Soviet era aircrafts used in some countries:

Hi all,

would be great to some peoples opinions on the following.

Some countries are still using old soviet era aircraft in varying roles from trainers to ground assault. The aircraft in particular that i am interested due to there age are: MIG 15 fagot, MIG 17 fresco, MIG 19 farmer, SU 17/20/22 fitter, and TU-16 badger bomber. I know that China produced a copy of the TU-16 called H-6 which is still in service in China and North Korea, and that the Syrian air force are using the SU 17/20/22 against rebels. the other 3 mig 15/17/19 are being used but North Korea and some African countries and also being used as trainers. But are they of any use (other than in the training role) in todays battles???

I personally believe that if the MIG's and SU aircraft are in reasonable shape that they would provide vaulable ground support for troops on the ground, and could also be used at destroying artillery units, distrupting supply lines and attacking transport aircraft aswell as helicopters (providng thay dont have anti aircraft missles). The TU-16 could still be used as a bomber providing the enemies anti air defences are weak, but could also be used in the following roles: transport, anti ship/submarine, recce/suveilance, int gathering, ECM, and a launch platform for cruise missles.

Any input would be great.

old planes are like old computers... they can still do the same job they used to do, but if you want to use a new camera or new piece of equipment with it you might find you have problems.

Also when something fails getting a new old part can sometimes be difficult or expensive.

For a poor third world country buying old Soviet aircraft might make sense if you can find some old Soviet pilots and ground crew who still remember how to service and fly the damn things.

Against poorly equipped enemies they should be fine but don't expect precision or highly capable air support.

If I was looking at my options for equipping a new air force I would be looking at something along the lines of a Mig-29M2 or Mig-29SMT or an Su-27SM that didn't have all the latest and bestest stuff and I would add to their capabilities with new cheap weapons like satellite guided bombs and TV and laser guided bombs and missiles for cheap standoff ground attack.

For dedicated ground support then the Su-25SM and Mi-28NE would be on my list too.

Another option would be Mig-AT or Yak-130 lead in fighter trainers for the training and light fighter and attack roles... with a couple of larger aircraft in a high low mix.

d_taddei2 wrote:Hi all,

would be great to some peoples opinions on the following.

Some countries are still using old soviet era aircraft in varying roles from trainers to ground assault. The aircraft in particular that i am interested due to there age are: MIG 15 fagot, MIG 17 fresco, MIG 19 farmer, SU 17/20/22 fitter, and TU-16 badger bomber. .... the TU-16 called H-6....

You quoted Mig 15/17/19 like TU-16 and chieftly SU- 7/17/20/22 , but it is strange you forgot the most famous soviet fighter -my favourite  -. Whad did you do with the MIG-21 ? Didn't he deserve to be mention again and again ?
Indian air force still use the Mig 21, they even modernized it with the help of russian engineers and called him Mig-21 Bison. In the recent exercise COPE India he overcame F-15 C. Just a reminder, syrian Mig 21 successfully downed several F-15 A in the end of the 70's. The Mig-21 is far to be obsolet, and far to be forgotten. I would be courious to see a dogfight opposing the Mig 21 vs SU PAKFA, and Mig-21 and F-22/35 it is possible to see big surprises.

Concerning the Mig-15/17/19 sincerly at the era of supersonic,- and the increasing, and worrying proliferation of SAM, as US criminals high responsibles wanted to provide them to terrorists gangs in Syria-, more than 60 years after their design, I doubt they still could play a role other than very good training aircraft, drone attack platform, electronic platform recognition.
The TU-16, could still play a role, as the B-52, with modern hypersonic cruise missiles, and electronic platform, or even a kind of new AWACS.
As the contemporary of Mig 21, SU-7 too, could play a role, as he is supersonic, he will have to be modernized too.

Hi thanks for the input, the reason i didnt include it was due to the high numbers still in service compared to the ones i listed. I am fan of the mig 21 and think its a great aircraft, and your right with the numerous upgrades now it can still be a threat in the air, and for forces who are on a budget it makes sense to upgrade existing ones.



