МиГ-29 против F-16 в небе Польши

[agm]

There were not so much MiGs in Iraq and Yugoslavia. Anymore these airplanes nowhere met with f-15 and f-16.

P.S. Sorry for my English.

Edited May 24, 2010 by agm

[ФрогФут]

There is lie, there is brazen lie, and there is statistics.©

[DimASS]

If you find one...i would LOVE to read.

 

IM NOT MIG-29 or F-16 patriot...but i want FACTS not love stories :smilewink:

 

Well if you want facts - go on and find them.

 

You want us to try to make you change your mind?

 

Or you're trying to replace the trolls that have been banned?

[Blakk]

ну а вообщето хоть один ОФИЦИАЛЬНЫЙ документ хотелось бы увидеть, а то "югославские партизаны", да всякие байки а ля первый полет Су-27 в США уже поднадоели...

[KOT(UA)]

Вобщето эта часть форума русскоязычная, хватит постить на ангийском, мне уже надоело переводить :) пусть вон товарищ A.S садится за словарь, и постепенно овладевает великим и могучим.

[ФрогФут]

Show me the statistics please

The question does not correspond with my salary.:)

[Scart]

The question does not correspond with my salary.:)

ok, waiting for salary increase...

[Chizh]

Автор просто очередной обиженный на то, что старенький, потрепанный МиГ оказался получше и все. :)

Это попытка просто что-то сказать? Или есть более серьезные аргументы? :)

 

P.S.

Я помню несколько лет назад во время очередного спора про наши и не наши самолеты все пришли к выводу, что было бы крайне интересно послушать мнение летчика освоившего типы самолетов вчерашних потенциальных противников.

 

Вот наконец один из таких людей высказал свое мнение, но поскольку оно не совпало с ожиданиями "ура-комьюнити" он тут же был предан анафеме. :)

Edited May 24, 2010 by Chizh

[Civis]

P.S.

Я помню несколько лет назад во время очередного спора про наши и не наши самолеты все пришли к выводу, что было бы крайне интересно послушать мнение летчика освоившего типы самолетов вчерашних потенциальных противников.

А скажем мнения Харчевского не катит?? Он ведь тоже на Миражах и F-15/16 полетал:)

[DS]

Это попытка просто что-то сказать? Или есть более серьезные аргументы? :)

"But when all that is said and done, the MiG-29 is a superb fighter for close-in combat, even compared with aircraft like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. This is due to the aircraft’s superb aerodynamics and helmet mounted sight. Inside ten nautical miles I’m hard to defeat, and with the IRST, helmet sight and ‘Archer’ I can’t be beaten. Period. Even against the latest Block 50 F-16s the MiG-29 is virtually invulnerable in the close-in scenario. On one occasion I remember the F-16s did score some kills eventually, but only after taking 18 ‘Archers’. We didn’t operate kill removal (forcing ‘killed’ aircraft to leave the fight) since they’d have got no training value, we killed them too quickly. (Just as we might seldom have got close-in if they used their AMRAAMs BVR!) They couldn’t believe it at the debrief, they got up and left the room!"

 

Чем не аргумент? Или большая угловая скорость установившегося разворота и лучшая скороподъемность не аргумент? :)

P.S.

Я помню несколько лет назад во время очередного спора про наши и не наши самолеты все пришли к выводу, что было бы крайне интересно послушать мнение летчика освоившего типы самолетов вчерашних потенциальных противников.

 

Вот наконец один из таких людей высказал свое мнение, но поскольку оно не совпало с ожиданиями "ура-комьюнити" он тут же был предан анафеме. :)

Казнить, нельзя помиловать! :D

[Starwalker]

Вот наконец один из таких людей высказал свое мнение, но поскольку оно не совпало с ожиданиями "ура-комьюнити" он тут же был предан анафеме. :)

Ну, анафема - это слишком сильно сказано :)

Но нельзя забывать, с какой стороны баррикад находился "высказывавшийся"... Оно понятно, что СЕЙЧАС их самолеты ничем не уступают тому, что было создано у нас несколько РАНЕЕ. Речь идет исключительно о пилотажных сво-вах, а не о БРЭО. Тут даже наши современные образцы = позавчерашние разработки "синих"... :(

[Chizh]

А скажем мнения Харчевского не катит?? Он ведь тоже на Миражах и F-15/16 полетал:)

Ага. Полетал пассажиром, которому иногда давали подержаться за ручку.

 

Это не вспоминая о том, что к его словам, как и к словам Ильина нужно относиться осторожно.

