Military Review

Fulcrum (MiG-29) vs Hornet

By the time of the tense Cold War finals at the end of the 1980, the Russian MiG-29 appeared as a symbol of the communist threat to NATO air superiority in Western Europe. Every American pilot trained to fight this Soviet aircraft. And so, there was a prospect of meeting them in the air and making the transcendent air battle a reality.

In America, millions of dollars and uncountable labor of specialists were spent on modeling the probable flight characteristics of the MiG-29 and the tactics of its actions using combat training units such as Top Gun and Red Flag. Global intelligence tools provided American squadrons with detailed information on MiG-29. These data were used to develop tactics of actions against the MiG-29 and its notorious missile with a thermal targeting head P-73 Archer.

The air combat missile P-37 Archer is used with a fantastic helmet-mounted sight, which will soon be installed on Western fighters. The ability of the full-range launch, together with incomplete data on the effectiveness of the pulse-Doppler radar MiG-29, further strengthened the legends about its deadliness.

FA-18C in the ranks of the MiG-29, a few years ago this could not even be imagined

However, the long existence of the MiG-29 in the threatening darkness behind the Iron Curtain came to an end in November 1989 after the fall of the Berlin Wall. During its leadership of the Warsaw Pact countries, the USSR armed several Communist East German bases with more than 100 MiG-29s. With the spread of democracy, which reached the highest point with the unification of Germany, the Russian MiG-29, along with hundreds of MiG-21 and Su-22, joined the Luftwaffe.

For the first time, the NATO Air Force received a legal opportunity to study in detail the MiG-29 and determine its characteristics, which until that time, Western experts could only guess. After the complete unification of the Luftwaffe, the squadron of the MiG-29 now consisted of German pilots trained by both the Soviet Union and the United States, who only resisted each other a year ago in defense of their divided homeland. This is a bizarre paradox, rich in controversy, but it continues to provide an unimaginable insight into what was previously one of the most seductive puzzles for America during the Cold War: the possibilities of Soviet advanced air power.

Fulcrum (MiG-29) vs Hornet

Wing to wing over germany

In the years following NATO’s receipt of these now-friendly MiG-29 squadrons, most of the secrets surrounding the aircraft were scattered. However, much of what has been learned is just raw technical data. Since the data alone cannot fully acquaint the pilots with the combat capabilities of the enemy, the NATO units Luftwaffe MiG-29 were more and more often used in training air battles with US Air Force aircraft deployed abroad.

During such exercises the planes flew against each other, as it would be in real combat. Within a few weeks, various options were worked out. During these battles, in which only real rockets and shells were not launched, invaluable experience was gained.

JG 73 has four combat training MiG-29UBs

The first and only squadron aviation fleet The United States took part in such exercises 82nd VFA. In September 1998, the Marauders, as the squadron is called, arrived at the former East German Air Force fighter base at Laage, a two-hour drive from Berlin on the Baltic coast.

VFA-82 made a non-stop flight from NAS Cecil Field to Jacksonville, Florida, which was made possible only by refueling in the air from tankers based in McGuire AFB.

With one quick roll, the nine most recent Boeing F / A-18 Hornet and 98 sailors, along with thousands of pounds of spare parts, successfully crossed the 6900 km to Laage. 1 squadron of the 73 th wing of the Luftwaffe, Major Tom Hahn Marauder, warmly met the commander of the 24 squadron quickly deployed the parking lot next to their German masters. After the XNUMX hours, pre-flight briefings were held and the first assignments began soon.

The Relic of the Cold War Era - Strengthened Aircraft Shelters

Up to ten flights per day were divided into three waves. This almost combat pace of departures was maintained for two weeks, testing the endurance and endurance of flight personnel.

Red and Blue designations, meaning attacking and defending side, alternated between naval pilots and Luftwaffe pilots in order to give an opportunity to demonstrate the full range of flight and tactical characteristics of each aircraft. Often, pilots retreated from the type of action they prescribed and changed their roles. However, in most cases, the American pilots were struck by the amount of off-boresite launch demonstrated by the P-73 with its helmet-mounted target designation system.

Several comparative demonstration flights were conducted in which MiG-29 and Hornet took part. When performing most of the tasks, the Luftwaffe pilots talked between themselves and the ground controller in Russian or German to prevent American pilots from intercepting their talks and not giving them an unfair advantage. After two weeks of intensive flight, the data was examined by both parties; Much of this is classified. However, such momentous meetings are planned not only to achieve strategic and tactical goals, but also for bilateral cultural exchanges, which also took place. Comparing their former opponents, both the Germans and their American colleagues discovered a universal community, shared by all the fighter pilots, the love of flying and the partnership. Today, watching how these high-class pilots work together, it’s hard to imagine that only a few years ago, they were preparing to kill each other.

Fights with MiGs
From the perspective of Lt. Joe Guerrein of VFA-18

Four MiGs are waiting for their next flight to Laage

After returning from a trip in April, 1998, VFA-82, under the command of Greg Nosal, decided to use a favorable turn in the training process in order to get the best opportunity to learn how to conduct air combat and ground attack. They trained until July 1998 in Langley AFB, VA, honing their air combat skills against the F-15 of the 1 th Fighter Wing. In August, the Marouders were practicing air target attacks at Puerto Rico. After returning, attention was again focused on air combat, as Marouders wanted to better prepare for training battles with German MiG-29 in the heart of former East Germany.

The Marouders flew in on their eight FA-18Cs and borrowed one double Hornet from the VFA-106 so that they could fly with the German pilots. At dusk 4 September, 1998, two US Air Force KC-10 tankers, accompanied by nine FA-18C, flew out of Florida in a ten-hour raid across the Atlantic. It took 10 refueling to fly to the east coast. After separation from tankers, Marouders became the first US Navy squadron to land at Laage base in Germany.

The MiG-29 pilot’s helmet sight manages its best weapons - air-to-air missile P-73 Archer.

