MiG-21 vs F-104G

[Hummingbird]

The following might come as a surprise to some:

 

Edited December 22, 2015 by Hummingbird

[zantron]

i was under the impression that the mig-21 was proven the winner over the f-104 during one of the indian-pakistani wars, but not sure if it was the f-104g variant the pakistanis were fielding

[Darkwolf]

charts are nice but it doesn't apply in DCS.

 

1/ Flight model changes regulary depending on airframe or simulator engine patching

2/ Mig-21 doesn't need to go dogfight to kill F-104G. R3-R will. :P

[mattebubben]

i was under the impression that the mig-21 was proven the winner over the f-104 during one of the indian-pakistani wars, but not sure if it was the f-104g variant the pakistanis were fielding

 

Pakistan only had F-104A and F-104B

(with the 104B being a 2 seat trainer variant)

 

And pakistan never had a large number of 104s with only 12 aircraft.

the F-104A was the first F-104 variant and was alot less capable then later variants like the G (only having a ranging radar)

 

The Mig-21FL (second generation mig-21 based on the Mig-21PF)

on the other hand was brand new (with india only having received less then a year before the conflict)

 

And it had a more capable radar with search / lock functions.

 

So between a Mig-21FL and a F-104A the Mig-21FL would have a slight advantage with most of the outcome depending on pilots.

[Basher54321]

What MiG-21 variant is that chart for?

 

The PAF F-104As initially had the J79-GE-11A - same engine as the F-104G with a bit less weight.

[Croaker47]

This was to show similar performance, right? I'm still trying despite myself to understand these doghouse contraptions, but if I had to guess, it seems that their charts are about even. Seems, though, the MiG needs to pull less G at corner to get the same result at what looks to be the same speed, and has more room for error within that envelope.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, though. I have near-zero confidence in my conclusions from looking at those charts.

[GGTharos]

It shows similar performance in a narrow range. Generally the F-104 can't really do much at slow speeds compared to the MiG-21 and you can see this in the charts as well.

And it appears that the MiG-21 has a significant ITR advantage as well.

[Hummingbird]

What the chart shows is that from Mach 0.6 to Mach 0.8 the F-104G & MiG-21 have practically identical sustained turning performance. The MiG-21 however enjoys a large advantage in instantanous turn performance, the F-104 being quite limited in that regard.

 

The former will probably come as quite a bit of surprise to some as the F-104 doesn't really have a reputation for being at all capable in the horizontal. But as the charts show it wasn't completely helpless in that regard.

[Croaker47]

Aha, I think I'm starting to see that. Sorry, but my only experience with these charts, really, are the barebones charts on the DCS manuals, and the one in the old Allied Force manual, heh. I'm pretty sure the numbers on the rate graph show the altitude(?) loss/gain during a type of turn under G, but in the MiG graph, what are the lines extending from the bottom left?

[GGTharos]

They represent turn radius

[Robin_Hood]

I'm pretty sure the numbers on the rate graph show the altitude(?) loss/gain during a type of turn under G,

 

The numbers associated to each curve show, AFAIK, a measure of energy/speed gain (I am not sure what units it uses, though).

The 0 curve is the sustained turn rate, where the energy stays constant (ie. you can sustain the turn because you gain exactly as much energy as you bleed).

The negative number indicate energy loss, and are non-sustainable turns (you bleed too much energy for your thrust to compensate), and so represent instantaneous turn performance - the higher curve being max instantaneous turn rate, as limited by lift and maximum load factor).

And the positive curves are, obviously, energy-generating turns, where you gain speed. Those are sustainable, but not optimal ; they can be useful to regain energy for exemple.

 

Interesting indeed that the max sustained turn rate performance is similar in those two aircraft. Would be nice to know the MiG-21 variant, though.

[HugePanic]

Acc. To have donut you should use high speed hit and run tactics against the mig21 from a f104 standpoint.

Don't get into a prolonged turning engagement.

 

The mig max turn rate is better, so you can dump some energy to get a missilen of the rails. That's about the same as against a F4.

[Danneskjold]

I'm sorry, but who is actually surprised that a dedicated dog fighter is better than a dedicated point interceptor?