[Chizh]

Вот статья из Air Force Montly про совместные маневры в Болгарии.

Вполне взвешенное мнение о самолете с его достоинствами и недостатками.

 

DACT..

 

Well who can we learn most from DACT?

USAF Pilot MIKE TONGUE would be a good source indeed

 

He is now retired with more than 3,300 hours flight time in F-15s and F-16s.

 

 

"My greatest training lesson!

This truly was the greatest training lesson in my career as a USAF aviator and F-16 pilot. We had the chance to see the Mig-29 up close and meet the pilots who trained in those lethal machines.

They(Bulgaria Air Force) welcomed us into their squadron and country like lost brothers. In some ways they was better prepared than we where. They had studied our tactics, read our articles and knew the different Blocks of F-16 and what the unique capabilities that followed them.

They even quoted some of our article, and the tactics in them.

 

The F-16s we operate have been used to simulate Mig-29 in our aggressor units back home for some time now.

But i have to tell you, this is not the same as clashing with the real deal!

 

But i'm getting ahead of my self here..

 

My observations.

The first thing i noticed when i walked up to a Mig-29 quite some time ago was how low it sits to the ground and how beefy the landing gear is.

The next thing i noticed was the rivet work ans sheet metals difference from my standard USAF Aircraft. It was not pretty to be honest, when looked at closly. So my first impression was not good, but once again there is a surprise in its rough exterior that i will describe later when i actual got to see them in flight operations.

 

Then i proceed to the back of the Mig, where i realised i would have my hands full if i ever had the opportunity to hit merge with this beast.

The engines are huge for a fighter of this size.. They are far more disproportinal visually than our F-15s, F-18s and for that matter the Typhoon or Rafale that i've looked at over the years.

The massive engines on the Mig-29 are its advantage and anchor. Initially i would read about the Russian jet for years before finally getting to experience it in person, both fighting it in DACT in my F-16 and then flying in the backseat against our F-16.

 

DACT

Fast forward many year to the best deployment i have ever had the oppertunity to tag along on: two weeks of DACT with the Bulgarian AirForce Mig-29s!

In my personal view i have the best fighter short of the F-22 thats in our inventory, to fight this Mig in a visual fight- namly the F-16C Block 30.

Why?

The F-16 have evolved significantly since the first flew in 1972. Some are good and some are not so good in my opinion. The different Blocks the USAF has flown over the years included the older F-16A/B that comprised the Block 5, 10, 15, and 20. These where great fighters, with an analogue flight control system, a light nose feel, but still not enough thrust to sustain a level turn of some of the newer models!

The Block 30 F-16C is my personal favorite out of many Blocks i have flown, for one reason: its THE best machine for visual range fights! It has the extreemly powerful GE110 engine crankin out 28,000Ibs(125kgN) of thrust and it has the analouge flight control system. The Block 40 and 50 are heavier and both have the digital flight control system. The Block 50 has a larger engine so the thrust/weight are pretty close to the Block 30. But the Analogue flight system feels lighter and allows you to get closer to maximum Angle of Attack(AoA) faster in my expirience and bounce off the limits if you ever need it.

Conversely, it allows you to cross the line to go out of control faster if you hand ham it too.

It also feels smoother under G while you are trying to gun someone without the 'ratchety' feel of the digital flight control system that you get when you slow and 'honking' on the stick. In short it is a great jet to tangle with a Mig-29 and see how it worked out.

 

The DACT mission we flew with and against the NATO brothers in-arms of the BuAF were set to compare our training doctrine with theirs. The Bulgarian Air Force has a proud tradision going way back to 1912.

We were soon given them academics on how we fight western style within visual range manoeuvring.And they were doing the very same for us, passing along their own techniques developed indipendently in thir Air Force, and some from being former members of the Soviets circle of friends flying their equipment.

 

Mig-29 BFM

Back home the way we did train ourself is first basic flight, second is BFM or basic fighters manoeuvres, then Tactical Intercept TI; using the radar to intercept with missiles or close to visual conditions, then the ACT Aerial Tactical Training which pretty much is a mix of TI and BFM.

The method taught in Bulgaria are in different orders..

They do the same first Basic training.

But then they go on to Tactical Intercepts, and eventually to the BFM.

We tried both with the Bulgarian Air force but i'm stick with the BFM in this article.

 

The first fights we did were from set-piece training positions: one fighter in front in a defencive position, another one in the back in a offensive position. This particular set is what we call a '9K', which means we are 9,000ft apart at the 'fight's on' call to initiate manoeuvring.