The first thing that caught my eye after arriving at the airbase was that it was strengthened much more than the western ones and had ground-covered hangars for the MiGs, which were left from the Cold War era. When the pilots got out of the planes, they were warmly greeted by their German colleagues and invited to a party in their honor, where there was excellent food, drinks and warm conversations. Marouders arriving on Friday had the weekend ahead for acclimatization to a new time zone and for exploring the city of Rostock, however, the thoughts of all the pilots were only about the upcoming battles with real MiG-29.

September 7 hosted the first fight between Migami and Hornet. All pilots were anxiously awaiting the results of the first fights with MiGs. One by one, the pilots returning from the mission were surrounded by a crowd of comrades asking what they saw, what they did, what techniques worked, and what did not. Even the technicians asked the pilots if they won or not? A few days later, maneuvers began with the participation of mixed groups of aircraft: MiGs and Phantoms. It was very easy to work with the Luftwaffe pilots. They speak very good English and are very well prepared. Marouders focused on improving tactics and trying to find new tactics to fight MiGs. For the most part, the MiG's capabilities were as good as expected and it was a good way to learn how to counter them in future battles.

Patches of the 1 Squadron of the 73 Fighter Wing
Luftwaffe (Jagdgeschwader 73).

Marouders also had the opportunity to get to know Europe better. All officers and many privates traveled to Berlin during the weekend and visited historical places. Another part of the staff remained in Rostock, which prides itself on its restaurants and shops.

The technical team Marouder'ov did everything to maintain the technical condition of the aircraft away from home. With 18, on average, departures per day, staff worked hard to solve all problems, from minor ones to engine replacement. All pilots understand that without the VFA-82 maintenance team, these exercises could never have taken place. Also, Marouders cannot express enough gratitude to the technical personnel of the MiG-29 and F-4 squadrons, who have devoted a lot of effort and labor to helping their American colleagues.

But it all ended too quickly and the Marouders had to pack their things and go back home. And so, on September 18 1998, having spent the night in Mildenhall, England, VFA-82 made another throw across the ocean. The benefits in terms of international cooperation gained from this visit, the moral and tactical lessons were enormous. Marodeurs are confident that the lessons learned in Germany will help them prepare for any future conflict involving the MiG-29.

Our afterword

D. Sribny

The Luftwaffe is armed with the first-edition MiG-29 (Fulcrum-A) of the end of 70-s of the early 80-s. FA-18C - the latest modification of this aircraft of the end of the 80-s. According to the characteristics of the onboard equipment, the FA-18C is superior to the MiG-29, but in flight characteristics, the MiG-29, in turn, looks better than its opponent. Despite the fact that the MiG of this modification on 10 years older than the FA-18C, it turned out to be a difficult opponent for the American fighter.

Unfortunately, in this article the author does not provide any specific data on the results of training battles, but for some comments it is clear that the MiG-29 apparently had an advantage in fights with FA-18C.

For some clarification of the picture I will cite only one quote from the collection "Farnborough International 98" (Collection of the Society of British Aerospace Companies SBAC, dedicated to the 50 anniversary of the Farnborough Air Show), page 81: "For the Western Air Force it was a big shock when F-16 armed SIDEWINDER missiles (AIM-9M - DS) were compared in tests (apparently in the same Germany - DS) with MiG-29, armed with Р-73. From 50 fights against Р-73 AIM-9M won only one . Short-range training battles between F-15 with AIM-9M and MiG-29 with a helmet-sight and P-73 showed that MiG can capture targets in airspace are 30 times larger than F-15. "

In conclusion, I cite the comparative characteristics of the MiG-29 and FA-18C. Characteristics taken from Military Aircraft, Airlife, England, 1994.


MiG-29 Fulcrum-A


First flight 6.10.77 3.09.1986
Engines 2 x Klimov RD-33 8300 kgf afterburner 2 x F404-GE-402 7980 kgf afterburner
Swipe, m 11.36 12.31
Length m 17.32 (with LDPE) 17.07
Height, m 4.73 4.66
Wing area, m2 38.00 37.16
Empty weight, kg 10900 10455
Normal take-off weight, kg 15240 (fighter) 16652 (fighter)
  18500 (shock) 23541 (shock)
Maximum speed at high altitude 2445 km / h (2.3M) 1915 km / h (1.8M)
Rate of climb, m / min 19800 13715
Ceiling, m 17000 15240
Range 1500 km without PTB 740 km - combat radius
Cannon armament 1 30mm gun GSH-301 with 150 shells 1 20mm gun M61А1 with 570 shells
Max load 3000 kg 7031 kg
Air-to-air missiles P-60M, P-73, P-27 AIM-120, AIM-7, AIM-9
Radar station RP-29. Accompany to 10 targets, one shooting channel. Aerial target detection range - 100 km. Multimode digital pulse Doppler radar AN / APG-65 (73). Escort to 10 targets, mapping mode.
EDSU no Yes
Helmet Scope Yes no
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Krsk
    Krsk 9 February 2013 07: 47
    I did not understand something ... or missed? What is the article about?
    1. Kasym
      Kasym 9 February 2013 17: 03
      Hello everyone ! Alexei, I don’t remember something when amers criticized their planes! They have everything super - duper !!! So they will write that the MiG-29 butchered them to smithereens! It was after such fights that they decided to create the F-22 and F-35.
      I saw live the work of the MiG - 29 at the training ground during its service in the SA, though only for ground targets. And also, before the day of the Air Force (the third Sunday of August) or after, at the training ground, instructor pilots staged a real show with aerobatics. At the beginning of the shooting, and then (relieving) such tricks at low altitudes, probably so that we (Rukov. Flights - RP, his assistant and all the personnel serving the training ground) would be better visible. Do I have to talk with which faces we looked at all this ?! BEAUTY !!! It was the MiG - 29 that aroused my interest in aviation and I think for life!
      1. Windbreak
        Windbreak 9 February 2013 22: 54
        Quote: Kasym
        It was after such fights that they decided to create the F-22 and F-35
        They decided to create the F-22 back in the 80s and its prototype made its first flight in 1990. That is, long before these exercises
        1. Kasym
          Kasym 11 February 2013 12: 36
          Good afternoon, windbreak! But congressional funding was approved in the 90s. In my opinion, after the demonstrational training battles of the Su-27 in Top Gan.
          And so we have been working in this direction: MiG-1.44 and Su-47 (Golden Eagle).
          But the series did not go. Patzantre claimed that the F-35 had been in development since 2001. So there are opinions on this issue a wagon and a small trolley.
      2. Krapovy32
        Krapovy32 April 11 2013 13: 47
        Yeah, all the best they have laughing Accustomed to bullying his nose, and the F35 still does not normally fly.
    2. Lucky
      Lucky 9 February 2013 17: 07
      about airplanes!
  2. Fox
    Fox 9 February 2013 08: 34
    the point is that the mattresses were torn like a newspaper. Moreover, on old planes. Amers attempt to make a good face, with a bad game.
    1. scrack
      scrack 10 February 2013 00: 13
      It would always be like this - so that the amers could not catch up with us in everything
  3. Pon69
    Pon69 9 February 2013 08: 36
    With all the love of amers for PR and the praise of their capabilities in this article, in others, following the results of these and other exercises with the German MiGs, there is not even the slightest mention of the results of the exercises. Especially revealing is the description of the teachings with Indian Dryers.
    1. Grishka100watt
      Grishka100watt 9 February 2013 11: 03
      There are no results because there is nothing to brag about)
      1. xan
        xan 10 February 2013 02: 11
        I agree, otherwise the world would be shy
  4. papik09
    papik09 9 February 2013 09: 24
    Once again it is said that when the USSR collapsed, the EQUIPMENT was LEFT WEST !!! What is still not clear? Let them practice. And the fact that they still can’t beat the MiG-29 (or not catch up, choose for yourself which expression is better) is clear for a long time.
  5. duchy
    duchy 9 February 2013 09: 49
    Interesting article. + however. Our technology (1977 vs. 1986) even in such a recent past. I believe that the results of training battles were far from in favor of American technology. laughing Imagine what will be the air battle with MIGs and Sushki indices 30; 35? Yes with our pilots! I wish them to participate only in training, for fear of the enemy. Still, the world is better. I really want to understand the great-great-grandchildren.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 9 February 2013 15: 05
      Quote: duche
      Imagine what will be the air battle with MIGs and Sushki indices 30; 35? Yes with our pilots! I wish them to participate only in training, for fear of the enemy.

