Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Share

    Svyatoslavich
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 252
    Points : 263
    Join date : 2015-04-22
    Location : Buenos Aires

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Svyatoslavich on Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:54 am

    MiG-21-93 and Bison (a close version purchased by India) never had the engine replaced, it would be extremely expensive, if not impossible, to make a RD-33 fit in a MiG-21. Anyway, it is still a very decent light fight, with its PESA Kopyo radar and R-73 and R-77 missiles.

    d_taddei2
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 736
    Points : 896
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    reply

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:11 am

    hey thanks for the good reply and information. I also remember the article about the Mig-21 kicking F-15 and F-16 ass but can't find it.
    please see below some pretty amazing info regarding the Mig-21.

    "The agility of MiG-21 cannot be matched by any of the present day fighters," IAF chief NAK Browne said"
    source http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/MiG-21-Indias-first-supersonic-fighter-flies-into-history/articleshow/27230270.cms

    Draft copy of the exercise Cope India report says:
    While the superb performances of IAF Sukhoi-30s were somewhat anticipated, the performance of MiG-21Bison came as a major “unpleasant surprise” to the USAF officials. It also validates the claim of the Russian officials that they are capable of successfully converting “second generation” late-model MiG-21bis fighters to “fourth generation combat platforms”. Inherently the significant positive attributes enjoyed by MiG-21s were their dog fighting ability in WVR (Within Visual Range) combat. Even the earlier models had a low corner velocity of 556 kilometers per hour and at Mach 0.5 had an instantaneous turn rate of 11.1 degrees per second. The MiG-21Bison with more powerful R-25 engines not only considerably bettered this performance but it may also be credited with “jackrabbit” acceleration, a very critical attribute in WVR combat.

    Among many fourth generations attributes added to the IAF MiG-21Bison design, the incorporation of HMS (Helmet Mounted Sight) and high-off-boresight R-73RDM2 NBVR/WVR (Near Beyond Visual Range/Within Visual Range) AAMs (Air-to-Air Missiles) have turned it into a “Great Equalizer” in the WVR combat scenario. Conceptually a small number of MiG-21Bisons maintaining “radar silence” can be guided towards their aerial target by a couple of Sukhoi-30s by secure data links in accordance with MFFC (Mixed Fighter Force Concept). Upon entering into an WVR combat envelope the MiG-21Bisons armed with HMS and deadly NBVR/WVR missiles had the capability of destroying even fifth-generation fighters alike F/A-22 Raptor as assessed by high-profile Fighter Analyst Ben Lambeth of RAND Corporation. According to Lambeth “in visual combat everybody dies at the same rate.” F/A-22 also has to slow down if forced into a WVR combat scenario and loses the advantage of its super-cruise attributes. The situation further complicates if the IAF Sukhoi-30s have acquired the capability of providing target illumination for RVV-AE (AA-12 Adder) BVR missiles being launched from IAF MiG-21Bisons at extended ranges.

    and from an exercise in 2008, involving India and USA. Source http://theboresight.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/swirl-of-controversy-cope-india-and-red.html

    interesting read heres is a few comments made in relation to the Mig-21 Bison

    "The Indians flew a number of different fighters, including the French-made Mirage 2000 and the Russian-made MiG-27 and MiG-29, but the two most formidable IAF aircraft proved to be the MIG-21 Bison, an upgraded version of the Russian-made baseline MiG-21, and the Su-30MK Flanker, also made in Russia."

    "Indian Air Force flying the MiG-21 'Bison' gave USAF F-15 drivers - a very bad day. "Low-tech" aircraft fitted with the right equipment, and properly trained crews - should never be underestimated. It appears the IAF knows exactly what they are doing"

    "the U.S. pilots admitted that they did have problems with the simulated active missile threat and don't normally train against launch-and-leave threats. They also admit they underestimated the training and tactics of the Indian pilots."

    and a little interesting clip mentioning the F-35 and Mig-21 from Pierre Sprey co desinger of the F-16 and helped with the design of the A-10


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:38 am

    The upgraded MiG-21s were never intended to be alternatives to modern state of the art fighter bombers and would never be comparable to the F-16 in range or payload capacity.

    What they were was very cheap and simple to operate and maintain and with all the old electronics removed and new modern stuff fitted they should remain relatively cheap to operate...

    With modern AAMs and a modern radar they should be effective enough and with good training they are small and relatively agile and with HMS and high off boresight missiles they will be very potent in close combat and with R-77s a real threat in BVR combat too.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:06 pm

    GarryB wrote:The upgraded MiG-21s were never intended to be alternatives to modern state of the art fighter bombers and would never be comparable to the F-16 in range or payload capacity.
    I never said this Garry, I said only that Mig-21 Bis is not inferior than the F-16, and on contrary the effectiveness of the US aircraft in term of dogfight is dubious.

    d_taddei2 wrote:

    "The Indians flew a number of different fighters, including the French-made Mirage 2000 and the Russian-made MiG-27 and MiG-29, but the two most formidable IAF aircraft proved to be the MIG-21 Bison, an upgraded version of the Russian-made baseline MiG-21, and the Su-30MK Flanker, also made in Russia."