I had the displeasure of being on the receiving end as the defender.

I remember thinking: if this guy guns the hell out of me and gets in on tape, i'll never hear the end of it from my sq mates!

Nothing like a little motivation to up the G tolerance!

At my first 'fights on' call i start my standard 9G break turn, which by the way is a pain in the a** or in this instance in my neck, the high thrust/weight Block 30 F-16C, and tried to stay awake to watch the Mig initial moves. As expected, he gave me a go with the heat-seeking missile AA-8 Aphid which i foild with a flare, followed by a gun attempt. The Mig-29 shoot the massive 30mm procjetile out of a single barrel Gsh-30-1 cannon that can carry 150 rounds. You sertaintly would NOT get hit by a big procjectile like that cause then its pretty much bye bye for me, but one good thing when fighting it is it has more pronounced ballistick drop and slower muzzle velocity vs the 20mm i am used to fight with and against.

 

I hoping i guess right on his required lead(hoping he does not have a gun shot solution) and keep pulling. Right about the time i think "Wow! Thats a big aircraft" he blazes by, with both afterburners fully lit! What a sight! I reverse my turn to see if i can force an overshoot, and here is where i learned a good lesson you just do not get in fighting blue vs blue training: this Mig-29 can slow way down fast! The nose rate is damn impressive too. We end up jousting to get behind one anotherfor a bit, then 'knock it off' to try again, always respect the ROE or you end up beeing kicked out of the training sessions..

 

The pilot i'm fighting is a young captain, extremly smart and fast learner who absorbed information from me like a spronge in the pre-briefing fot our fighting techniques. We set up another one and this time he goes to my turn cycle, wich is more of the USAF style of BFM, to give himself an easier gun shot. I do my best to flare and jink, but he makes it tougher to force him closer. So he is learning fast!

We only get three sets, which is ok, but i would like do this all day.

 

Lessons learned

I found out this is defenintly a short range fighter and the stenght/weakness of the aircraft lies in those massive RD-33 engines. Both the F-16 and Mig-29 were designed as lightweight fighters if you will. The engine on the F-16 is remarkebly efficient for a fighter and groundbreaking for its era. Just as the hart and soul of the Spitfire was the Merlin engine, the F-16s engine is what makes the superb aerodynamics wrapped around it perform. The Mig-29 does it similar, but with two engines- and those bad boys are thirsty! The listed thrust is 18,000Ibs+ (80kN) in each afterburner, with aprox weight of 32,00Ib (14,515kg) depending on gas and armament, so it is defintely similar to the F-16 thrust/weight 28,000Ib (125kN).in a basic A2A configuration.

The overall engine is very relieble, altough it needs to be overhauled more often than its western competitors.

But the fuel burn rate is much higher, especially in Afterburner. The Simplicity of the overall design is more appreciated after fighting it and watching tha maintenance and operations process. The duct that shut during take-off to avoid foreign object are a brilliant design and allow austere base operations. Time spent sweeping the ramp can be spent elsewhere. It is definitely a more robust aircraft, better suited to handling tough conditions than most USAF aircraft could ever handle.

And the ablilty to 'turn the Mig around' to the next flight is short of amazing!

What the F-16 acheives with relaxed stability and computer-driven flight controls, the Mig-29 acheives the with the exellent aerodynamics and massive engines - different ways to acheive similar goals.

B.t.w. here is where i learned how well suited the Mig-29 is to real world conditions you may find in a war. While the F-16 with its low-slung intake, is a stickler for having a clean tarmac, the Mig-29 has no such problems. The raw metal work, tough landing gear and simple systems acheive very similar performance to the F-16 without the complexity or sensitivity to tough conditions. The Mig i looked 'down' on for years as a youngsters F-16 student now grew tremendously in stature after watching it in real day-to-day operations.

In short the difference would probably come down to training and pilot proficiency. As a expiriencedpilot of a 4th generation fighter like the F-16 against a similar pilot flying a Mig-29, the fight would probalby end yp to a draw or a mutual kill.

The advantage the F-16 has if you can beleive it, is the fuel economy. We get similar performance from one engine and its way more economical in the pound of thrust vs pound of of thrust ratio. Yes the Mig-29 carries a bit more fuel but has to feed those massive engines and it has less as a proprtion to do so. My last flight in Bulgaria was against one of the most expirienced pilots in their Wing. With about 1,500 hour of flight time in his Mig-29 vs my 1,900 in my F-16, it was going to quite some match.