      Our drying is certainly good ... when they appear in the army. Amers have something to put up against them. Even the elderly F-15s and 16s are upgraded to the level of Su-30s. And the pilots have at least 2 times more air raids. So it's early you throw hats.
      1. kot11180
        kot11180 9 February 2013 21: 22
        Remember our argument about the R-73 missile? 30 - 1 in our favor
        1. patsantre
          patsantre 9 February 2013 21: 32
          I don’t remember the argument, maybe remind? And what kind of 30-1, I would like to know.
          1. kot11180
            kot11180 9 February 2013 23: 45
            even 50 - 1, water excerpt from the text - "For some clarification of the picture, I will give only one quote from the collection" Farnborough International 98 "(Collection of the Society of British Aerospace Companies SBAC, dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the Farnborough airshow), p. 81:" For Western The Air Force came as a big shock when the F-16 armed with SIDEWINDER missiles (AIM-9M - DS) was compared in tests (apparently in Germany - DS) with the MiG-29 armed with the R-73. AIM-50M won only one of 73 fights against P-9. "And we had a dispute with you about an article about the" Aggressors "squadron a couple of days ago.
            1. rolik
              rolik 10 February 2013 01: 16
              Quote: kot11180

              A very interesting article in the sense of avoiding answers to directly asked questions:
              September 7 hosted the first fight between Migami and Hornet. All pilots were anxiously awaiting the results of the first fights with MiGs. One by one, the pilots returning from the mission were surrounded by a crowd of comrades asking what they saw, what they did, what techniques worked, and what did not. Even the technicians asked the pilots if they won or not? A few days later, maneuvers began with the participation of mixed groups of aircraft: MiGs and Phantoms. It was very easy to work with the Luftwaffe pilots. They speak very good English and are very well prepared. Marouders focused on improving tactics and trying to find new tactics to fight MiGs. For the most part, the MiG's capabilities were as good as expected and it was a good way to learn how to counter them in future battles.
              And then silence. A typical evasion of the answer to the question posed, pretend to be a rag, crush your forehead on 33 teeth, and repeat as an ass - all about Kay guys. From this article, a simple conclusion is made that the Germans reddened the ass of the mattress mattresses fairly well.
              1. Odysseus
                Odysseus 10 February 2013 09: 41
                Actual results are usually not disclosed.
                The Swiss gave a little more information - according to them, Hornet had a slight advantage over 9-12 in the BVB and a big one in the DVB.
                As for the BVB, maybe they are cunning.
            2. patsantre
              patsantre 10 February 2013 11: 18
              I remembered that it was the BVB. I think it was not the advantage of the missiles that affected them, but the planes themselves, their maneuverability. It is interesting how such a battle would have ended if it had started from a maximum distance.
              1. Odysseus
                Odysseus 11 February 2013 01: 35
                Sorry. I'm interfering, for which planes? By the way, 49: 1 in BVB at F-16 and Mig-29 is an unconfirmed ancient button accordion. Mig-29 9-12 is really better than the first F-16s in BVB, but 49-1, alas, has not received confirmation.
            3. Mujahiddin777
              Mujahiddin777 11 February 2013 08: 21
              Yes, it’s true, here is a video, at 21-22 minutes
              1. Odysseus
                Odysseus 11 February 2013 19: 27
                Quote: Mujahiddin777