    "the U.S. pilots admitted that they did have problems with the simulated active missile threat and don't normally train against launch-and-leave threats. They also admit they underestimated the training and tactics of the Indian pilots."
    I share obviously this point view, even though the Mig-29 is a real fantastic aircraft. And as the Mig-29 was the successor of the Mig-21, he is necessary better than the Mig-21.

    At first I must add some precisions about the previous post about Lebanon War in 1982. Indeed the Mig-21 Bis was armed with AAM.



    But even if their most role was to escort -dedicated mostly for the Mig-21 MF- the Mig-23 BN, and the cumbersome SU-22, they much participated too -Mig-21 Bis - in air raid against israeli armoured divisions.
    For more informations about the Lebanon war in 1982 see, this link, it is one of the best western website, and I encourage you to read the Tom Cooper's books, he is very objective about what's happenned.
    http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=47

    The question is why the Mig-21 Bis was used as fighter-bombers's role against israeli ground forces.

    When they launched their campaign Israel had ambitious plans against palestinians, and chiefly syrian army. They wanted to expel, and totally destroy syrian army in Lebanon. For this purpose israeli ground forces were 3 times more than syrian army. The next we know, Israel failed, and could not even reach the highway Beyruth-Damascus, because of fierce syrian army resistance, and mostly due to the effectiveness of soviet technology.
    For that reason the losses of Mig-21 Bis were high, because the casualities of israeli army -air, and ground- were high. Here is Tom Cooper's excerpt  


    How fierce and bitter the fighting on the ground was shows the fact that - according to contemporary reports in Israeli press - in the fierce fighting of this day a single Israeli Brigade suffered a loss of 18 KIA - including its commander, Col. Avigdor Shriper - 87 injured, and 22 tanks destroyed.
    22 Tanks acknoaldged by the press, the reality, U can count at least 50. And the other casualties, no need to tell more.

    Here is a syrian Mig-21 Bis, in 1982



    Although the Israelis claimed possession of air superiority over Lebanon since afternoon of 9 June 1982, the SyAAF continued dispatching ever larger formations of fighter-bombers to attack advancing Israeli units. MiG-21s mainly acted as close escort for MiG-23BN and Su-20/22 fighter-bombers, but were several times also deployed in air-to-ground role - like on the morning of 11 June, when two straffed the trapped elements of the 362 Tank Battalion IDF. (Artwork by Tom Cooper)


    If we back to the subject, and about these 26 Mig-21 downed, or lost by syrians, how much could we remove these losses of the real dogfights ? 10 -downed by sam, or israeli anti aircraft guns- ? Because we are all interrested by dogfights here. The tactics of F-16, and F-15, with their E-2 C were like snipers. The purpose was to avoid as long as it is possible any dogfight. It could work against fighter bomber, or light bomber that is blinded, no ECM, no IFF, no MAWS, etc...And as we've seen exported Mig-21 Bis were often downgraded regarding their avionic. Nevertheless the Mig-21 Bis could dodge any air air missile.

    Example of Israeli ugly methods

    This photo shows a supposed egyptian Mig-21 downed somewhere above the Sinai around october 1973.

    In fact it was an israeli F-4 Phantom II downed by a syrian Mig-21 above the Golan Heights. But ugly western propaganda still claims that this aircraft is a Mig-21. For that reason, I have no trust on western medias at all.


    The appraisal
    If the syrian army had more casualities than israelis regarding aircrafts, it is an evidence, nevertheless the results are more mixed than we were told. If indeed syrian army lost too much Mig-21 Bis, many of them were downed from the ground, because the syrian pilots took the maximum of risks, and few were downed by missiles because the Mig-21 is very agile, and could easily dodge any air-air missile launched against him.
    The E-2C, F-16, and F-15 tactics contrary to what US asserted, their results were mitigated, if at the beginning of the battle syrian army lost many aircrafts, at the end they lost sparsely. On the contrary the ambush of syrian air force allowed them to down the heart of israeli structure, they downed an E-2C. Forcing Israel to sign immediatly the cease fire. It prove, in the best case, F-16, and F-15's effectiveness is mitigate, on the other hand, in term of dogfights the Mig-21 is still a formidable asset. It is hard to consider Mig-21 as second generation, but rather as fourth generation, especially regarding the Mig-21 MF, and Mig-21 Bis. As I've said before, in term of pure dogfights, Syrian Air Force must be at least slightly ahead.
    Dr.J.Chorba, President of Washington Centre of Internatinal Safety, who visited Israel on a commission from American Government shortly after the end of military operations in Lebanon, told that Israelis refused to give him any concrete informations concerning use of "new American weapon" in the military operations.
    The main purpose of the US-Israeli propaganda, and their filthy lies, was to discredit USSR, and after Russia' technology. They successfully debunk soviet, and russian know how.