You quoted Mig 15/17/19 like TU-16 and chieftly SU- 7/17/20/22 , but it is strange you forgot the most famous soviet fighter -my favourite  -. Whad did you do with the MIG-21 ? Didn't he deserve to be mention again and again ?
Indian air force still use the Mig 21, they even modernized it with the help of russian engineers and called him Mig-21 Bison. In the recent exercise COPE India he overcame F-15 C. Just a reminder, syrian Mig 21 successfully downed several F-15 A in the end of the 70's. The Mig-21 is far to be obsolet, and far to be forgotten. I would be courious to see a dogfight opposing the Mig 21 vs SU PAKFA, and Mig-21 and F-22/35 it is possible to see big surprises.

Concerning the Mig-15/17/19 sincerly at the era of supersonic,- and the increasing, and worrying proliferation of SAM, as US criminals high responsibles wanted to provide them to terrorists gangs in Syria-,  more than 60 years after their design,  I doubt they still could play a role other than very good training aircraft, drone attack platform, electronic platform recognition.
The TU-16, could still play a role, as the B-52, with modern hypersonic cruise missiles, and electronic platform, or even a kind of new AWACS.
As the contemporary of  Mig 21, SU-7 too, could play a role, as he is supersonic, he will have to be  modernized too.
[/quote]

The main problems with the Mig-21 were short range and relatively small payload.

It was a way for a third world nation to have a modern mach 2 fighter jet that was relatively simple and cheap to operate.

In terms of avionics it was basic, but if the goal was to show off then it was ideal.

A modern upgrade of a Mig-21 could be very interesting... it will never be a long range heavy fighter bomber, but it could be a Gripen on the cheap.

Give it wing cheek air intakes, put a full size decent radar on it and add two under wing pylons and two wing tip points for a total of 8 wing pylons and a belly pylon and you wouldn't need to increase its payload by much because modern accurate weapons don't need to be heavy.

Put a new RD-333 engine in there and bulk it up like a Mig-21SMT for extra fuel and fit it will brand new RVV-MD and RVV-SD missiles and give it a modern serf defence suite like President-M with radar jammers and DIRCMs and perhaps use wing tip pods (7 weapons pylons should be enough anyway).

thanks gary for the input, as always very good info, i dont suppose you the average cost for an average upgrade on the mig-21? just wondering if its worth while doing this considering its age, or would it be better to buy newer aircraft.

GarryB wrote:The main problems with the Mig-21 were short range and relatively small payload.

It was a way for a third world nation to have a modern mach 2 fighter jet that was relatively simple and cheap to operate.

In terms of avionics it was basic, but if the goal was to show off then it was ideal.

A modern upgrade of a Mig-21 could be very interesting... it will never be a long range heavy fighter bomber, but it could be a Gripen on the cheap.

Give it wing cheek air intakes, put a full size decent radar on it and add two under wing pylons and two wing tip points for a total of 8 wing pylons and a belly pylon and you wouldn't need to increase its payload by much because modern accurate weapons don't need to be heavy.

Put a new RD-333 engine in there and bulk it up like a Mig-21SMT for extra fuel and fit it will brand new RVV-MD and RVV-SD missiles and give it a modern serf defence suite like President-M with radar jammers and DIRCMs and perhaps use wing tip pods (7 weapons pylons should be enough anyway).

d_taddei2 wrote:thanks gary for the input, as always very good info, i dont suppose you the average cost for an average upgrade on the mig-21? just wondering if its worth while doing this considering its age, or would it be better to buy newer aircraft.

MiG-21's are too old and no new chasis was built in what? 30 years? So really, the airframe is going to go eventually and the upkeep costs would be too much. So purchasing a new jet, even if it is simply for the airframe, is much better now and for future than upgrading an old horse. That not to say though, the MiG-21BiS (as an example) is a great jet and proved itself, as much as Su-30MKI proved itself in the red flag exercises. It is just, the aircrafts airframe would cost a lot to upkeep.

Su-22's still have potential as great strike aircrafts, if given modern avionics.

I wonder if any upgraded MiG-23s were conceptualized to carry more modern weapons and electronics. The MiG-23MLD was quite capable for its time and would be a good modern day ligh fighter if it could carry an AESA radar guided A2G munitions and modern AAMs like the RVV-MD and RVV-SD.

BTW I'm still highly fascinated why there are so many nations today that still use the MiG-21bis yet no nation still uses the more capable MiG-23s.

MiG-23-98.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:I wonder if any upgraded MiG-23s were conceptualized to carry more modern weapons and electronics. The MiG-23MLD was quite capable for its time and would be a good modern day ligh fighter if it could carry an AESA radar guided A2G munitions and modern AAMs like the RVV-MD and RVV-SD.