It was a 1 vs 1 high aspect Basic Fighter Maneuvre set, where you start of neutral. needless to say i was looking forward to it!

 

Fighting An Equal

The first set we started about 3 miles apart and turned straight at each other, both of us hitting the merge with about 1,200 miles per hour of closure. I used every dirty trick i could muster!

I wanted to deafeat his short-range shots and eventually force an energy fight to use the more efficiant turning capability of my F-16 to negate the superior nose authority of his Mig-29. It worked out 'ok', until the second immelman(an immelman being half of a vertical loop, this would have looked like an S from the side as we went up twice), where i had the thought that it was going great as there was no way he could lift his nose to point up at me!

Right about that time.. he lifted up his nose to point at me! If i had a grin on my face, it was not there anymore.

Thankfully, with a face full of sun, he could not get a valid gun or missile track/lock, but that was more luck than skill.

 

Just because he could not validate the gun atempt on tape does not mean he could get lucky and whack me with 'one' of those massive 30mm shells in real life..

Well the fight continued and i was eventually able to work my way around behind him using the F-16s better rate of turn vs his better radius of turn, plus the fact he cashed in so much energy trying to nail me on the top of that second 'Immelman'. So that was a draw- maybe he could have hit me before i was able to get behind him maybe not. The remarkeble thing was how fast he learned my tricks!

 

The second set, i tried some siilar initial moves at the 'merge', while staying wary of the nose authority that was now seen firsthand vs just reading about it in some book, with no luck. I guess i was learning fast too, as i did not underestimate that nose authority. This one ended in a solid stalemate, with both of us staring at eachother from the other side of the turn circle, neighter able to kill or get killed.

Then the 'Break manouvre' came.

 

We were able to get only two sets cause the Mig was all out of fuel. And that my friends, is why i would take the F-16C Block 30 hands down. Although the Mig-29 capabilities are superb, if you can manage to negate the initial attack and stay neutral for a short time he is going to run out of fuel quickly. I would not be gunning a pilotless Mig after the guy had to eject due to flameout due to lack of fuel.

A kill is a kill right?

Luckely this is all training, but i knew next time i saw a mig-29 it might not be from a frendly NATO country, so my training here was very valuable for me as an USAF pilot and instructor."

 

Source: Airforce Monthly Magazine

 

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1522595&postcount=24

[Chizh]

Вот взвешенное мнение болгарина AirTito:

 

I can give you the same story from the bulgarian "Aero" magazine but you have to translate it. This is a report from the Mako Javelin 2008 joint exercise between the 1st (MiG-21bis) and 2nd (MiG-29) squadrons of 3rd AFB Graff Ignatievo and 93rd FS "Makos" from the 482th FW of USAF based in Florida. Read carefully and note that those guys (extremely experienced) have chosen between Red Flag '08 and flying across the Globe for training with our modest Air Force.

 

Some more info (all in bulgarian) including interviews with young bulgarian pilots flying for the first time with such adversary + pics - http://forum.aeropress-bg.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=152

 

Has F-16 been "shot" in this (and other) exercises? The answer is yes. Has the MiG-29 been "shot" at it's turn - the answer is again yes. Has anyone involved made a conclusion which one is better? The answer is no. As long as it's a allied training it's only the shared experienced that matters. The MiG-29 is extremely attractive for the USAF, they send few times a year either "rookies" or veterans to Bulgaria. Ones to learn how to fight it for the first time, the others to stay in shape. They wouldn't be spending all those money just for the nice bulgarian food, wouldn't they?

 

The fact that these guys are now here for a second time isn't a coincidence. And they don't fly the F-16, they fly the F-15 fitted with JHMCS and AIM-9X. In fact the F-22 is the only US fighter that hasn't come yet to train with our MiG's but I don't believe they will ever do it.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=911114&postcount=120

[Chizh]

 

Чем не аргумент? Или большая угловая скорость установившегося разворота и лучшая скороподъемность не аргумент? :)

Это не факт.

Я уже как-то проводил сравнения. Самолеты в пилотажных характеристиках примерно равны.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=42383

[Belamor]

Миг-29 была в свое время отличная машина. Очевидно, что с каждым годом разрыв только увеличивается. Увы у нас так Миг-29 не модернизируют - как Ф-16.

Я бы не стал сравнивать Миг-29 с Ф-16 блок 50-52 вообще.