    Ref:
    http://www.amazon.com/MiG-19-MiG-21-Units-Combat-Aircraft/dp/1841766550/ref=sr_1_22?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1460460302&sr=1-22
    Tom Cooper's website ACIG.info.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:36 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:this pretty remarkable out of the top 10 most fighter aircraft in service in the world the Mig-21 ranked sixth with 551 operational aircraft.

    source

    http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151223/1032208907/russia-warplanes-report.html


    What it amazed me is : "US F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter jet was ranked first with 2.264, and  1,047 F-18 sold". In my view it is a pitiable accident in the history. The F-16 was sold, because of USSR's collapse. In the dark 90's era Russia near completely collapsed too. In this link,
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-produced_aircraft
    U can see the logical ranking of US hardware. Whatever it is helicopters, jets, WWW II's fighters, machine guns, grenade, etc... soviet hardware were among the first. Why ? Because there are among the best, as engineers, designers were absolutely exceptional. The ranking of the F-18, and the F-16 -many problems for the dubbed Fighting Falcon Twisted Evil , its supposed success in Lebanon was doubtful if not false, its setbacks during Desert Storm are countless and well known, and during Serbia's war its results did not be shinning,... as expected - are not normal. Normally the first, the best are Mig-29/35, SU-30/35, Rafale, EAF Typhoons, and only after maybe the F-15 -F-15 success was due to the US air war's doctrine. They outnumbered their enemy. Most of the time you have the following situation : 5 F-15, 10 F-16 against two other malfunctioning fighters. U can see a rain of ineffective AAM, but among 15 missiles fired, at least, at least one could reach its target. It is enough for US to claim that their F-15 is the best. Really ? Shocked -.
    Next  russian, chinese, french, british's hardwares will back in their normal ranking. Because the US's domination is reaching its terminal phase.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:25 am

    I know Tom from a few years back... he is ex US Navy and hot for all things F-14... so of course that means unlike the vast majority of American military people he is not seriously anti Iran.

    He is however very anti MiG-29 and views all models to be MiG-29A models at best and therefore inferior.

    Needless to say we didn't agree on an enormous number of things except we both opposed US government treatment of Iran.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:03 pm

    GarryB wrote:I know Tom from a few years back... he is ex US Navy and hot for all things F-14... so of course that means unlike the vast majority of American military people he is not seriously anti Iran.

    He is however very anti MiG-29 and views all models to be MiG-29A models at best and therefore inferior.

    Needless to say we didn't agree on an enormous number of things except we both opposed US government treatment of Iran.
    Thx Garry for this precious information.
    I do not say that Tom Cooper is right on all. He is not the truth too, he could do mistakes as any human, beginning by me. I could do huge mistakes too, and human history is very complex, meanwhile the life learn us to be modest about all. I quoted several sources, beginning by the conclusions of Vladimir ilyin -about the F-16, i think he is right-, to be honnest, I had to add some westerners pov. The more objective possible, and I found T. Cooper, maybe there are others -if you know others interresting sources, please post them-. It is not because an american says something that he is the truth, and it is not because we have a non american's POV says something that he is necessary right.
    The Concord, Midland, Salamander, and Osprey, etc...publishing in many respect are near all anti-soviet, pro israel, hence lack of objectivities. But sometimes there are few interresting views. I don't like the soviet propaganda too, I am only interrested by the truth. For that reason I try to equilibrate, it is not an easy task. If you know other westerners sources, or ref. please post them!

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:46 pm


    Mig-21 MF in few words. Give me any F-16, we will laugh!
    For that reason, any claim about F-16 success is dubious.


    DIMENSIONS, EXTERNAL (MiG-21 MF):
    Wing span 7.15 m (23 ft 5 1/2 in)
    Length, incl pitot boom 15.76 m (51 ft 8 1/2 in)
    Fuselage length, intake lip to jetpipe nozzle 12.30 m (40 ft 4 1/4 in)
    Height overall 4.10 m (13 ft 5 1/2 in)
    Tailplane span 3.70 m (12 ft 8 in)
    Wheel track 2.69 m (8 ft 10 in)
    Wheelbase 4.81 m (15 ft 9V2 in)
    Wings, gross area 23.0 m2 (247.0 sq ft)

    WEIGHTS AND LOADINGS (MiG-21 MF):
    Weight empty 5,843 kg (12,882Ibs)
    Take-off weight:
    with four K-13A missiles 8,200 kg (18,078Ibs)
    with two K-13A missiles and two 490 liter tanks 8,950 kg (19,730 lbs)
    with two K-13As and three drop tanks 9,400 kg (20,725 lbs)
    MaxT-O weight 9,800 kg (21,605Ibs)
    Max wing loading 426.0 kg/m2 (87.5 lbs/sq ft)
    Max power loading 151.4 kg/kN (1.48Ibs/lb st)

