a real piece of 1960s/70s Soviet aviation history. Most people aside from aviation buffs/pilots don't realize how incredibly rare this is to have & see in the USA- Fantastic video....I wonder what the logistics are of maintenance & spare parts with this bird
For a moment I thought the plane just took off by itself...until I realised its a two seater. Most of these cold war era jets were really good and have lasted 5 decades. These mig's were used as interceptors and since they were smaller in comparison to many of its counterparts, they were usually hidden in small bunkers near the border.
I did at first too. However, I then realized he still has a stick in the back too so while likely only in emergency situations, he is expected to be able to fly the aircraft. So back to our original concerns, hth do you fly an old bird like that when you can’t see? No virtual landing views happenin on that old girl! However, design has never been Russia’s strength when it comes to aircraft. Engineering for durability is a different story though...
@@sint5990 The UB is a training variant of the MiG-23. The flight trainer will sit in the back seat, the student pilot in the front seat. 'Student pilot' would mean a fully capable pilot that's just learning the ins and outs of the particular aircraft type, if the soviet/russian training doctrine is anything like the US American flight training. You don't need external view for flying at all, instruments will suffice. I suspect the duplicated controls are there for emergency manouvers (like in a driving school vehicle), for thinks like a spin and the front pilot panicks. As for landing, russian planes of that era should have instrument landing capability. Flying from back seat would be like flying in fog with visibility down to zero, fully dependent on instrument systems, with crosschecks to the sides (for proper alignment when over the runway). I also suspect that the modern looking screen at the very top either replicates the front HUD or even replicates the HUD overlaid with a front facing camera image. That and the modern GPS system to it's bottom most likely replaces an original HUD replicator that has been present (I'm not familiar with the MiG-23, though). There's also a periscope mirror for looking forward above the instructor's head. I have to agree though; soviet and russian cockpit always had more switches and a higher pilot workload than their contemporary US counterpart. Don't forget that the MiG-23UB is an early 70s design - most western cockpits were barely better.
It's just the flying version of the russian roulette: grab that stick, use your intuition (the Star Wars stuff called "the Force", u know) and let luck do the rest.
There's a mirror/periscope system built into the rear canopy that works really well for seeing ahead while the gear is down. See ruclips.net/video/WsHPoQygnVQ/видео.html at 36min55sec
@@jjthomas2297 I don't know what kind of pilot you are, but you are terribly mistaking the Flogger for something else when it comes to speed. When it appeared, the MiG-23 was faster than F-4 and F-16A, heck it could even surpass the climbing rate of a F-15A above 700MPH, which was a newer and superior aircraft in every other aspect.
@@Flankerski In a straight line, for very short periods the -23 was faster. But in acceleration, turn rate, climb rate,..virtually every every performance parameter the F-15,f-16 and even the F-18 were VASTLY superior...
That checklist is as large as my shopping list after I've phoned the wife to say I've dropped in to get some milk and sugar, and "do you want anything...?"
When the turquoise cockpit is that dark, it almost looks appealing to me. Looking at the stick input and the view outside, the MiG-23 seems a lot more stable than the Su-25.
@Giada_De_Low_Rent_Tits The takoff shaking you are talking about is because of the runway. Russians use concrete runways made from many seperate blocks, sticked together. And the little spaces between the concrete pieces are the things that make the plane shake while accelerating on the runway. The other shaking while making turns is the flow that runs above the surface of the wings. When the plane pulls up a high angle of attack, the flow becomes haotic (turbulence) and that is what makes the plane vibrate. Every plane does that, not only the Russian ones. Good to know that
@@KB4QAA That's why the DC-9 had the same cockpit color. The famous Russian made DC-9, by the great Stalinist aircraft manufacturer McDonnel Douglas. In Mother Russia, joke makes you.
@@KB4QAA I'm not your mother. Also, the DC-9 part isn't a joke. Reality is more interesting than your 'anything I don't identify with sucks' mentality. I hope the rest of puberty is less traumatic, so you can grow out of whatever kind of a phase you are in.
Apparently the reason they used this colour (the Soviets used it in all their aircraft and I think modern Russian aircraft cockpits are still coloured the same way) was because they did studies that determined this colour to have a calming effect on the pilot in stressful situations.