[Chizh]

Миг-29 была в свое время отличная машина. Очевидно, что с каждым годом разрыв только увеличивается. Увы у нас так Миг-29 не модернизируют - как Ф-16.

Я бы не стал сравнивать Миг-29 с Ф-16 блок 50-52 вообще.

В статье выше летчик говорит, что наиболее маневренный вариант F-16С это Block 30 1987 года, еще с аналоговой системой управления. Именно он может успешно противостоять МиГ-29.

Последующие модификации становились тяжелее.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Chizh

[Civis]

Chizh

Ага. Полетал пассажиром, которому иногда давали подержаться за ручку.

И не только за ручку подержаться, но и маневры закладывать замечу:)

Это не вспоминая о том, что к его словам, как и к словам Ильина нужно относиться осторожно.

Да ну? А к словам немца значит нужно без опаски относится. Года бегут, а у вас все так же однобоко... У нас "шитяковы", звездуны и ура-комьюнити, а у них объективность, правда и взвешенность, прям аки черное и белое:))

[Belamor]

В статье выше летчик говорит, что наиболее маневренный вариант F-16С это Block 30 1987 года, еще с аналоговой системой управления. Именно он может успешно противостоять МиГ-29.

Последующие модификации становились тяжелее.

 

Да даже блок 30 по брэо на голову выше миг-29.

[Chizh]

Chizh

И не только за ручку подержаться, но и маневры закладывать замечу:)

Мне кажется есть разница между "подержаться за ручку" или налетать самостоятельно 2000 часов.

 

Да ну? А к словам немца значит нужно без опаски относится.

Немец в отличие от Харчевского пока не был замечен в изложении, мягко скажем, не проверенной информации.

 

Года бегут, а у вас все так же однобоко... У нас "шитяковы", звездуны и ура-комьюнити, а у них объективность, правда и взвешенность, прям аки черное и белое:))

Отнюдь нет. Шарлатаны есть в каждой нации. Но у нас шарлатанство кое-где имеет государственный размах.

[DS]

Это не факт.

Я уже как-то проводил сравнения. Самолеты в пилотажных характеристиках примерно равны.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=42383

Примерно. :D

[GUMAR]

Вот статья из Air Force Montly про совместные маневры в Болгарии.

Вполне взвешенное мнение о самолете с его достоинствами и недостатками.

 

Вот мне почему-то эта статья показалась красочнее и ярче. Наверное потому что летчик описал свои feelings. Ощущения, что я там был. Так описать может только летчик. :thumbup:

[Scart]

для того чтобы приблизить характеристики Ф-16, участвовавших в упражнениях Рэд Флаг, к характеристикам МиГов, пришлось выкинуть из них всё, что только можно, и это только лишь чтобы приблизиться, а не превзойти. Но конечно это шарлатанство, разве имеют их специалисты какое либо понятие о том, что чтобы приблизиться по маневренным характеристикам к МиГам нужно что-то делать, кроме того, чтобы просто взять стандартный Ф-16.

 

З.Ы. В свете имеющейся у меня информации, я вполне склонен верить Харчевскому в том, что он висел на хвосте у Ф-15 на максимале, я даже склонен думать, что он вынужден был это делать чтобы не утратить позицию. Хотя ещё некоторое время назад я скорее склонялся, что это из разряда баек. Можно к "З.Ы." не аппелировать это чистое ИМХО.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Scart

[Chizh]

для того чтобы приблизить характеристики Ф-16, участвовавших в упражнениях Рэд Флаг, к характеристикам МиГов, пришлось выкинуть из них всё, что только можно, и это только лишь чтобы приблизиться, а не превзойти.

Откуда ты это взял?

 

Но конечно это шарлатанство, разве имеют их специалисты какое либо понятие о том, что чтобы приблизиться по маневренным характеристикам к МиГам нужно что-то делать, кроме того, чтобы просто взять стандартный Ф-16.

Не очень понятен смысл фразы.

[Scart]

Откуда ты это взял?

из открытых источников :)

например: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article22.html

или http://home.comcast.net/~keblair/f-16nvariant.htm

хотя мои сведения из других источников.

К сожалению, сам Локхид Мартин упорно умалчивает о наличии такой модификации и истории и предпосылках её появления - видимо не положительная реклама будет.

 

Не очень понятен смысл фразы.

да всё там понятно, просто ИМХО либо у меня паранойя, либо налицо некоторая предвзятость в оценках. Форум на то и есть чтобы истину выделить, а предвзятости и так везде уже полно - выше крыши просто. Edited May 25, 2010 by Scart