    Performance:
    Max level speed: above 11,000 m (36,000 ft) .M2.05 (1,175 kt; 2,175 km/h; 1,353 mph)
    at low altitude M1.06 (701 kt; 1,300 km/h; 807 mph)
    Landing speed 146 kt (270 km/h; 168 mph)
    Design ceiling 18,000 m (59,050 ft)
    Practical ceiling about 15,250 m (50,000 ft)
    Take-off run at normal AUW 800 m (2,625 ft)
    Landing run 550 m (1,805 ft)
    Combat radius (hi-Io-hi):
    with four 250 kg bombs, internal fuel 200 n miles (370 km; 230
    miles)
    with two 250 kg bombs and drop tanks 400 n miles (740 km; 460
    miles)
    Range, internal fuel only 593 n miles (1,100 km; 683
    miles)
    Ferry range, with three external tanks 971 n miles (1,800 km; 1,118
    miles)

    Performance (MiG-21 US, clean):
    Max level speed above 12,200 m (40,000 ft) .M2.02 (1,159 kt; 2,150 km/h; 1,335 mph)
    at sea level M1.06 (701 kt; 1,300 km/h; 807 mph)
    Max rate of climb at sea level 6,400 m (21,000 ft)/min
    Rate of climb at 11,000 ill (36,000 ft) 3,050 m (10,000 ft)/min
    Time to 1,500 m (4,920 ft) 20 s

    Turn rate at 4,575 m (15,000 ft):
    instantaneous (MO.5) 11.1 °/s
    instantaneous (MO.9) 13.4 °/s
    sustained(MO.9) 7.5°/s
    Take-off run 700 m (2,297 ft)

    d_taddei2
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 736
    Points : 896
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    reply

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sun May 29, 2016 12:46 am

    Legend of the Sky: This is Russia's Most Reliable Fighter Jet:

    The third-generation Soviet supersonic tactical fighter MiG-21 is one of the world’s most reliable military aircraft ever produced, according to military analyst Robert Farley

    http://sputniknews.com/military/20160528/1040425871/russian-legendary-fighter.html

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Sun May 29, 2016 12:17 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:...according to military analyst Robert Farley...
    During years, and years I used to rely of these so-called pundits, but they are only a mere liars. Their purpose are not to tell truth, but to push for more credits in military industrial complex.
    As I said before the Mig-21 with a fair upgrades, its engine -vector thrust-, avionics -new radar, new IRST, or OLS- it still could be a redoubtable fighter today. This fighter is again able to challenge every US fighters, including F-18, F-16, F-15, and F-35.

    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 304
    Points : 308
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Isos on Wed Jun 01, 2016 11:55 pm

    Intersting facts about mig21 bison. With a newer AESA radar and newer stealth technology could do very well against 4+ generation aircrafts. They shoud have offer these upgrades to egypt when they signed mig-35 contracts.



    defence pk forum wrote:Improvents on the baseline Mig-21 to make the bison :

    >multifunctional coherent Doppler-pulse airborne radar "Kopyo" with slot antenna
    > onboard digital computer
    >helmet-mounted target designato
    >double screen (HUD and CRT) display system
    >stores management system
    >inertial navigation system
    >air data computer system, digital
    >short range radio navigation system
    >onboard radio command receiving equipmen
    > new flare dispenser (26 mm 120 rounds)
    >new electric power supply system, controlling and recording system
    >Sextant's TOTEM RLG-INS with NSS-100P GPS embedded GPS receivers
    > El-Op HUD, infrared search and track system (IRST) from Russia's URALs optical-mechanical plant
    >two Sextant MFD-55 LCD displays
    >autopilot
    >radar warning receivers (RWR)
    >new liquid air cooling system
    >HOTAS controls

    It has a mix of French, Israeli, Indian and Russian aveonics equipment.(like the MKI). It is claimed that the fighters are equivalent to any 4th Generation fighter, with the ability to lock on to 8 different targets at once.

    It's weaponry includes the not so commonly seen seeker module of the KAB-500Kr TV guided bomb, R-73and an R-77 BVRAAM carried underwing. The aircraft's sophisticated EW suite comprises of a DRDO Tarang RWR/RHAWS, "Tempest" internal Self-protection jammer (SPJ) and the conformal CMDS.

    Other features include a SURA HMS, a semi-glass cockpit and a Sextant Totem-3000 Ring laser gyro nav. system with GPS, to mention a few. Note the conformal countermeasure dispensers, the new Tarang RWR's antennae on the tailfin and the single piece windshield.


    The Indian Air Force (IAF) is now adding stealth modifications to an existing $340m programme to upgrade 125 of its MiG-21bis fighters to MiG-21-93 standard. Sources for Jane's Defence Weekly have revealed these secret events in a report published in today's edition of the magazine.