Its to prevent color blindness after looking too long on the sky, surgical robes are green for the same reason so the doctor can see bleeding after staring too long on bloody flesh. I think it resets your color cones but i am not exactly sure.
At 1:36... just outside the plane, between the left intake and aircraft body....just barely visible was something that "popped" up during the climb? A piece of metal or protrusion. What was that?
+sovietjet *The instructor cockpit of this Mikojan-Gurevich-23 Ubechn'yj Boevoj is definitely a bit crowded.* I presume the periscope is out of view to the top, just short of the eye-level screen on centerline? The cockpit space looks more optimum for a Fazotron Zaslon-equipped MiG-23 Modernizatovenn'yj Perekhvatchik radar-intercept officer's station, although there's not much space for R-27 or R-77 MRAAM's under the wing gloves. (The R-73's have a home under the engine inlets straddling the reload chutes for the internal Grjazev-Shipunov-23-2.)
You can fit R27R or R77 under the wing gloves as these missiles are about the same size as the R24. There is/was an upgrade package called 23-98. Warload would be 2 R77 + 2R73.
B. C. Schmerker I’m missing a piece for the periscope so I installed a go pro camera up front with a video monitor in back so the backseater can see. It’s not as clear as the periscope but is better than nothing.
This is a trainer aircraft, and the rear seat (where the camera is in this video) was the instructor's seat. The instructor can take control of the stick at any time. I don't know if the instructor can actually *override* the student's stick, but they can at least take control. In all situations where you have a multiple-person flight crew (like a pilot and copilot situation), you would both communicate and verbally confirm who has control at any given moment so that nobody's fighting the other's control inputs. For instance the one pilot would say "I have control" and the other would respond "you have control", and they would take turns controlling the plane like that.
Very strange design indeed. It almost seems like the 2nd pilot must eject as soon as anything happens with the 1st pilot, leaving the plane to certain and total destruction, which is not what the Soviets (or any other nation with their respective planes) would've wanted. My best bet is they thought an elevated cockpit would've added too much drag (and as a result, too much heat, rate of wear, etc.), but I still don't understand, as the possible loss of a complete aircraft should outweigh these undesirable effects any time...
Why would that be the case? Only the newest generation of trainer jets have raised rear cockpits. The older generationb didn't. The rear seat has a forward view periscope and is occupied by an experienced instructor who knows how to land with poor visibility. And this isn't a trainer for student pilots, it is for trained pilots transitioning to the Mig 23. There is no reason to think the instructor will have to land the plane, he is just there to guide the student and correct him if anything goes wrong. If the student has a heart attack...that could happen in a single seat jet as well, and then there is no one to take over. They figure in the very unlikely event that happens the plane is going to be lost anyway. With the veteran in the back it shouldn't be a problem. I'm any case the tiny chances of that happening don't justify the cost and difficulty of reengineering the entire funny if the plane, it would be cheaper to just let them eject crash a few planes. This is literally just a way to let an experienced pilot help a new MiG23 pilot get used to flying, take over it he makes any gross errors. Hell, how good do you think the visibility is out the front seat of a normal MiG 21 or 23 anyway? 😅
still very scalable platform for poor countries and countries with restricted military budget especially with a huge security needs like dprk , only it comes with very moderate useful payload , the UB is the training version of this platform which is suited to be developed and evolved to be specialized strike platform , with an advance EW capabilities . the recent developments in the standoff weapon systems can reestablish the combat usefulness of the mig 23 utilizing its supersonic capabilities to outperform the slower f16 and reach very fastly the designated launching zones and then launching its payloads of long range guided ammo before retreating , especially after comprehensive upgrading and developing which should touch enhancing the kinematic performance by increasing the supersonic speed especially with long range cruise missiles .
Probably. It isn't being used as a trainer any more, the only people in the back are passengers. They give them a way to see forward, it doesn't have to be fancy and it probably has a better field of view than the original periscope. Definitely easier to see the screen anyway.
Soviet Aviation, that isn't Russian necessarily. People need to realize Soviet and Russian aren't the same thing. Plenty of Soviet planes from elsewhere in the USSR besides Russia.