                Yes, it’s true, here is a video, at 21-22 minutes

                I would not like to upset you, but the television series "Impact Force" does not in any way confirm that this is true))
                Mig-29, of course, is very good in BVD, but 49-1 against F-16 the result is as unrealistic as the Chinese 13-1 J-10a against J-11b (upgraded Su-27) in the BVB.
          2. rolik
            rolik 10 February 2013 01: 11
            [quote = patsantre] patsantre [/ quot
            In that long-standing dispute, they proved to you that our missiles would be more interesting than Amer’s. That our missiles have excellent maneuverability. And in response, it was stubbornly said, without bringing any reliable facts, that Pinsky ... planes and missiles are cooler than all other missiles in the world.
            Hope refreshed memory)))))
            1. Odysseus
              Odysseus 10 February 2013 09: 49
              AIM-9X is much better than P-73, AIM-9M is not much))
              NATO did not like the R-73 itself. But the combination of the R-73 with the crest and maneuverability of the aircraft.
              In the event of a real war in the mid-80s, this would have had its effect. Since the F-16s were without medium-range missiles, the F-15 was small.
              1. kot11180
                kot11180 10 February 2013 14: 34
                Well, if AIM-9X, then R-73m, and still I don’t think ours is inferior for sure, especially AIM-9M
                1. Odysseus
                  Odysseus 11 February 2013 00: 51
                  The probability of defeat of the latest modification of the R-73 is almost equal to the AIM-9X, but only in the combat units of the latest modifications of the R-73 is not enough ......
                  Regarding the AIM-9M and P-73, a long-standing dispute, AIM-9M is more likely to lose, the angle of capture is less.
                  1. kot11180
                    kot11180 11 February 2013 02: 08
                    What about maneuverability? if there is data share, I will look with interest
                    1. Odysseus
                      Odysseus 11 February 2013 07: 52
                      The maneuverability of the P-73 is higher than that of the AIM-9M.
                      There is a lot of useful information on missiles here -Http: //
                      The truth is even more there is useless information smile
                      1. kot11180
                        kot11180 11 February 2013 10: 46
                        understood thanks
            2. patsantre
              patsantre 10 February 2013 11: 22
              Your comment here is not very relevant, in a long-standing dispute, as far as I remember, it was completely about other planes and missiles. And I, just, unlike you, confirmed my words with facts.
              Quote: rolik
              pins ... planes and missiles are cooler than all other missiles in the world.

              Let’s you not ascribe to me what I never said? You are not showing yourself in the best light.
              1. kot11180
                kot11180 10 February 2013 12: 38
                we are talking about other aircraft, but specifically about these missiles (by the way, about Mig-29 I wrote there anyway)
                1. patsantre
                  patsantre 10 February 2013 20: 32
                  You didn’t understand when I said about other planes, I didn’t answer you and it wasn’t about our dispute with you. I answered above. If you recall specifically our dispute, then you claimed that the amers have no analogues to the R-73 rocket and OLS, which is fundamentally wrong. So even if you do not raise the question of the reliability of those training battles and the objectivity of their program, and the MiGs really broke their opponents, this was done, first of all, due to the advantage of the MiG in maneuverability. Yes, and in general, we are not able to objectively judge by these fights, because we don’t know in what conditions they were held, what were the rules and how the battles took place, what strengths and weaknesses of the aircraft did not show themselves due to the actual conditions of the battles.
                  1. kot11180
                    kot11180 10 February 2013 21: 41
                    I think it's useless to argue, there are too many conventions, but still I will remain in my opinion - at least ours is not inferior
  6. e-froloff
    e-froloff 9 February 2013 10: 58
    Yes, they knew how to make planes in the USSR. It is a pity the country was ruined.
  7. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 9 February 2013 11: 06
    He put the article +, although 14 years have passed since its writing and much has changed.
  8. pechv
    pechv 9 February 2013 11: 12
    The results of the training - visiting restaurants, a trip to Berlin and moral satisfaction from communicating with colleagues. A little for such an expensive undertaking. The text simply yells about modest results for the Americans, the advantages of Russian technology, especially if it is in capable hands.
    The meaning of the report, which was prepared at the end of the competition, should be something like this: "Chief, the truncated is gone, we urgently need a wunderwaffle to fight the Russians." Okay - thought the chief - and his gaze settled on the children's album with the image of ancient dinosaurs.
    But that was another story ...
  9. spanchbob
    spanchbob 9 February 2013 11: 30
    Both the Mig-29 and the F-18 were adopted in 1983.
    f-18- deck fighter + attack aircraft
    You cannot put the range and the radius of action on one step, for example, the f-18 range of -2800km
    Mig-29 radar detection range is not 100km, but 70km
    1. washi
      washi 9 February 2013 16: 39
      consider modifications
    2. tomket
      tomket 9 February 2013 20: 29
      adopted in the modification f-18, in addition to the modifications themselves there are significant differences in the blocks, the 10 block, the 20 block, etc.
  10. Atrix
    Atrix 9 February 2013 11: 55
    And who told you that they are old? The exercises took place immediately after the reunification of Germany, and not yesterday.
    TRAFFIC 9 February 2013 13: 17
    On YouTube there is a film about these teachings, here is 1 part, there are 5 of them
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 9 February 2013 16: 21
      TRAFFIC, thanks for the video, but "Lipetsk battle" is a real training of our guys. Article +, old stuff, but between the lines an intelligent reader will understand what's what. Without touching on the catastrophic consequences of the collapse of the Union and the consequences of the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, I want to note that the MiG-29 is a fighter, what is needed, and the latest modifications of the aircraft systems, its weapons make it possible to be sure that it will be dangerous and troublesome to meet the MiG in a real air battle. And, of course, it is worth noting that a complete combat unit of any military aircraft It shows, only when using the aircraft in a single reconnaissance aviation complex, target designation, electronic warfare. In the absence of it, the Mig is rescued by the remarkable flight qualities of the 29th and the pilot's skill. Military pilots are required to fly as much as possible. The sky is their home - the rest is the lyrics.
      1. washi
        washi 9 February 2013 16: 57
        one on one we tear any, but. During the Second World War, the Germans established interaction between the types of aircraft, there were aircraft guides, air spotters, etc. We have everything again for 0000. Which of the infantry will be able to adjust the air raid, or at least artillery? As a result, we are back in the ass, unfortunately.
        1. Thunderbolt
          Thunderbolt 9 February 2013 18: 11
          washi, I understand your indignation and in many ways share it. Yesterday there was just a "branch" and I gave a link there, but my business is small, but the guys from "Hephaestus" are closely involved in this important issue. They helped "Buran" to take off, so competence is normal good
          ru-do-konca-goda.html # comment-id-903219 + for understanding the Archivicity of this task.
      2. TRAFFIC
        TRAFFIC 9 February 2013 17: 05
        Thank you. It would be interesting to see this fight on behalf of the MiG, and it seems like they say a draw, and this Su easily holds it in sight, it turns out that the MiGs also failed a couple of Sushki. Although in this video, Su vs Su also holds easily. winked