    Extensive tests to demonstrate Russia's ability to upgrade Indian fighter aircraft with stealth capabilities took place in front of Indian defence ministry officials at the Sokol aircraft plant in Nizhniy Novgorod on 29th May 2000. The demonstration was highly successful and is understood to have resulted in the Russian government and RSK MIG urging the IAF to adopt the stealth modifications across its MiG-21-93 fleet.

    The core of the demonstration saw two MiG-21bis--one upgraded with stealth technology and one without--being tracked by what is believed to be a Mig-31 in a controlled test of radar-absorbent materials (RAM) and coatings developed at the Moscow Institute of Applied and Theoretical Electrodynamics.

    During its flight the radar signature of the upgraded Mig-21bis was shown to be between 10 and 15 times weaker than the regular MiG-21bis.

    Source: http://defence.pk/threads/mig-21-bison-the-underdog.53018/#ixzz4AMo5kwnd

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 03, 2016 11:53 am

    Intersting facts about mig21 bison. With a newer AESA radar and newer stealth technology could do very well against 4+ generation aircrafts. They shoud have offer these upgrades to egypt when they signed mig-35 contracts.

    With serious upgrades like new radar and avionics and missiles it is a small light dangerous aircraft for even a modern fighter, but it also has huge drawbacks like only 5 weapon hardpoints for weapons, it has relatively short range, which gets worse if you add things like a self defence suite and other hardware and electronics it does not already carry... if you put it in an external pod that takes up a pylon.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept of a small cheap fighter as long as you realise it is limited in range and payload.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Fri Jun 03, 2016 12:18 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Intersting facts about mig21 bison. With a newer AESA radar and newer stealth technology could do very well against 4+ generation aircrafts. They shoud have offer these upgrades to egypt when they signed mig-35 contracts.

    With serious upgrades like new radar and avionics and missiles it is a small light dangerous aircraft for even a modern fighter, but it also has huge drawbacks like only 5 weapon hardpoints for weapons, it has relatively short range, which gets worse if you add things like a self defence suite and other hardware and electronics it does not already carry... if you put it in an external pod that takes up a pylon.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept of a small cheap fighter as long as you realise it is limited in range and payload.

    The setbacks of the Mig-21 are not new. Neverheless there was and still is an excellent and redoubtable fighter, including against the best modern fighters like F-15, F-18, F-35 and even F-16 A. By a fair upgrade I mean mostly new engine, if possible Vector thrust, like Lyulka 12.000 Kg/f. In my view AESA radar, as supposed stealth technology are pointless. 4 Air-air missiles  are largely enough, if not too much, too cumbersome, the most important asset is still the gun. Indeed, with a powerful IRST -OLS-, RWR, and MAWS could be excellent assets. The Mig-21 should not be a fighter bomber, but just a fighter, it excels in this role. As I said in Vietnam, 50 Mig-21 were downed by F-4 Phantom -US scored, because Fishbed was outnumbered by US air fighters-, meanwhile the Mig-21 downed 130 F-4 Phantom. During Lebanon's war in 1982, the same Mig-21 downed several dozens of Phantom again, and even F-15 A, and several F-16. This aircraft is an absolutly fantasctic fighter. Thx to Arthem Mikoyan, and Gourevitch.








    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 304
    Points : 308
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Isos on Fri Jun 03, 2016 9:47 pm

    Well, I was thinking about a front line interceptor. Turn off radar, go near the target, turn on the powerfull but small aesa radar, fire missiles (4 R-77) and then let other Su-30/35 and Mig35 take of the rest will escaping.

    Imagine a coordinated attack with Mig-21 and Mig-35 covered by Mig-31 !!

    Is it possible to use Nakidka on aircrafts ?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakidka

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:16 pm

    Sorry for my stupid question. But I heard many people claimed that Vietnamese and Indian MiG-21/23 has been becoming flying coffin due to the incorporation of Western and Israel parts..

    Is it due to incompatibility or low quality of incorporated parts ? Idea Question Question Question

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:30 pm

    Isos wrote:Well, I was thinking about a front line interceptor. Turn off radar, go near the target, turn on the powerfull but small aesa radar, fire missiles (4 R-77) and then let other Su-30/35 and Mig35 take of the rest will escaping.

    Imagine a coordinated attack with Mig-21 and Mig-35 covered by Mig-31 !!

    In real battlefied, Russian Air Force done it in a more simple way. That is shooting down all the enemy aircraft from afar by using superior radars and other avionics. MiG-25/31 possesses a gigantic nose radar (1,4 metre) while T-50 has a 10 metre L-band radar. Compare to 60-70cm radar on F-xx. Bigger radar antenna provider better resolution and sensitivity. (I don't fully understand about the mechanism behind it, though).

    Furthermore, MiG-25/31 and T-50 can synchronize their radars into a same time-space system. They can compare their distance between them and the target (radiowave propagates at constant speed) and then calculate the position target using these data. This method enable Russian radar to accurately detect the target location w/o relying on radar resolution.

    nemrod wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Intersting facts about mig21 bison. With a newer AESA radar and newer stealth technology could do very well against 4+ generation aircrafts. They shoud have offer these upgrades to egypt when they signed mig-35 contracts.