Dayum, it comes with a dvd player on the backseat
And a garmin gps too!
It's a privately owned one here in the states.
I think that’s a CCTV monitor for reverse parking🤔🤪
Bruh, I’d be watching the entire endgame movie in that thing
Yeah bro
a real piece of 1960s/70s Soviet aviation history. Most people aside from aviation buffs/pilots don't realize how incredibly rare this is to have & see in the USA- Fantastic video....I wonder what the logistics are of maintenance & spare parts with this bird
Probably out of India; given that they were a major and one of the last operators of the Mig-23 and it's derivatives.
@@Mthammere2010 no, there is a MiG-23UB owned in the US and this is that plane.
@@dejeffmcbob he is talking about the spares
For a moment I thought the plane just took off by itself...until I realised its a two seater. Most of these cold war era jets were really good and have lasted 5 decades. These mig's were used as interceptors and since they were smaller in comparison to many of its counterparts, they were usually hidden in small bunkers near the border.
I thought the sane thing 😂
I was like cool they have autopilot 😅
I was tripp'n. Then I realized it was the two seater. I was like how this dude even see anything?... Lol
Good shit. Thank you
Notice how he controls the stick through telepathy too.
I did at first too. However, I then realized he still has a stick in the back too so while likely only in emergency situations, he is expected to be able to fly the aircraft. So back to our original concerns, hth do you fly an old bird like that when you can’t see? No virtual landing views happenin on that old girl! However, design has never been Russia’s strength when it comes to aircraft. Engineering for durability is a different story though...
@@sint5990 The UB is a training variant of the MiG-23. The flight trainer will sit in the back seat, the student pilot in the front seat. 'Student pilot' would mean a fully capable pilot that's just learning the ins and outs of the particular aircraft type, if the soviet/russian training doctrine is anything like the US American flight training.
You don't need external view for flying at all, instruments will suffice. I suspect the duplicated controls are there for emergency manouvers (like in a driving school vehicle), for thinks like a spin and the front pilot panicks.
As for landing, russian planes of that era should have instrument landing capability. Flying from back seat would be like flying in fog with visibility down to zero, fully dependent on instrument systems, with crosschecks to the sides (for proper alignment when over the runway).
I also suspect that the modern looking screen at the very top either replicates the front HUD or even replicates the HUD overlaid with a front facing camera image. That and the modern GPS system to it's bottom most likely replaces an original HUD replicator that has been present (I'm not familiar with the MiG-23, though). There's also a periscope mirror for looking forward above the instructor's head.
I have to agree though; soviet and russian cockpit always had more switches and a higher pilot workload than their contemporary US counterpart. Don't forget that the MiG-23UB is an early 70s design - most western cockpits were barely better.
It's just the flying version of the russian roulette: grab that stick, use your intuition (the Star Wars stuff called "the Force", u know) and let luck do the rest.
There's a mirror/periscope system built into the rear canopy that works really well for seeing ahead while the gear is down.
See ruclips.net/video/WsHPoQygnVQ/видео.html at 36min55sec
One of the few videos where the paint on the stick isn’t worn off. Shows what these glorious planes must have looked like when new. :)
The altimeter doing its best impression of an office desk fan. 🤣
What? this thing is climbing slower than shit. Wanna see a fast climb? Look up an F-16 with the GE Engine. THAT is climbing fast
@Ronald McDonald Yea..pilot and mechanic. But you are right. I know nothing. Not like you RUclips experts.
@@jjthomas2297 I don't know what kind of pilot you are, but you are terribly mistaking the Flogger for something else when it comes to speed. When it appeared, the MiG-23 was faster than F-4 and F-16A, heck it could even surpass the climbing rate of a F-15A above 700MPH, which was a newer and superior aircraft in every other aspect.
@@Flankerski In a straight line, for very short periods the -23 was faster. But in acceleration, turn rate, climb rate,..virtually every every performance parameter the F-15,f-16 and even the F-18 were VASTLY superior...
@@jjthomas2297 *1:1 thrust to weight ratio has entered the chat*
Man, this is really cool. Tks for sharing.