  12. Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk 9 February 2013 14: 14
    As the Mig-29 is praised, it’s straight gold, not a plane. But it’s not that a large number of MIGs were shot down that were not able to withstand the FKs.
    1. biglow
      biglow 9 February 2013 16: 35
      where were they shot down? when were they shot down and who were the pilots?
      1. Axel
        Axel 9 February 2013 20: 58
        Quote: biglow
        where were they shot down? when were they shot down and who were the pilots?

        Results of aerial combat MiG-29 with F-15 and F-16:
        During these wars and conflicts, a total of 15 MiG-16 fighters were destroyed by F-11 and F-29 fighters without loss on their part. (Just do not say that the pilots were not trained)
        1. tomket
          tomket 9 February 2013 23: 25
          if a crowd of gopniks will take you away from the gateway, it doesn’t mean that you are a bad person)
        2. Ivan_s
          Ivan_s 10 February 2013 14: 42
          The Yugoslav Air Force announced the destruction of two F-15C aircraft in aerial combat (this information was partly confirmed by video footage), an unobtrusive attack aircraft F-117A, as well as aircraft of other types (presumably "Tornado", F-16 and F / A-18C) ... In mid-May, representatives of the NATO Air Force announced that only three combat-ready MiG-29 fighters remained in the Yugoslav Air Force. However, regular air strikes on the Batainitsa airfield indicate that even single "moments" were the object of constant "headaches" of the NATO command.
    2. tomket
      tomket 9 February 2013 16: 43
      and nitsche that f-18 of the first was cut off in the war in Zavliv? moreover, compared with the fka-antediluvian Mig-25?
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 9 February 2013 20: 03
        The facts in the studio, tada and discuss: who was sitting and what controlled.
    3. carbofo
      carbofo 12 February 2013 10: 59
      Even the best aircraft against packs, has little chance of survival.
      I suppose you mean the war in Iraq, so with total air superiority and the presence of AWACS aircraft, and long-range missile launches, you can shoot fighters that are more suitable for close combat, in batches.
      This long-arm doctrine has already proved its effectiveness, but only with an overwhelming superiority in means and strength.
      What is equal strength and close combat, we know from 2008, the Georgians dirtied all the environs of Tskhinval with diarrhea.
  13. Aiviar
    Aiviar 9 February 2013 15: 23
    The MiG-29 is an extremely difficult enemy (to put it mildly) for any aircraft in service with NATO. And one can only say one more big thanks to Mr. Gorbachev for the fact that the aviators of the "probable enemy" were given the opportunity to study Soviet technology in all details to learn how to fight it. The Serbs could probably give him a "thank you" for this (albeit a small one, of course, in comparison with all his other "merits") in the most appropriate form.
    A comparison of the characteristics and training battles of the MiG-29 with NATO fighters was first carried out by the West Germans themselves and, although not very much, was written about this. Even Adolf Galland flew on it (the MiG was just the last aircraft on which it flew). The general conclusion was that even the highly qualified pilot on any NATO fighter had equal low chances in a battle against the MiG, even if the latter was flying the most ordinary drill pilot.
    Based on experience, they made sure that no "level playing field" would ever occur during meetings with MiGs over Yugoslavia. And still, the Serbs managed to win some victories.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 9 February 2013 16: 39
      Aiviar, 100% agree with you good .
    2. Corsair
      Corsair 10 February 2013 03: 43
      Even on the MiG, laying between the helm and the seat is important.
  14. washi
    washi 9 February 2013 16: 59
    It was not in vain that Gorbachev was given orders and medals in the west. He leaked everything he could. Nevertheless, there were still backlogs.
  15. Edgar
    Edgar 9 February 2013 17: 41
    the dignity of the MiG is greatly exaggerated. you can talk a lot about how maneuverable he is and generally super-duper, etc. etc., but he is not able to repeat the flight made by the hornets. not even because there is no such thing as refueling (and this is on the plane of the longest country in the world!), but because the engines are more gluttonous by 15% that way! its combat load is not only lower than the hornet, it is 2 times lower than that of the single-engine F-16. and only on later modifications did they bring it to 4500kg. Reb not in the first series was not even in the project - that is why on the later (and very small series) the Reb's equipment had to be placed in an actually overhead "hump" behind the cabin, so there was no place. the current MiG-35, which is positioned as a continuation of the 29th, in reality has a completely different glider (albeit similar)
    1. tomket
      tomket 9 February 2013 19: 21
      do you forget that the MiG 29 is a front-line fighter in the first place, tell me how many f-22 bombs it carries? further, the f-18 is deck-based, and not having a large supply of fuel on board, it is more likely to crash into the sea, about gluttony, compare the thrust-to-weight ratio MIGA and F-18, the last rate of climb, except as a miserable one, can not be called, .F-18 is primarily a universal vehicle for the fleet, it is both a fighter and a bomber and a refueling tanker and an electronic warplane performed by a growler, and his merit is primarily in the fact that he replaced the Vikings, corsairs, tomkets and intruders with provlers, as an air fighter, because of his versatility, he will most likely yield to all our fighters, such is the price for universality, confirmation-inability to stand up for himself in the Gulf War.
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 9 February 2013 20: 34
        Quote: tomket
        F-18 is primarily a universal vehicle for the fleet, it is both a fighter and a bomber and a tanker and an electronic warplane performed by a growler, and its merit is primarily that it replaced the Vikings, corsairs, tomkets and intruders with provlers,