    With serious upgrades like new radar and avionics and missiles it is a small light dangerous aircraft for even a modern fighter, but it also has huge drawbacks like only 5 weapon hardpoints for weapons, it has relatively short range, which gets worse if you add things like a self defence suite and other hardware and electronics it does not already carry... if you put it in an external pod that takes up a pylon.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept of a small cheap fighter as long as you realise it is limited in range and payload.

    The setbacks of the Mig-21 are not new. Neverheless there was and still is an excellent and redoubtable fighter, including against the best modern fighters like F-15, F-18, F-35 and even F-16 A. By a fair upgrade I mean mostly new engine, if possible Vector thrust, like Lyulka 12.000 Kg/f. In my view AESA radar, as supposed stealth technology are pointless. 4 Air-air missiles  are largely enough, if not too much, too cumbersome, the most important asset is still the gun. Indeed, with a powerful IRST -OLS-, RWR, and MAWS could be excellent assets. The Mig-21 should not be a fighter bomber, but just a fighter, it excels in this role. As I said in Vietnam, 50 Mig-21 were downed by F-4 Phantom -US scored, because Fishbed was outnumbered by US air fighters-, meanwhile the Mig-21 downed 130 F-4 Phantom. During Lebanon's war in 1982, the same Mig-21 downed several dozens of Phantom again, and even F-15 A, and several F-16. This aircraft is an absolutly fantasctic fighter. Thx to Arthem Mikoyan, and Gourevitch.

    MiG-21 is designed to be short range interceptor and point defender. That means, it takes off, engages the enemy near the base, quickly finishes the target at close combat, and quickly returns to the base. It can't fly long, it can't carry much, it is quite sluggish at low alitude and dense atmosphere... but it is very fast and has excellent maneuveravility, especially at high alitude. Excellent speed and climb rate of MiG-21 enabled it to perform the deadly "corba attack" against sluggish F-4.

    However it became obsolete after MiG-25 was born. MiG-25 is the first 4th gen fighter and it laid the foundation for most of Russia and US 4th gen.

    Isos
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 304
    Points : 308
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Isos on Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:43 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:
    nemrod wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Intersting facts about mig21 bison. With a newer AESA radar and newer stealth technology could do very well against 4+ generation aircrafts. They shoud have offer these upgrades to egypt when they signed mig-35 contracts.

    With serious upgrades like new radar and avionics and missiles it is a small light dangerous aircraft for even a modern fighter, but it also has huge drawbacks like only 5 weapon hardpoints for weapons, it has relatively short range, which gets worse if you add things like a self defence suite and other hardware and electronics it does not already carry... if you put it in an external pod that takes up a pylon.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept of a small cheap fighter as long as you realise it is limited in range and payload.

    The setbacks of the Mig-21 are not new. Neverheless there was and still is an excellent and redoubtable fighter, including against the best modern fighters like F-15, F-18, F-35 and even F-16 A. By a fair upgrade I mean mostly new engine, if possible Vector thrust, like Lyulka 12.000 Kg/f. In my view AESA radar, as supposed stealth technology are pointless. 4 Air-air missiles  are largely enough, if not too much, too cumbersome, the most important asset is still the gun. Indeed, with a powerful IRST -OLS-, RWR, and MAWS could be excellent assets. The Mig-21 should not be a fighter bomber, but just a fighter, it excels in this role. As I said in Vietnam, 50 Mig-21 were downed by F-4 Phantom -US scored, because Fishbed was outnumbered by US air fighters-, meanwhile the Mig-21 downed 130 F-4 Phantom. During Lebanon's war in 1982, the same Mig-21 downed several dozens of Phantom again, and even F-15 A, and several F-16. This aircraft is an absolutly fantasctic fighter. Thx to Arthem Mikoyan, and Gourevitch.

    MiG-21 is designed to be short range interceptor and point defender. That means, it takes off, engages the enemy near the base, quickly finishes the target at close combat, and quickly returns to the base. It can't fly long, it can't carry much, it is quite sluggish at low alitude and dense atmosphere... but it is very fast and has excellent maneuveravility, especially at high alitude. Excellent speed and climb rate of MiG-21 enabled it to perform the deadly "corba attack" against sluggish F-4.

    However it became obsolete after MiG-25 was born. MiG-25 is the first 4th gen fighter and it laid the foundation for most of Russia and US 4th gen.

    Mig-25 was not build to replace Mig-21. Even the Mig23, which was mean to replace it, didn't because it's a realy good fighter. Egyptian Mig-21 dedstroyed some Lybian Mig-23 because they engaged them in a dogfight.

    Mig-25 is an interceptor not dogfihter.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Jun 04, 2016 1:58 pm

    Isos wrote:Mig-25 was not build to replace Mig-21. Even the Mig23, which was mean to replace it, didn't because it's a realy good fighter. Egyptian Mig-21 dedstroyed some Lybian Mig-23 because they engaged them in a dogfight.