Love the classic green/blue cockpit
That checklist is as large as my shopping list after I've phoned the wife to say I've dropped in to get some milk and sugar, and "do you want anything...?"
Wow! It is so technologically advanced it flies by spirit of mother russia!
I hope that’s a joke xD
Так самолёт 60х годов, какое должно быть оборудование?
Fantastic! Thanks for showing!
Damn, so advanced, gauges turn and loud sounds!
Thanks for upload bro..nice sound!
My mom says she'll pay for a type rating. I can't wait.
Cool!
@@antonwestergaard5211 lucky man which aircraft you will fly
LOL!
@@thedarkkid8961 One of these ruclips.net/video/IFPQViByh1s/видео.html
@@michael-ju8tv LMAO!
When the turquoise cockpit is that dark, it almost looks appealing to me. Looking at the stick input and the view outside, the MiG-23 seems a lot more stable than the Su-25.
@Giada_De_Low_Rent_Tits The takoff shaking you are talking about is because of the runway. Russians use concrete runways made from many seperate blocks, sticked together. And the little spaces between the concrete pieces are the things that make the plane shake while accelerating on the runway. The other shaking while making turns is the flow that runs above the surface of the wings. When the plane pulls up a high angle of attack, the flow becomes haotic (turbulence) and that is what makes the plane vibrate. Every plane does that, not only the Russian ones. Good to know that
@@Bulgariabeautifull great, but this plane is based in the US, privately owned.
My Canta makes the same noise when I pull up, but it lacks the acceleration 🤣 Nice video!
What a coincidence these video come out after Might snail released Mig23 on Warthunder
23 зверь.На малых по скорости непревзойдённ .
awesomeeeee...!!! happy new year
Happy New Year , Alejandro !
The instrument that shows wing-sweep level been defective or u guys just took off with fully swept-back wings? :D
Maybe it was an IFR departure but I would definitely get your look out sorted front seat driver!
Beautiful cockpit
At least the guy in the back can enjoy an in-flight movie. I wonder what's playing?
He's back there on Microsoft Flight Sim😁😂
Jokes aside, the 2 seater is blind as hell if it wasn't for that camera or mirror in earlier versions
Periscope
Top Gun
beatiful
The gloves of the back seat pilot are in different colours 🙂
It looks like he had a TV back there.
Love the Soviet era green paint colour .
Green paint makes the Soviet aircrafts look like a toy.
747 cockpit colour is the best.
@@ravivijay2741 The Russians think the green has a psychological calming effect. BTW "AeroCommander Gray" is the best panel color!
@@KB4QAA That's why the DC-9 had the same cockpit color. The famous Russian made DC-9, by the great Stalinist aircraft manufacturer McDonnel Douglas. In Mother Russia, joke makes you.
@@burnttoast111 Well it's obvious you couldn't make a joke. meh.
@@KB4QAA I'm not your mother.
Also, the DC-9 part isn't a joke. Reality is more interesting than your 'anything I don't identify with sucks' mentality.
I hope the rest of puberty is less traumatic, so you can grow out of whatever kind of a phase you are in.
Çok Rüzgar sesi alıyor:)
The forest green interior color is much more bearable than the institutional industrial blue of the more modern fighters.
Apparently the reason they used this colour (the Soviets used it in all their aircraft and I think modern Russian aircraft cockpits are still coloured the same way) was because they did studies that determined this colour to have a calming effect on the pilot in stressful situations.
Its to prevent color blindness after looking too long on the sky, surgical robes are green for the same reason so the doctor can see bleeding after staring too long on bloody flesh. I think it resets your color cones but i am not exactly sure.
Although folks badmouth it. The MIG-23 is very capable..
Is it though?
@@flight2k5 If you've seen them operate, then I think you'd say yes.
Craig Pennington yea no
@@craigpennington1251
Sorry bro. Perhaps in 1980's but not now.
It's better to disengage the secondary joystick if available when taking a female passenger for a joy ride,just for anticipation for unwanted rolls...
first time i see a Mig-23 with a cockpit tandem config, those UB stands for trainer?
thats a cool ass cockpit
amazing aircraft
Too Fn cool!!!!
i got confused "takeoff from cockpit" so i was like wait so how do they.....but i realized it was a cockpit perspective
Is it private jet now?