        This is the F-18 E / F Super Hornet. Actually another plane.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 9 February 2013 20: 31
      Quote: Edgar

      MiG's merits are greatly exaggerated

      Not exaggerated, just people often judge an airplane regardless of the time and purpose of its creation.
      Mig-29 appeared in the early 80s (1983). It is a massive light front-line fighter for the global war (against NATO). Its task is to gain superiority in the air over the front line and in the immediate rear of the enemy, with the possibility of delivering a nuclear weapons strike.
      It was for these purposes, and at that time (1983), it was a brilliant aircraft. In the BVB at that time there were no equal to it, and the DVB a few F-15s could not have shot down all the Migs. The long range or magnitude of the load of the Mig-29 was unnecessary.
      The lack of electronic warfare equipment, of course, is a major flaw (although they were in the project), but the Su-27 and Mig-31 are also inherent in this flaw.
      P.S Here's what annoying in the article is the small frauds-MiG-29 and Hornet peers appeared in 1983. A Hornet modification C differs from A not in flight qualities, but in avionics and new missiles. That is, for BVB it doesn’t matter Hornet A, or Hornet S.A. in the F-18C DVB significantly exceeds the MiG-29, which the commentator preferred to remain silent about))
    3. Aiviar
      Aiviar 10 February 2013 17: 08
      And why would a MiG make such flights and even carry such an assortment of weapons and in comparable quantities with the Hornet? The enemy of the latter in its purpose can be considered approximately the Su-27. Many experts were very upset by his flight from Zhukovsky to Farnborough without refueling, and they were even more upset by the demonstration that he could. ...That was a long time ago.
      Returning to the MiG. Its "enemy" is the F-16. It has been argued that the F-16 is more maneuverable. I've seen aerobatic demonstrations of both. And take my word for it - the F-16 in comparison with the 29th is an "iron". "Boy" did not see - flights at different times at different shows. The pilots of both aircraft are demonstrators of the highest qualifications. The F-16 is older. But what does it matter if it is still the most massive NATO fighter in service?
      And by the way - about those tests of the MiG-29, which were carried out in Germany after the unification. Their results also caused a scandal in the Bundestag - not only did the MiG "wing like a bull to a sheep" in battle of any enemy available, it also surpassed in many articles and characteristics those that were laid down as design in the then developed Eurofighter ... There was a lot of noise - don't be too lazy to look.
      1. CAPILATUS
        CAPILATUS 12 February 2013 23: 44
        I like to read about cheers-patriotism :)
        If you sift the husk, the article says two things:
        1) the results of the battles were classified, from the article - "After two weeks of intensive flights, the data obtained were studied by both sides; much of this was classified", most likely the article was ripped off from somewhere, with a more accurate translation "classified".

        2) they talk about one clear advantage of the Miga, actually not even the Miga, but the combat system as such - the helmet-mounted target designation system. I think for this reason it’s at least incorrect to compare fighters.
        About the comparative REAL performance characteristics of aircraft - not a word. What is written in the table after the article - I think data with full tanks. Keeping in mind that Hornet as a deck should carry fuel much more than his land brother - I think the real data can be very different.

        About "iron" F-16
        Last summer I came across an article by a US Air Force combat pilot describing in detail his training battle between an F-16 and a MiG-29. The F-16 was in the "top" modification, the most suitable for air combat, in my opinion Block 61, MiG-29 data were not given, apparently one of the first.
        So, according to that pilot, the initial conditions for the battle were the same - height, speed, as well as the continuation of the battle after the first convergence. And according to him, the F-16 was a very toothy opponent. According to what was written, it looked something like this: after the first convergence, the immelman (half loop up) and converge again, then again the immelman. On the second immelman, the MiG-29 had a very small advantage. For the third immelman, both fighters already lacked energy. According to the pesatel on bends, fights were approximately equal (!). The request not to throw boots at me - for which I bought, for which I am selling. Plus, the MiG-29 smokes like a steam locomotive, plus it is larger than the F-16 - it is very easy to find that in real combat it does not add any pluses.

        Also read about the memories of a Soviet pilot that using the strengths of his MiG-23ML (!) Tore the MiG-29 like a hot-water bottle.
        I don’t know where the truth is here, and where we don’t quite, we probably won’t know until we get into the cab ourselves and sweat on overloads, but against this background the MiG-29 doesn’t look like such an uber, as is commonly believed.

        Reviews about Gorbach - to the point. The asshole leaked the advanced technologies of the Soviet Air Force, because before that in the United States they did not even think about creating a helmet-mounted STS
        1. voxpopuli
          voxpopuli 12 February 2013 23: 55
          "Reviews about Gorbach - to the point. I leaked the asshole the advanced technologies of the Soviet Air Force, because before that, the United States did not even think about creating a helmet-mounted control center"

