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

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.

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.

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 ?

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

Not too bad an article https://warisboring.com/a-russian-super-jet-flew-so-fast-it-blew-up-its-own-engines-15bc6fd0a8ca#.b6g4j15ug

Is this a photo recce version, hence all the stars?

Actually there were strike bomber versions of the MiG-25 and MiG-31....

Look up MiG-25RB...

My understanding was that the MiG-31 variant had a payload of 9 tons that consisted of 6 x 1,500kg bombs... four under the belly of the aircraft and one under each wing pylon.

These were dumb bombs released at mach 2.4 plus at altitude... accuracy was not great, but with the new Gefest & T packages for using unguided bombs it becomes a rather interesting potential capability...

Note special heat resistant FAB bombs were developed especially for these aircraft.

JohninMK wrote:Not too bad an article https://warisboring.com/a-russian-super-jet-flew-so-fast-it-blew-up-its-own-engines-15bc6fd0a8ca#.b6g4j15ug

Is this a photo recce version, hence all the stars?

Yes, a Mig-25RB, bort red "46"; you can see, in the nose, the cameras. This Mig-25RB, if i'm correctly reading, brings the name of "Valentin Sugrin", Hero of the Soviet Union (the red badge with the star, on the side of the air intake). The aircraft brings also the red banner of the Revolution's Guards, and almost 40 recon missions, (afaik) above all over the Cecenia. 47° indipendent regiment of the Guards. Voronez-Baltimore air base (or Monkegorsk?).
The Mig-25RB is very fast, and it has a slightly shorter wing, with specific tip-pods, afaik with ecm.

Look what i found Shatalovo Air Base

Someone posted it on twitter few days ago

nemrod wrote:Impacts of 30 mm of the gryasev-shipunov gsh-30-1's shells  belonging to the syrian Mig-29 on israeli airplanes affected during the raid of 10/02/2018

The article

impacts of 30 mm of the gryasev-shipunov gsh-30-1's shells  belonging to the syrian Mig-29 on israeli airplanes affected during the raid of 10/02/2018

The news of the day is amazing: three Israeli combat aircraft that participated in raids on Syrian military positions on February 10, 2018 were hit by automatic gunfire during an Air-Air combat with Mig-29 SMT Syrian.

Israeli military investigators found that one of the F-15s damaged during the raid had been hit by the Gryasev-Shipunov GSh-30-1 gun shells that specifically equipped the Mig-29.

The point of impact of the fragments of these shells were all behind the damaged Israeli F-15 and although no shells were lodged in the propulsion areas, the pilots had to eject very little time before the planned landing on a base in northern Israel.

This presupposes that the Syrian Mig-29 SMT (s) not only attempted to intercept the intruding airplanes but chased them so closely that it was possible to hit them with the cannons.

Similar shell fragments were found on the fuselages of two other fairly damaged F-16Is.

Anti-aircraft defense fired five Surface To Air missiles S-200 aka SA-5, SA-6 and the powerful SA-22 Greyhound aka Pantsir S-1 systems fire to deal with Israeli cruise missiles and fighter-bombers but it now appears very highly likely that Syrian Mig-29SMT interceptors participated in an Air Denial and Prosecution operation.

Syrian Mig-29 SMT have certainly hunted down the Israeli F-15s and F-16s to the heights of the Golan Heights. Israeli aircraft had, however, made an escape maneuver at great speed.

Confirmed reports in January of the mobilization of front-line Syrian aviation to deal with any new Israeli aggression have proven to be accurate.

This is the first time a Mig-29 SMT hits an F-15 gun in an Air to Air combat.

https://strategika51.wordpress.com/2018/02/18/des-impacts-dobus-30-mm-du-gryasev-shipunov-gsh-30-1-du-mig-29-sur-des-avions-israeliens-touches-lors-du-raid-du-10-02-2018/

Sorry for this translation, english is not my native tongue. I did all my possible. Thx for your understanding. Moreover the author of this article does have a very reliable informations. He never said what he did not know. He is a very reliable source.
The Mig-29 SMT proved to be very reliable design.

It's bullshit. I saw another article that said Israeli air force fired 4 pilots because of the downing of the f-16 and they said it appeared on israeli media while there was nothing in israeli media.

A mig behind a f-15, it touchs it with a 30 mm shell and the F-15 escape ??! That's bullshit. If it touched the F-15 it could have follow him and destroy him.

Would be interesting to see how they worked out that 30mm cannon shell holes in an Israeli aircraft automatically means it was hit by the 30mm cannon in a MiG-29SMT...

I mean Su-22s also have 30mm cannons...

Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when i'm 64?...  

The Beatles... another legend from the same era!  

But there are a lot more MiG-21´s left then Beatles. or

Just noticed this:

Bigger radar antenna provider better resolution and sensitivity. (I don't fully understand about the mechanism behind it, though).

On a normal radar there is one transmitter receiver and it directs a signal onto a large dish that reflects the signal out into the space in front of the aircraft... the signal goes out and hits things and bounces back... but not to the transmitter receiver... to the dish, which then reflects the return back to the transmitter receiver.

Very simply the bigger the dish the more angular data can be collected at a time. A 5cm by 5cm dish would make it like a laser searching the sky so the target would need to be pretty much exactly where the radar is pointing to be detected. The radar can use a narrow beam and only use a small area of the dish for tracking to get a high level of precision but for scanning or searching and wide beam is more valuable. Also if there are multiple objects close together a bigger dish means their return can be easier to distinguish from each other... offering better discrimination of targets.

If you don't understand that... how about compare it with a map.... the bigger the map the better the detail... the more information can be placed within a given area and the easier it is to tell things apart from one another...

Of course for modern AESA radars it means more transmit receive elements and therefore better coverage... if you have an LED torch with 6 beams at very close range all the beams combine and make a very bright light... but the greater the distance the more the beams spread out... as they have to cover more area and cover more distance their brightness dims. The angle the beam spreads at over distance will determine the angles each beam is set to so as the distance increases no gaps form between the beams, so the more elements you have the wider coverage of air space you can have at any given range...

Strength and width of beam wont change enormously over time so adding more elements is the easiest way to increase field of view and number of targets detected and engaged...

interesting site

pilots (indian air force) review of the mig-25

https://hushkit.net/2018/12/12/loneliness-at-mach-3-interview-with-a-mig-25-foxbat-pilot/

another on the mig-21

https://hushkit.net/2017/07/12/flying-fighting-in-the-mig-21-in-conversation-with-air-marshal-matheswaran/

5 000 liters tank fuel for mig-25.