BTW I'm still highly fascinated why there are so many nations today that still use the MiG-21bis yet no nation still uses the more capable MiG-23s.

Last I heard, is that MiG-23's were expensive to field and they were not in numbers in many airforces like the MiG-21 was. MiG-23 does indeed have a lot of potential and if Zhuk-A was offered with it, it could find a lot of homes. But, the aircrafts are old and everyone would rather have a jet with a new airframe, which is best imo.

The Mig-23 was an impressive performer when it came to acceleration, yet it had good range and handling thanks to its swing wing design.

The swing wing design however added complication and weight, so you don't see modern fighters with swing wings... they have more sophisticated wing designs that allow low take off speeds and high flight speeds.

The Mig-23-98 is probably the most sophisticated upgrade available which added R-77 and R-73 missiles and a self defence suite.

The problem with upgrades is how far do you go before it actually makes more sense just to buy a newer aircraft.

A Mig-29M2 is not super expensive and has plenty of future growth potential as well, while second hand Mig-29s are available with a modest SMT upgrade could give you the new plane you want with the features you want when you can afford them.

For a country that currently operates both Mig-23s and Mig-27s an upgrade to unify the design and allow fully multirole capability makes sense... but then a Mig-29SMT can also replace both aircraft with lower operational costs.

AFAIK, the only relatively recent MiG-23 upgrades were Angolan and Syrian MiG-23ML to a standard roughly similar to the MLD version in the early 2000's. The upgrade might have included some components from the MiG-23-98 project.

Hi all, was looking to get peoples view on the MI-2 helicopter. With UAV's now becoming more popular and with increasing abilities, does the MI-2 still have use? espiecally with many still in service or will its role get down graded like the Gazelle helicopter did in the British Army to be used to fly generals around?????? (the gazelle has now been totally withdrawn from UK forces). The MI-2 does have weapon capability but lacks armour and modern systems. I suppose it could still be used as an air ambulance. Someone on another forum some time ago suggested insertion of special forces, but i think this would be more suited to the HIND-35M given its armanent and armour aswell as night time capability and GLONASS.

any views welcome

The Mi-2 is largely used for recon now and light transport... both roles likely being replaced by Ka-52 and Ka-226T/Ka-62/Mi-34 etc.

The Mi-2 is still a useful helo, but as it was not made in the Soviet Union... it was only ever made in Poland, though cheap upgrades and servicing was offered by Russian companies to keep them operational.

hi garry, thanks for the input, i know Poland still produce it, i wasnt sure if they still used them as much considering you never really much about them and with UAV now becoming the prefered recce equipment and in some cases prefered weapon platform. DO you know of any operational history of the MI-2???????

I've flown on one.

Was young and really hated the experience lol.

TR1 wrote:I've flown on one.

Was young and really hated the experience lol.

lucky u wish i had a chance, ive only ever been on westland wessex, puma, lynx, chinook, all while i was serving, would prefer russian heli's.

Wow, that is quite the list.
I have never even been on good old Mi-8.

Mi-2, Yak-18T, Yak-52, An-2....I think that is it for the non-commercial guys. All @ Borki airport in Russia, where among other things the aerobatic team often trains.

TR1 wrote:Wow, that is quite the list.
I have never even been on good old Mi-8.

Mi-2, Yak-18T, Yak-52, An-2....I think that is it for the non-commercial guys. All @ Borki airport in Russia, where among other things the aerobatic team often trains.

AN-2 really like this would be great to fly on one. Would love to fly in a MI-24 HIND and a MI-26

I suspect many of the roles the Mi-2 performed are now being performed by ANSAT helos, the old Mi-2 was fairly manouverable for a helo and was used in at least one aerobatic flight team from memory.

Hi all.

With a announcement from Azerbaijan armed forces saying that they are to upgrade its MIG 25's comes as alittle surprise due to the age of the aircraft, and most recce roles now being carried out by drones/UAV's. I was wondering what peoples views are on the usefulness of the MIG 25 in both recce role and interceptor??? as MIG 31 and SU-27 Flankers, aswell as UAV's can carry out both roles. Does it makes sense to upgrade?

Another old time aircraft is the MIG 23 Flogger which is still in service with some countries and has had some upgrades, the last production models i believe were the MiG-23MLD Flogger-K. The aircraft is mostly in service with poorer nations like Cuba, North Korea, and African countries, they are also still in service in decent numbers in Syria. But does this age old aircraft still have a use of should it be put to bed and more modern aircraft be bought or maybe even an upgrade???? and views or info would be great.