          If my memory serves me at about the same time, did the Israelis develop DASH for Python?
          1. Aleks28
            Aleks28 13 February 2013 00: 10
            Here's the answer for you. But you can’t even suspect the discovery channel in sympathy for the Russians. As for the crest, they are only going to introduce it to NATO.
        2. carbofo
          carbofo 13 February 2013 12: 36
          2- In an air battle to untie the capture of the target from the course of the aircraft, this is a considerable achievement, now it is not necessary to catch the sight, it is enough that the target was not in the collimator, but simply in the field of view of the homing missile at the course angles.
          This helmet-mounted system allows you to do this, which gives a strong advantage in guiding missiles, and given that the Mig-29 is a very maneuverable aircraft, I think that launching a rocket at the first turn is quite real.
          And do not forget that the F-16 and Mig-29 are basically designed for the same purpose, so their capabilities are approximately the same.
  16. potomak8
    potomak8 9 February 2013 19: 31
    ours is definitely better
  17. Axel
    Axel 9 February 2013 20: 43
    The article is not about anything. How can you compare two different planes, the FA-18C is more of an attack bomber than a fighter
    Mig 29 VS F-16 will be more correct
    1. spanchbob
      spanchbob 10 February 2013 11: 29
      That's it! As Ch. MIG engineer (on the STAR channel) I don’t remember my last name: Mig-29 was created as an opponent of f16 and of the type f16. But the lack of a powerful engine and computer forced to abandon the single-engine scheme and the two-plane aerodynamic instability. Unlike f16, the Mig-29 has only one-plane
      1. kot11180
        kot11180 10 February 2013 15: 15
        One may ask, are you talking about aerodynamic instability as a specialist ?. Just as far as I know, the F16 is generally built using the classical aerodynamic scheme, but the Su-27 and Mig-29 are built according to the static instability scheme. But I could be wrong.
        1. spanchbob
          spanchbob 10 February 2013 15: 59
          F-16 is unstable both in the longitudinal and in the transverse plane and cannot fly without a computer. But this is precisely what gives speed when performing aerobatics. For example, visually compare the rotation speed along the longitudinal axis of the instant and f16. But if the computer crashes, the glider will fail, and the pilot will no longer help
          1. kot11180
            kot11180 10 February 2013 21: 47
            "F-16 is unstable both in the longitudinal and in the transverse plane and cannot fly without a computer" - all this exactly applies to the Su-27 and its EDSU (I won't tell you for a moment), due to this, the drying has super-maneuverability, and the F-16 Vset aki is built according to the classical scheme, and in terms of maneuverability it is significantly inferior to ours
            1. spanchbob
              spanchbob 10 February 2013 22: 33
              Su 27 is unstable only in one plane and can fly without a computer and its maneuverability only at low speeds. For example, "Cobra" is performed at speeds up to 400 km / h, according to Pugachev himself at -295 km / h.
              At higher speeds, it just crumbles. Take an interest in f16 and su27. A su-27 computer with the same power as f16 will have to weigh three times as much, which happened on the mi-28n (compare with the mass of the an-64). You understand, overweight ... If you want, you can find out for yourself, if you don’t want, then nobody will prove anything to you
              1. kot11180
                kot11180 10 February 2013 23: 03
                I don’t argue in electronics, we are inferior, but this does not affect the maneuverability of the su-27, but the question was different - the scheme with longitudinal instability in the su-72 and not in the f-16. (By the way, I read about twinkles in the Middle East wars - even 23bn with the F-16 maneuvered almost equally). We don’t need to prove anything, we are discussing.
                1. spanchbob
                  spanchbob 11 February 2013 12: 57
                  Yes, you're right here, we're just discussing. But "(by the way, I read about the moments in the Middle East wars - even the moment-23mld maneuvered with the F-16 practically on equal terms)" comparing the maneuverability of the moment23 and the f16 is not serious. The MiG-23 is a bullet, and the F-16 is the first aircraft created using an integrated circuit, and this very "electronics" allows it to fly with its two-plane aerodynamic instability. I read about it for a long time, sorry I don't remember where and I can't throw off the link. And I very much doubt that you will find a link about the fact that f16 is built according to the classical scheme (only maybe about f15)
                  1. cherkas.oe
                    cherkas.oe 11 February 2013 14: 50
                    Quote: spanchbob
                    I read about it for a long time, sorry I don’t remember where I can’t drop the link

                    Because the 16th does not have these qualities
                    1. spanchbob
                      spanchbob 11 February 2013 18: 53
                      You can throw off about the fact that f16 was created according to the classical scheme, I will be grateful to you, and I admit that I lied.
                  2. kot11180
                    kot11180 11 February 2013 15: 26
                    why is the "bullet", the bullets are the mig-21, su-7 and other aircraft of their generation, and the mig-23 of the next generation, and comparing the f-16 and the mig-23 is still quite serious, since they converged in real air battles, and the moment showed itself with dignity (with the next generation aircraft), mainly the failures of the Syrians in the moments were the reason for the poor organization of battles, and not the characteristics of the aircraft (for more details, see the article)
                    1. spanchbob
                      spanchbob 11 February 2013 19: 11
                      Indeed, here I was mistaken about the bullet. Nevertheless, comparing them is not serious. Because Mig23 limitedly maneuverable. And compare cars of different generations ...? If these machines could be compared, then at least half the price of $ 16, instantly 23 can now be sold.
                      1. kot11180
                        kot11180 11 February 2013 23: 22
                        to compare quite seriously, but I say - they really fought with each other and the moment proved quite worthy (with the next generation aircraft), how else to compare if not according to the results of real battles
                      2. spanchbob
                        spanchbob 12 February 2013 21: 05
                        And what are the results? See "Foreign Military Review" No. 8 1986. True, it only speaks about the longitudinal aerodynamic instability of Ф16 and about the integrated circuit of the layout and EDSU (without mechanical duplication, also for the first time in the world). True, I wrote to you about two-plane instability, but I used American sources. As soon as I find it, I'll throw it off.
                      3. spanchbob
                        spanchbob 12 February 2013 21: 43
               Здесь о поперечной аэродинамической неустойчивости ф16. " зарубежное военное обозрение" №8 1986 г о продольной неустойчивости. И каковы результаты реальных боев? Что то комментарии не прошли что ли?
                      4. kot11180
                        kot11180 14 February 2013 00: 00
                        Read here, ,, an interesting article
                      5. spanchbob
                        spanchbob 14 February 2013 21: 01
                        This interesting article, I’ll probably not read a priori a victory for an instant, Only whom to believe? Your word is against their word.
                      6. kot11180
                        kot11180 14 February 2013 21: 43
                        But why not, the victory is not in a jiffy, they just showed themselves worthily, but you don’t read the article in vain, it’s really interesting, those events are correctly described.
                      7. spanchbob
                        spanchbob 15 February 2013 18: 39
                        Well, do you agree that the f16 is aerodynamically unstable? Yes, many believe that the moment29 and su27 are more maneuverable than f16 in close combat. It may be so, but the amers believe that not. Let's leave the question open. But you must agree that modern battles are mostly fueled by missiles. And electronics solves everything - range of target detection, speed of target capture, only please read several Russian sources, and even in some explicit forgery
                      8. kot11180
                        kot11180 17 February 2013 02: 16
                        All the same, I do not agree, but Mig29 and Su27 and their modifications are less expensive than any aircraft, this is also recognized in the West. "But you have to agree that modern battles are mainly fueled by missiles" - 100% agree, but in this case the maneuverability of the aircraft is of great importance, of course, to a greater extent BVB, and at modern speeds the planes converge very quickly. "And electronics decides everything - target detection range, target acquisition speed "- again 100% agree, but our tiredness may be in size but not in capabilities (by the way, as an example - AFAR first appeared on our aircraft). In outline. I try to read wherever I find information. (I didn't minus)
  18. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 11 February 2013 14: 46
    Quote: spanchbob
    Take an interest in f16 and su27.