    Mig-25 is an interceptor not dogfihter.

    MiG-25 can dogfight if it was armed with a gun. The design enable MiG-25 to achieve considerable AoA and maneuverability, which is critical for dogfight.

    MiG-21 is obsolete means, with the deployment of MiG-25, people entered the era of BVR combat using reliable radar and reliable guided missiles. People also entered the time when fighters could carry excellent payload, could fly far and long, could have a great amount of weapon, and began to perform multirole combat.

    Yes MiG-25/31 could be modified to drop bombs if somebody want it.

    Meanwhile, MiG-21 lack BVR capability and has limited range and payload.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 04, 2016 2:06 pm

    A new 12 ton thrust engine would reduce internal space (because it will be larger than the existing engine) and burn fuel much faster so it will likely greatly shorten operational range and time in the air.

    with high off boresight AAMs and long range AAMs being agile is likely not going to be that critical.... having long range sensors, the ability to carry long range missiles and the ability to climb and fire and then land and rearm and get back into the battle will likely be useful features.

    In this regard the MiG-23 would probably be a useful aircraft with a large nose mounted radar, the ability to climb like a rocket, but it could do with more missiles.

    I mean for a numbers aircraft you could go remote control and have unmanned versions of previous generation fighters that take off and climb to high altitude and fly around at medium speeds until a threat is detected and they can quickly accelerate and launch missiles to their max range and then be landed and rearmed and refuelled... they don't need radar... just engines and missiles... more modern and more capable and more expensive aircraft can detect targets for these drones to fire upon so that they don't use up their own missile load...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  nemrod on Sat Jun 04, 2016 3:32 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:
    MiG-25 can dogfight if it was armed with a gun.
    I never heard a such thing, on contrary the Mig-25 was not designed to be manoeuvrable as the Mig-21. At first the Mig-25 was designed against the XB-70 Valkyrie's threat, and SR-71 Blackbird. In this task it was a success.


    higurashihougi wrote:
    The design enable MiG-25 to achieve considerable AoA and maneuverability, which is critical for dogfight.
    AFAIK, as several books I read, the Mig-25 was not intended for dogfight, even though many syrian, iraqi Mig-25 dodged easily the western's state of the art's air to air missiles. There are reports that Mig-25 dodged successfully several AIM-120 C launched by F-15, and F-16.

    higurashihougi wrote:
    MiG-21 is obsolete means,...
    As we've already discussed the Mig-21 is far to be obsolete.

    higurashihougi wrote:
    ...the era of BVR combat using reliable radar and reliable guided missiles.
    Again the BVR is like stealth, it never worked, and won't work in foreseeable future, it is an hollywood fantaisy. The number of BVR's success other than those trumpeting by Raytheon is laughable, if not never existed. An aircraft like the Mig-21 could dodge any air air missile, I talk about the more manoeuvrable WVR, no use to tell more about BVR.


    higurashihougi wrote:
    ....fighters could carry excellent payload, could fly far and long, could have a great amount of weapon, and began to perform multirole combat.

    Multirole combat impede much on the intrinsics  performances of an aircraft. All US multirole aircrafts are all a setback. The most famous the JSF is total faillure, because it was designed as multirole. Soviet multirole fighters were faillure too, like the SU-7 for example.

    higurashihougi wrote:
    Yes MiG-25/31 could be modified to drop bombs if somebody want it.
    I don't see the interrest. We've already discussed about this subject about serbian's war -as Desert Storm-, as we've seen the result NATO air campaign was a total faillure. Faillure made by specialized aircraft, no use to tell more about multirole.

    higurashihougi wrote:
    Meanwhile, MiG-21 lack BVR capability and has limited range and payload.
    It is a good thing, because Mig-21 does not need BVR. BVR capabilty is a mere fantaisy, without sense. Indeed, if they could extend the range and autonomy of the Mig-21 it could be a good thing.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Jun 05, 2016 1:15 am

    I personally think MiG-25 still has life in it. They could potentially come up with a refit program - modernize the engines, use glass cockpit, possibly try to reduce weight of aircraft, modernize radar to something far more powerful and digitize instruments. I imagine if they replace the powersupply unit and modernize engines, they could possibly fit a really powerful radar to it.

    But I imagine no one is interested in it anymore.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  higurashihougi on Sun Jun 05, 2016 6:02 am

    nemrod wrote:I never heard a such thing, on contrary the Mig-25 was not designed to be manoeuvrable as the Mig-21. At first the Mig-25 was designed against the XB-70 Valkyrie's threat, and SR-71 Blackbird. In this task it was a success.

    AFAIK, as several books I read, the Mig-25 was not intended for dogfight, even though many syrian, iraqi Mig-25 dodged easily the western's state of the art's air to air missiles. There are reports that Mig-25 dodged successfully several AIM-120 C launched by F-15, and F-16.