At 1:36... just outside the plane, between the left intake and aircraft body....just barely visible was something that "popped" up during the climb? A piece of metal or protrusion. What was that?
Maybe it's the latch for opening the rear canopy
@@ivoukadi Not a good thing!
Nice training
Awesome 👍✈️
Cool.
+sovietjet *The instructor cockpit of this Mikojan-Gurevich-23 Ubechn'yj Boevoj is definitely a bit crowded.* I presume the periscope is out of view to the top, just short of the eye-level screen on centerline? The cockpit space looks more optimum for a Fazotron Zaslon-equipped MiG-23 Modernizatovenn'yj Perekhvatchik radar-intercept officer's station, although there's not much space for R-27 or R-77 MRAAM's under the wing gloves. (The R-73's have a home under the engine inlets straddling the reload chutes for the internal Grjazev-Shipunov-23-2.)
You can fit R27R or R77 under the wing gloves as these missiles are about the same size as the R24. There is/was an upgrade package called 23-98. Warload would be 2 R77 + 2R73.
Wow I love this plane
I'm impressed with your knowledge btw
@@rgrigio R-77s? That would have been a serious upgrade, considering that newer R-27s are still very much a thing.
B. C. Schmerker I’m missing a piece for the periscope so I installed a go pro camera up front with a video monitor in back so the backseater can see. It’s not as clear as the periscope but is better than nothing.
Impressive.
อ๋อๆๆ นี่นักบินที่นั่งข้างหลัง
Крутяк, моя мечта на истребителе летатать ну здоровья нет, не повезло в жизни блин
блять класс, готов вечно смотреть!!
Yo quisiera uno propio :'(
승차감이 S크래스네요!!!!
Who else thought it was taking off on auto pilot and this jet has the worst view for pilots? Didn't realize it was a two seater lol.
Holy crap the back seat has almost 0 forward vision!
khatchaturov (R-35/300) engine what a roar this engine ..!!!😮😮😮😮
This is actually aTumanski R-27F2M-300. The R-35 was used in the latest ML/MLA/MLD variants.
What? A TomTom sat Nav? 🤣
SUPERB....BRAVO!!!!!
Rank 7 aviation in Warthunder and the mig 23 coming in the game. But my question is how tf does RUclips know???
That was a thunderbird pilot in the back seat
I quite sure it looked this dated even in 1967
ıt even has back seat tv entertainment system wow
how do the control stick works? is it automated? could they fight over control?
The back seat ist the trainer operator so he have priority.
This is a trainer aircraft, and the rear seat (where the camera is in this video) was the instructor's seat. The instructor can take control of the stick at any time. I don't know if the instructor can actually *override* the student's stick, but they can at least take control.
In all situations where you have a multiple-person flight crew (like a pilot and copilot situation), you would both communicate and verbally confirm who has control at any given moment so that nobody's fighting the other's control inputs. For instance the one pilot would say "I have control" and the other would respond "you have control", and they would take turns controlling the plane like that.
A very short take off
Men Nice RIO.....view........she was an interceptor not fighter......big radar shoot and scoot.....wings back
That's not a RIO seats; the MiG-23UB is a training variant, so the back seat was for the instructor pilot.
Grey left and blue right.
Yeşil renk güzelmiş
juz auto pilot?
I swear he's using a tom Tom gps.
coolhari2000 it’s actually an Aero 500 GPS
Oh no, the billious green again.
Može li se kupiti ova igračkica
Yo quiero uno
Two seater , he is trainee
Is the UB the training version?
Yes
Are there any regulations for those planes like no afterburner or only subsonic?
@Mars Exulte You're not allowed to populate areas underneath the sound breakage area.
khaki & blue Nomex pilot gloves...
Hello fellow war thunderers.
High noise in this plan until in cockpit ...
Runway 13 East Texas Regional Airport (KGGG)
Very strange design indeed. It almost seems like the 2nd pilot must eject as soon as anything happens with the 1st pilot, leaving the plane to certain and total destruction, which is not what the Soviets (or any other nation with their respective planes) would've wanted.