 

 

Next up, stunning documents show the BF-109 can turn tighter than the B-17!

[RoflSeal]

I don't really see the MiG-21 as a dedicated dogfighter.

[Danneskjold]

I don't really see the MiG-21 as a dedicated dogfighter.

 

The russians always had an eye towards defending against heavy bombers after watching the Americans grind Germany and Japan into a pulp, but a simple investigation of both planes, and the eras they were designed in, show that they were made for relatively different purposes.

 

The decision to overly rely on missiles aside, one is an arrow and the other is a bird. The F-104 has smaller wings, less drag, better climb, and is basically faster until it hits the plane's structural limit at Mach 2.0 (which the Mig-21 also hits). I don't know why it's so surprising that the Mig-21 can maneuver better. Hell, just looking at the landing speed between the 2 (Mig -> 135 knots, Starfighter -> 165 knots) should be a quick and crude way to discern that it's true.

[Spectrum Legacy]

The decision to overly rely on missiles aside, one is an arrow and the other is a bird. The F-104 has smaller wings, less drag, better climb, and is basically faster until it hits the plane's structural limit at Mach 2.0 (which the Mig-21 also hits). I don't know why it's so surprising that the Mig-21 can maneuver better. Hell, just looking at the landing speed between the 2 (Mig -> 135 knots, Starfighter -> 165 knots) should be a quick and crude way to discern that it's true.

 

Actually I understood the point of this thread being that the F 104 can turn better than expected! :megalol:

 

Seeing as it is one of 2 or 3 jets I would be interested in from 'Murica, I would not object to have the widowmaker in DCS at all. One can't get much purer than F 104 in my eyes.

[Robin_Hood]

Yes, the point is that the F-104 is not that bad in a sustained turn. Now, obviously, considering his disadvantage in instantaneous turn rate, I wouldn't want to get in a turning fight with the MiG as the latter could simply extend and use his better ITR.

 

PS: I checked, and the Ps curves are indeed ft/s (which can be a measure of energy). I was a bit surprised to see Ps curves for a F-104, as I thought the E-M theory was developped rather after that aircraft's prime

Edited December 24, 2015 by Robin_Hood

[Hook47]

LOL Hummingbird, ol' pal, you just can't get enough of these MiG 21 vs _________ threads can ya?!

 

Anyway that being said my money would be on the MiG 21 vs the flying coffin... Ahem... I mean the F-104. Sure it may have a better STR according to the books anyway, but the Fishbed, particularly the Bis model has too many advantages. IIRC this was proved in actual combat.

 

The F-104G, to my knowledge, was really intended to be more of a fighter bomber. It had 7 hard points but only provisions for 4 AIM 9s, a load out easily matched by by the 21Bis, and with the 21Bis having a front aspect advantage with the R3R, and the 104G having no radar, I see a pretty big advantage tipping towards the MiG 21. The MiG could also control the engagement with superior TWW, particularly with the use of the emergency after burner.

 

That being said why exactly are we discussing the 104G? Did I miss something? As in a 104G announcement?! I haven't been around a few days but I didn't see any such thread... I think I heard Aviodev was supposedly planning one but that is assuming the C-101 gets finished one day :/

 

Coming up next: F4U Corsair VS MiG 21

Edited December 28, 2015 by Hook47

[Hook47]

The russians always had an eye towards defending against heavy bombers after watching the Americans grind Germany and Japan into a pulp, but a simple investigation of both planes, and the eras they were designed in, show that they were made for relatively different purposes.

 

The decision to overly rely on missiles aside, one is an arrow and the other is a bird. The F-104 has smaller wings, less drag, better climb, and is basically faster until it hits the plane's structural limit at Mach 2.0 (which the Mig-21 also hits). I don't know why it's so surprising that the Mig-21 can maneuver better. Hell, just looking at the landing speed between the 2 (Mig -> 135 knots, Starfighter -> 165 knots) should be a quick and crude way to discern that it's true.

 

Just looking at the two fighters in general tells me what I need to know! That 104 had some GOOFY little wings! Was a crazy lookin bird...