“Impeccable service”: India says goodbye to MiG-27 fighter

After a series of accidents, the Indian Air Force decided to finally decommission the MiG-27. The remaining fighters of this type are consolidated into a single squadron located in Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

According to representatives of the Air Force, this unit consisting of seven aircraft will make its last flight from the air base on December 27, after which they will all be decommissioned.

They will become history, since no other country now operates a MiG-27

- explained in the Air Force.

According to the local Livemint publication, which came out with "farewell" material, being acquired in the USSR in the 1980s, the aircraft proved its worth in various operations, including in Kargil:

The MiG-27 fighter-bomber, named “Bahadur” in India, has an impeccable track record for more than three decades of glorious combat patrol for the benefit of the nation.

It is emphasized that it has one of the most powerful engines, which ensured - together with a variable sweep wing - optimal flight characteristics.

On March 31, the MiG-27 crashed in the village of Sirohi in the state of Rajasthan, when he performed his usual mission, starting from his home base. On September 4, another plane crashed near Jodhpur, the crew remained miraculously alive, the newspaper writes. After these incidents, the Air Force decided to disable obsolete fighters.

Indian Air Force Hashimara Airbase, 10.02.2010/XNUMX/XNUMX

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

Mig-21 and 27 almost at the same time, the Indians were withdrawn from service, despite the fact that they consider the Mig-21 a dangerous machine for the pilot. All the same, the wing resource of variable geometry affects.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Mig-21 and 27 almost at the same time, the Indians were withdrawn from service, despite the fact that they consider the Mig-21 a dangerous machine for the pilot. All the same, the wing resource of variable geometry affects.

"geometry" has nothing to do with it, it's just that the term has passed by age. 27th managed to work in Afghanistan, an interesting article on this topic: http: //www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/afgan/mig27/mig27.html

[Vladimir_2U]

Well, as if the Mig-21 is older than the Mig-27, and the withdrawal time is about the same, 2019. For the article ATP.

[K-612-O]

MiG-21 was discontinued after 27, it is not so old. And the 27th controversial machine, difficult to pilot, came out as the 111th not to be a destroyer or a bomber, although the first used air-to-ground SD. Therefore, the workhorse was the Su-24

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: K-612-O

MiG-21 was discontinued after 27, it’s not so old

At first I did not understand, then I remembered about licensed production.

Quote: K-612-O

came out as the 111th

Compare the quite successful analogue of the Su-24, albeit with fighter capabilities and a single-engine aircraft like the F-16, you are very bent.

[K-612-O]

They are analogous in concept, both front-line bombers, with approximately equal combat load. Of the 23 fighter did not come out, made the FB-27th. 111th also came into the world. And the F-16 is a completely different level, with it we must compare our 29th.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: K-612-O

They are analogous in concept, both front-line bombers, with approximately equal combat load

You are of interest to compare the weight of the empty, before writing this, the difference is two times!

[TermNachTer]

As far as I remember, the F-111 was originally created as a fighter, not intercepted at all, such as the current stealth, and only then, when it did not go as a fighter, it was converted to FB-111, where it also did not show itself very well.

[tomket]

Quote: K-612-O

And the 27th controversial machine, difficult to pilot,

And what was her controversy? Well, the difficulty of piloting? Well, there are links, expert opinion)))

Quote: K-612-O

not up to the destroyer and not up to the bomber,

Nobody was going to sculpt the exterminator from it.
In general, the MiG-27 was a very advanced strike machine, which was written off not for its "ambiguity", but because Mikhail Sergeevich and Boris Nikolayevich made friends with wonderful people on the other side. And a large fleet of strike vehicles was no longer needed.

[tomket]

Quote: K-612-O

The 27th controversial machine, difficult to pilot, came out as the 111th not to be a destroyer or a bomber, although the first used air-to-ground SD.

Unfortunately, because of such a grief of commentators who write the gag, not even bothering to check what they write, some people who read comments may have an erroneous opinion about this aircraft. Before I write nonsense, I would recommend that you at least get acquainted with the reviews and opinions about the AirVar plane at least.

[Vodrak]

And instant 21, the variable sweep of the wing?

[Pecheneg]

It seems that in Kazakhstan the MiG 23 and 27 are still in storage.

[Pavel57]

The MiG-27 was the victim of a wing fashion with variable sweep. When it was developed, the designers were clear about the dead end of this path, but the military still did not.

[tomket]

Quote: Pavel57

When it was developed, the designers were clear about the dead end of this path, but the military still did not.

You can expand on in more detail what was clear to the designers there and what was not clear to the military. And then I'm in some confusion.

[Pavel57]

MiG-27 projects have been proposed several with different wings, chose this one.

[tomket]

Quote: Pavel57

MiG-27 projects have been proposed several with different wings, chose this one.

So what is the dead end, you did not explain.

[Pavel57]

Dead end wing with variable geometry. You do not understand why it appeared?

[tomket]

Quote: Pavel57

Dead end wing with variable geometry. You do not understand why it appeared?

It is clear to me why it appeared. It’s not clever for me that your stubborn thing is that the variable geometry is dead end, in the absence of any arguments. You give arguments, and repeat: dead end, dead end, dead end ...

[Pavel57]

The dialogue has lost its meaning. Read the wikipedia.

[tomket]

Quote: Pavel57

The dialogue has lost its meaning. Read the wikipedia.

As they reached the point of view, the dialogue lost its meaning. Well, of course, it was not originally in your comments. Excuse me, are you unable to voice your thoughts?

[Pavel57]

I don’t even know from what place you explain why you need a wing? Its properties in different flight modes and the task of combining the optimums in different modes?
And in the end, all the positive qualities of variable geometry can be achieved long ago using constant sweep and advanced mechanization. Variable geometry increases complexity - weight - cost - mining time. Fashion in the USSR led to the emergence of more aircraft with variable sweep. Projects at Mikoyan with a fixed sweep did not find a response among the military, but there were alternatives. Lucidly explained?