    A computer is needed for maneuvering at low speeds and supercritical angles of attack for the same longitudinal and transverse instability, which is absent in the 16th, therefore it cannot perform a "bell" or "cobra".
    1. spanchbob
      spanchbob 11 February 2013 19: 21
      Yes, for someone at low speeds. And you are right Western fighters of the 4th generation (incl-but) do not make "cobra" and they admit it. The Russians do this, but only at ultra-low speeds. And this is absolutely unsuitable in combat conditions - for a show.
    2. Airmax
      Airmax 21 May 2014 12: 40
      Some make cobra. I saw it myself - F-16 and F / A-18 can, albeit with difficulty, but they can !!!
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 11 February 2013 14: 39
    Quote: kot11180
    But I could be wrong.

    You are not mistaken.
    1. spanchbob
      spanchbob 11 February 2013 19: 27
      "You're not mistaken." You write so confidently as if you know everything for sure. If you want I will write that you are right, but this does not change the truth.
  • carbofo
    carbofo 13 February 2013 12: 39
    There were powerful engines, the su-27 engine would have completely pulled the moment29 alone, but taking into account our realities as well as climatic features, we prefer a twin-engine scheme.
    1. spanchbob
      spanchbob 13 February 2013 20: 21
      Where did you get this, or do you have difficulty arithmetic?
  • tuts
    tuts 9 February 2013 21: 46
    It is not clear what kind of tradition it is to leave your equipment on the adjacent territory. It seems that all decisions are made instantly without any coordination.
    1. vitya29111973
      vitya29111973 9 February 2013 23: 04
      Not your technique. The GDR paid a pretty big sum for it.
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 10 February 2013 00: 11
      Quote: tots

      It is not clear what kind of tradition it is to leave your equipment on the adjacent territory. It seems that all decisions are made instantly without any coordination.

      These are fighters of the GDR Air Force. But this does not reduce the guilt of Gorbachev and k, who betrayed the GDR.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 10 February 2013 15: 12
        Quote: Odyssey
        These are fighters of the GDR Air Force. But this does not reduce the guilt of Gorbachev and k, who betrayed the GDR.

        The GDR was the USSR's most loyal ally in the Warsaw Pact.
        And Gorbachev and Co. are certainly great syki.
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 11 February 2013 00: 57
          Quote: saturn.mmm
          And Gorbachev and Co. are certainly great syki.

          Traitors, betrayal in itself is foul, and the betrayal of the Communists (who must fight for a just society for all) is doubly foul.
          The leadership of the GDR fought against perestroika, but they did not have a chance against the joint actions of the USSR and the USA.
  • Axel
    Axel 9 February 2013 22: 42
    Quote: tots
    It is not clear what kind of tradition it is to leave your equipment on the adjacent territory. It seems that all decisions are made instantly without any coordination.

    Likely there was no money to drive to the union
  • xan
    xan 10 February 2013 02: 22
    beautiful plane, in my opinion more beautiful than SU 27
    Well, Western in general are some kind of clumsy
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 10 February 2013 11: 29
    As far as I remember, the Americans liked the R-73 very much, the only drawback was the long preparation time for the launch, but on Sidewinder 9X they achieved better characteristics. The most sad thing is that the US Air Force pilots have experience in joint exercises with the MiG-29, Su-27 and Su-30, they know their weaknesses and methods of counteraction, which can not be said about our pilots, for whom US planes are a mystery with many unknowns.
  • nnnnnn
    nnnnnn 10 February 2013 12: 15
    I talked with the French pilot, so his opinion about the capabilities of the MIG-29 was very high, they also practiced fights against the MIG-29 (Germans) in Canada in all battles, the result was 5 to one, the Canadians and the ovs had the same garbage .
  • saf34tewsdg
    saf34tewsdg 10 February 2013 12: 18
    Imagine, it turns out that our authorities have complete information about each of us. And now she has appeared on the Internet Very surprised and scared,
    my correspondence, addresses, phone numbers, even found my nude photo, I can’t even imagine from where. The good news is that the data can be deleted from the site, of course, I used it and I advise everyone not to hesitate
  • Alikovo
    Alikovo 11 February 2013 13: 08
    NATO aircraft are inferior to Russians in speed of maneuverability
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 11 February 2013 20: 25
      what, really?
  • Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt 11 February 2013 22: 31
    In the first photo, Mig 29 is very elegant, not a plane, but a soul!
  • Hunter 2-1
    Hunter 2-1 14 February 2013 19: 06
    All the same, the Mig-29 is much better than the Hornet. Russia always surpasses the USA, at least a little, but surpasses.
  • egeny patykov
    egeny patykov 27 November 2017 09: 08
    I read somewhere that a - 18 has an advantage over 29 in the possibility of using AMRAAM missiles in an instant there are none. and if there is a current "on paper" in fact in the troops they are not. and the table is interesting. 1500 am range and combat radius of 740. first no load in a straight line? and the second with a load and round-trip? by speed .maximum. the F - 18 has such a wing that it is not possible to develop a faster speed, but it is chosen taking into account that the speed of entering the battle is not maximum and the wing is made so taking into account the speed of entering the battle that contributes to better maneuverability at this speed. from the table it is not clear how many shooting channels f - 18