My best bet is they thought an elevated cockpit would've added too much drag (and as a result, too much heat, rate of wear, etc.), but I still don't understand, as the possible loss of a complete aircraft should outweigh these undesirable effects any time...
Why would that be the case? Only the newest generation of trainer jets have raised rear cockpits. The older generationb didn't. The rear seat has a forward view periscope and is occupied by an experienced instructor who knows how to land with poor visibility. And this isn't a trainer for student pilots, it is for trained pilots transitioning to the Mig 23. There is no reason to think the instructor will have to land the plane, he is just there to guide the student and correct him if anything goes wrong. If the student has a heart attack...that could happen in a single seat jet as well, and then there is no one to take over. They figure in the very unlikely event that happens the plane is going to be lost anyway. With the veteran in the back it shouldn't be a problem. I'm any case the tiny chances of that happening don't justify the cost and difficulty of reengineering the entire funny if the plane, it would be cheaper to just let them eject crash a few planes. This is literally just a way to let an experienced pilot help a new MiG23 pilot get used to flying, take over it he makes any gross errors. Hell, how good do you think the visibility is out the front seat of a normal MiG 21 or 23 anyway? 😅
♥️
shame what happened to it if its the one im thinking of
It was
still very scalable platform for poor countries and countries with restricted military budget especially with a huge security needs like dprk , only it comes with very moderate useful payload , the UB is the training version of this platform which is suited to be developed and evolved to be specialized strike platform , with an advance EW capabilities . the recent developments in the standoff weapon systems can reestablish the combat usefulness of the mig 23 utilizing its supersonic capabilities to outperform the slower f16 and reach very fastly the designated launching zones and then launching its payloads of long range guided ammo before retreating , especially after comprehensive upgrading and developing which should touch enhancing the kinematic performance by increasing the supersonic speed especially with long range cruise missiles .
Russians know how to build jets
Did you flight in this Russian jets?
I did and I can tell you that Mis-23 is a bad jet, we told it "the flying coffin". That is all...
@@AndresLopez-ve3io ''Did you flight'', bad grammar has entered the chat. U are freaking lying no way this kid has ever seen a MIG-23 Flogger.
@@emirredzematovic5123 May be my grammar is bad like Mig-23, excuse me english isn't my languaje.
Cramped cockpit!
Is that a freakin revers Cam that you can add to your car instead of the periscope
? :D
Probably. It isn't being used as a trainer any more, the only people in the back are passengers. They give them a way to see forward, it doesn't have to be fancy and it probably has a better field of view than the original periscope. Definitely easier to see the screen anyway.
PAFs tea bill = mig
Vodka as well served since the rear person does absolutely nothing
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Russian🇷🇺 Aviation Technology is👑 worth praising. These Mig series fighters are the real backbone of the Air Force. 👍👍👌👌
Soviet Aviation, that isn't Russian necessarily. People need to realize Soviet and Russian aren't the same thing. Plenty of Soviet planes from elsewhere in the USSR besides Russia.
😊
If it was me on the back seat then i will vomit because i cannot travel without front windshield
الله وأكبر
Forward visibility is overrated
Poor bastard is using the force at this point.
UB trainer
на 200 надо подымать нос, а оторвавшись тангаж сразу 12
What's that screen? The Tom Tom?
DvD player
Почему такой шум в кабине? На самом деле не так шумно...
Ну, когда сидишь в ЗШ не так шумно, а микрофон камеры открыт.
How am I suppose to look Infront ?
Imagination
Why are the insides or Russian jets always green?
Spacegoat92 ____ They just like that colour. Soyuz space capsules are the same.
To reduce eye fatigue
Some say it has calming effect, I believe it’s to ease the eyes when transitioning from sky to cockpit like what Star said(eye fatigue).
Where does this airplane live?
Longview, TX
@@ivoukadi Is it legal to fly this in TX? How did it pass FA-regulations?
@@NorceCodine the pilot got it an experimental rating.
Why do some of these vintage jets have terrible frontal view?
There is 2 pilots. This guy is the second pilot
Cyber attract pen and paper USA.
Rip
Russian ECM - Whistler CR65 radar detector Russian Sat Nav - Garmin DriveSmart 55.
Flying coffins..
I bet your tons of fun at a party👍