    MiG-25 is maneuverable although not at the level of Su-27 or MiG-29. The broad, boxy hull sustain better lift and the position of stablizers enable the wind to access vertical stabs at high AoA.

    Although MiG-25/31 is designed to be specialized in long-range intercepting, its design concept was applied widely in multirole and dogfight aircraft. Su-27, MiG-29, F-15 are multirole versions of MiG-25/31 concept.

    nemrod wrote:As we've already discussed the Mig-21 is far to be obsolete.

    It is already obsolete, it can't harbor gigantic radar like Su-35 or MiG-31, it can't fly long and carry much.

    nemrod wrote:Again the BVR is like stealth, it never worked, and won't work in foreseeable future, it is an hollywood fantaisy. The number of BVR's success other than those trumpeting by Raytheon is laughable, if not never existed. An aircraft like the Mig-21 could dodge any air air missile, I talk about the more manoeuvrable WVR, no use to tell more about BVR.

    Because Hollywood avionics is inferior to Russian avionics. For example, F-xx radar is only 60-70cm diameter, meanwhile Su-35 has 90-100cm radar, MiG-25/31 has 140cm radar, and the L-band wing radar of T-50 is 10 metre long. Bigger radar antenna provide better resolution and sensitivity (I don't understand the full mechanism behind it, though).

    Not to mention that Russian fighter can synchronize their radars into a same time-space system and compare the distance between each radar to the target to calculate the accurate location of the target. Using that method enable Russia to accurately locate the target without relying on radar's resolution.

    About stealth, longer wavelength can neutralize stealth cloak but decrease resolution. However, Russian gigantic radars in T-50 and MiG-31 and the method to synchronize their radars enable Russia to use low band longwavelength (L band, UHF, VHF) to detect stealth aircraft. Su-27...37 can't emit L band, but it can receive L-band signal from other sources. F-22/35/117 can't escape Russian radars.

    nemrod wrote:Multirole combat impede much on the intrinsics  performances of an aircraft. All US multirole aircrafts are all a setback. The most famous the JSF is total faillure, because it was designed as multirole. Soviet multirole fighters were faillure too, like the SU-7 for example.

    Russian multirole like Su-27 family are highly successful. The design concept of MiG-25 enable the fighter to has greatpayload and great range while retain much maneuverability, therefore it is natural for people to think about developing fighter-bomber.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 05, 2016 12:21 pm

    The MiG-21 is still flying because it is cheap and simple to operate, but offers mach 2 performance from a small and light fighter. It was designed as a bomber intercept fighter so while it has good manouver capability it does not have great manuver capability.

    The MiG-25 is handicapped by extreme operating costs and high maintainence... new upgrades of engines and avionics could solve most of those issues, but if you try to make it an uber plane then you will likely fail.

    Actually it would be interesting to take out the existing two engines and fit a single engine from a Blackjack... hehehehe. a modern radar and modern missiles with a new thicker wing containing fuel and electronics etc and limit speed to something like Mach 2 and you would have an interesting aircraft...

    MiG-25 is maneuverable although not at the level of Su-27 or MiG-29. The broad, boxy hull sustain better lift and the position of stablizers enable the wind to access vertical stabs at high AoA.

    The leading edge root extensions (LERX) on the MiG-29 and Su-27 families are designed to create energised vortexes that enhance the effect of the twin vertical stabilisers... for the MiG-25 to take advantage it would also need LERX too... or perhaps canard foreplanes.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Tolstoy
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 12
    Points : 12
    Join date : 2015-07-12

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Tolstoy on Mon Jun 06, 2016 12:51 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:Russian multirole like Su-27 family are highly successful. The design concept of MiG-25 enable the fighter to has greatpayload and great range while retain much maneuverability, therefore it is natural for people to think about developing fighter-bomber.

    Off Topic I read last week in Sea Waves magazine that Vietnam is planning to purchase BRAHMOS anti ship cruise missiles from India? Any truth in these reports? IIRC, Vietnam already has Yakhont & Bastion. So what's the need for BRAHMOS?

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2129
    Points : 2244
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  higurashihougi on Mon Jun 06, 2016 1:10 pm

    Tolstoy wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:Russian multirole like Su-27 family are highly successful. The design concept of MiG-25 enable the fighter to has greatpayload and great range while retain much maneuverability, therefore it is natural for people to think about developing fighter-bomber.

    Off Topic I read last week in Sea Waves magazine that Vietnam is planning to purchase BRAHMOS anti ship cruise missiles from India? Any truth in these reports? IIRC, Vietnam already has Yakhont & Bastion. So what's the need for BRAHMOS?

    At the time I type this comment, Vietnam hasn't announce any offcial decision yet.

    That news also appeared at several Vietnamese newspaper. However, it is just presuppositions and its reliability is questionable.

    Off Topic

    Sponsored content

    Re: MIG-21, MIG-25, MIG-29SMT. Your views

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 1:10 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 1:10 pm