Theres the Mig-23-98 upgrade that makes it carry better missiles and radar but unfortunately it hasn't seen any commercial popularity.

Theres the Mig-23-98 upgrade that makes it carry better missiles and radar but unfortunately it hasn't seen any commercial popularity.

I suspect the main thing that killed the upgrades of older model Soviet aircraft was that many were not taken up by the Russians themselves.

Most nations that operate Mig-23s could increase their performance by applying varying upgrades with different financial costs and operational benefits, but at the end of the day it would often be much cheaper just to buy an old model simple Mig-29 with a very basic upgrade and in maybe 5 or ten years time apply a more substantial upgrade to them to make them comparable to a Mig-29M. In ten years time the technology will be cheaper yet they will likely be upgraded to something that is fully multirole and apart from the lack of stealth be fully capable of doing anything a modern western fighter could do... especially if they buy new model deadly air to air missiles with them like the R-74 and improved model R-77s.

The recon Mig-25 is still in service in Russia AFAIK because it is a cheap and simple SR-71. Not as fast as an SR-71 but fast enough and with side looking sensors can fly along borders and look over from international air space and cover large areas very quickly.

An upgrade would make it cheaper and simpler to operate as well as improve performance.

The US had a few problems dealing with Iraqi Mig-25s simply because of their speed.

It is important to remember that while modern fighters have labels that say mach 2.3 or mach 2.4 the vast majority of such fighters will never reach such speeds in their operational life times.

The Mig-25 and Mig-31 routinely fly at top speeds because of their missions of recce an interceptor respectively.

Upgrading the old model planes makes sense if you have a lot still in service and already have the infrastructure and trained personel to operate them.


If I was buying new I would go with a simplified Mig-29M with the intention of applying upgrades later on to Mig-35 level.

Equipping them with modern capable missiles is very expensive and it is where I would spend most of my money.

It makes more sense having a fleet of 150 Mig-29Ms with the best missiles money can buy than a fleet of Mig-35s and second rate missiles or AAMs only because you spent the budget on the aircraft themselves.

Hi thanks for the replies. I never knew about the MIG 23-98 upgrade.

I am a bit of a fan of the MIG 29SMT, SU 30MK, and SU 25SM, aircraft.  I think these would be great aircraft to have in any force and would cover the the needs/roles without breaking the bank too much. And as for the SU 25 SM theres a decent number in service that could be upgraded, these could also be be backed up with MI-35 to give ground forces a great deal of support. the MIG 29SMT and SU 30MK would cover the other fixed wing roles. SU-27 would be nice but this could be pushing it a bit.

anyway back to the topic.

Your right gary, older aircraft with some upgrades, and some really upto date missles and you have deadly airforce, without splashing out on expensive new aircraft, maintenance, maintenance equipment, and a whole new training package on flying and how to maintain, as well as new spares.

As for the MIG 25, i understand that the Russians have upgraded ones to MIG 25RB which can be used for bombing as well as recce and interceptor, (correct me if i am wrong). But are mostly used for recce roles.

But how does the the MIG 25 compare to a modern interceptor role??? can it still be usefull in this role???

I think as far as drones go, they have there uses, but i think the MIG-25 has more advantages than the normal drones out there, faster speed being one. But are drones cheaper to operate/maintain and of course u still have to buy them.

another aircraft worthly of mentioning that is an old soviet bird thats still in service is the SU-22 fitter, still in service in decent numbers with Syria, Poland, Vietnam, Yemen, and Angola. This has had numerous upgrades over the years and that the Polish airforce plan to keep around 16 of theres intil 2026 as attack aircraft, pretty impressive considering the age of the aircraft.

Considering, that there are still sales of upgraded and modernized F-5 and Kfirs, modernized Mig-23 could still get a market in poorer states. Mig-23 MLD were produced in eighties up to 1984 and retired in nineties, when Russia decided to use only twin engined planes, so they have less than 10 years of active use and still better airframe conditions than worn out Kfirs, which were active for decades. There are still enough spare engines for them with 0 hours. With new radar and ESM equipment it could still work well for poorer countries.

I think MiG and RuAF could better market them to countries, which could not buy Mig-29SMT or Su-30.