteur.

@@Furzkampfbomber And because Soviet nukes were so heavy that they required a heavy-lifting rocket, which later turned out to be easy to convert to carry other payloads incl. an astronaut.

@@oleksiysokolov3510 Oh, I was not aware of that, but it makes a lot of sense. It's quite stunning and sad how often war is indeed the 'father of all things'.

Early American nukes were similarly heavy, the rocket that put John Glenn in orbit was an Atlas missile, and the later Gemini program used the Titan II missile as its booster. Funny how all these early ICBMs made better orbital rockets than weapons.

He knows the end of the World is nigh.

Ukrainians are good at rapidly delivering surprises under adverse circumstances

Also they got those engines because of KGB ties within the British Gov't

Yes. But they were sold to the Soviets with the condition they were NOT for military use! 😂 That went well. 🙃

If there only were a way to go back in time and supply the Mig 9, P-59 and other first gen jets with third gen engines. We may find the engineering was equal to the thrust. I wonder if it would have taken more time to get swept wings in operations. The F-80 was hampered greatly by the early engines, but went on to have a long career in it’s two-seat T-33 variant. The F-84, like the F-80, required tremendously long takeoff rolls.

Even very modern fighters have been shafted this way, particularly home grown non-NATO designs. Not that they are bad, they just can't deliver the same power to weight or power to volume.

​@@papadopp3870you ought to see a loaded "thud" take off run.

I personally thought it was a 37mm, maybe it was a different model or something.

@@ericyang3332 in the video he sais that the 57mm was changed to a 37 because of its difficulties that arous from it

@@ernstbusch179 yup - started off with a 57mm and downgraded to a 37mm. The Mossie had a 6lber (57mm) strapped to it at one point and I'm sure the US stuck some artillery calibre onto a few of their WW2 planes, so it's not that unusual.

@@ronhall9039 Some B-25 Mitchell variants were fitted with a 75mm cannon. The Germans slapped a 75mm gun on the Hs-129. The Italians beat them all with a 102mm howitzer mounted to a naval bomber.

@@janwacawik7432 👍👍

Quiet firing be like:

In socialist systems it isn't about actual doing well, it's about looking good.

Well, You cant have less kills and more casualties if all your kills were your casualties

Lol you cornball

USA speaks closer to proper English than any other English nation.

#MoreUkrainianAccentPlease

I just love the accent. Greetings from Finland! :)

It took me about half a minute to get familiar with it, like with most other accents. No problem at all. Greetings from Germany.

And those people dare to speak anything about "pentagon wars" )))

You could drop the word "basically" :) . It was the exact copy. The same thing with the RD-10 (Jumo 004) installed on the Yak-15.

@@PaperSkiesAviation Yes, I mean they even took the production facilities to produce those engines themselves. I wonder how far their own reseach was during that time. At least they had a rocket powered interceptor before Germany did, and its fuels was way less dangerous during the refueling process... you could make an episode about it, it's the Bereznyak-Isayev BI-x series, sometimes also called Bolkhovitinov after the design bureau's head. Would perfectly fit into your channel covering the less well-known things :)

An early version of this was the F11, the fastest plane to nowhere lol 😂

Probably just constant turn rate. It would bleed off more speed when turning than the 262 due to the wing design. And it literally had the same engines. We all have heard the stories of the 262 being most vulnerable right after takeoff with basically no speed. Same applies here. Took ages to get it up to speed.

@@CakePrincessCelestia yes, I think this was a fairly common problem, although to varying degrees in different countries, with all of the early turbojets, with many different solutions attempted to try get the short take-off / early flight regime already achieved by the most mature prop fighters (F-84 for being the most extreme example)

I believe that they were mock dogfights. Otherwise, the Soviets had detailed performance data for all of their prop aircraft, so there was no need to do anything except run solo performance trials for the MiG-9.

And the Tu-2 probably had to fly with one prop feathered....

In that case you gotta love the Yak-36...

Unless you're Buckaroo Banzai, and there are additional classified (to folks outsideo of Team Banzai) test plan, and you ARE the chief engineer as well as the test pilot. The jet car's actual purpose is to fully test out Oscillator Overthruster and breaching into the 8th dimensions.

Believe it or not, but there was a time where jet fighters would go supersonic on their first flight. Probably because they could🤷‍♂️

"When thinking about Soviet MiGs most of you would normally imagine some slick-looking swept wing fighter aircraft. Indeed, today it’s hard to imagine anything else for the MiG - an aircraft that for decades became the synonym for a any Soviet fighter. However, such a perception could hardly apply to the first jet MiG. Unlike its famous successors, like the MiG-15, 21 or 29, the very first mass-produced jet fighter by Mikoyan and Gurevich, the MiG-9, did not possess any elegant exterior or outstanding flight characteristics. ...". This is the opening part from the very 1st version of my script :). However, as with some other parts, I cut it off while "optimizing" the length of the video.

@@PaperSkiesAviation будет ил еще видео по МиГам, от 15го до 29/35. Все таки КБ "МиГ" фактически умерло и "Сухой" подмаля остатки под себя.

I think you mean the more famous mig 15/17 right 19 ain't that famous

@@jerryle379 yeah I meant the 15/17 since they were all developed from each other I misremembered, my bad lol

I believe that Sukhoi’s early jet fighters were shoved into the background and effectively ignored because Lavochkin, I believe it was, convinced Stalin that Sukhoi’s fighters were nothing more than copies of the German Me-262 and thus shouldn’t be fielded by the Soviet Air Force.

These languages are very close, considering that many Ukrainian words are old extinct in the Russian language

@@_b_x_b_1063 I know. My mom spoke polish, she and my grandmother did not pass that language on to me. I am 67 now and retired but had a job and in the hangar across from where I worked as a Pilot was a MiG-15 and I really wanted to fly that airplane. Mom could understand a lot of Russian, they are very similar.

Ironically the MiG-15, while no longer having the fueling issue, allegedly had its own fuel tank issue, where the high pressure pumps could cause the tank to implode, if there was venting issues. Unfortunately there's very little information about this in any english source I could find, but given the myriad of issues the MiG-21 had with its fuel tanks, I think its plausible.

The reason the MiG-15 was such a success was thanks largely to the Rolls Royce Nene, which Britain unwisely "sold" the Soviet Union (sold being in quotes because the Soviet Union never actually paid Britain for it), on the caveat that it was not to be used for military purposes, which, of course, the Soviet Union promptly violated that term of the agreement as well.

As far as we know, nobody would have known those are lend lease sometimes. There were rumors about sercret factories making those and people believed them, despite truck having writings and logos of us manufacturing (later deleted). at least my parents tell me this (we were occupied by soviets. Thanks by the way for doing lend lease to them, not to the people really needing it)

Good old times! /)

Do you remember "Black Death" FPS testing procedure with FRAPS? I came up with that.

@@str8ballinSA Hi Hank, I remember using FRAPS (and still do) but I'm afraid I haven't heard of "Black death".

@@gertjanmoens4188 It was one of the game replays that shipped with IL-2... We (few other guys and I) collaborated on forums to standardize performance testing using Fraps. Decided on Black Death replay - and to run Fraps with FPS logging from 0:05 to 1:05 length. Results would then be posted (together with CPU/RAM specs and NVIDIA settings)...

@@str8ballinSA Black Death literally was the benchmark "level" back in the day. Counted way more than any 3DMark or other thing. But I never used FRAPS with it... instead I opened up the console and entered >fps start show :)

It is quite possible. Putting all the blame on the pilot who couldn't say anything (because he's dead now), is an easy way to cover design mistakes and failures.

That's exactly the reason, in fact the unaccepted MiG-9M used the exact same gun arrangement.

@@miquelescribanoivars5049 That was my thought, the same armament, different configuration. :)

Guess they completely went with the solution shown at 12:55 which just was problematic for the center mounted gun.

I didn't (it often would not play ads anyway in my FF even if I disabled it), but decided to let it run in the background in Microsofts browser downloader (Edge) that doesn't have a blocker installed, turned it down to 144p and also 2x speed (according to Linus Sebastian, this counts fully as if you watched at 1x in regards of revenue) for saving traffic and energy :)

Oh yeah. I remember watching a movie about an experimental nuclear reactor. I can't remember the title.

Does any one know the title

I didn’t know he was Ukrainian, now I wanna go down on him too ❤

I have exactly the same question. I'm amazed with that footage, it must be really funny to see how they turned the failure into a glorious success...

Well, Dead astronauts don’t make for a good budget next year.

Its about a large amount of explosive mass. Armor has nothing to do with the size of the gun

Probably because they wanted to have the gun in line with the center of mass and in the direction of the nose. If the gun isn't in line with the center of mass every time you fire that gun your nose gets thrown off target. Not much of an issue with guns of a smaller calibre, but it can become a serious issue with larger guns. This is also what the A-10 makes use off in its design. Now issues arise when someone has never designed a jet aircraft and don't fully appreciate the jet engine air intakes.

@@martijn9568 That's a good point, thanks.

Don't forget the 75mm on the B-25G,H Mitchels, 57mm on Mosquitos, 40mm on Hurricanes