MiG-21. Where to look for the reasons for longevity?

120
MiG-21. Where to look for the reasons for longevity?

В stories Every company that designs and produces aircraft, with rare exceptions, will have models to be proud of. For the Mikoyan Design Bureau, this is definitely the MiG-21. The most popular and most purchased Soviet fighter, the service life of which in the air forces of some countries has exceeded 40 years of operation, and for some even more - 60.

In many countries, the MiG-21 today stands on pedestals, witnessing and directly participating in the first air victories. Vietnam, Algeria, India...



Here in India, where they recently celebrated 60 years since the purchase of the first batch of MiG-21 and where they gratefully ushered the plane into history, there are several monuments to the Soviet fighter. And it’s not just that the planes stand on pedestals; I’m sure, unlike many other countries, they will never be removed.

Why is that? But because victories are customary to perpetuate.

India received much-needed fighter jets just before one of the Indo-Pakistani wars. At that time, Pakistan, thanks to the “beautiful” division of Indian territory by Great Britain, was located in the east and west of India, and military conflicts were completely commonplace.


Yes, the army of old India at the time of partition did not represent anything interesting, but the sovereign countries that gained independence from Great Britain began to gradually increase their military potential. Pakistan relied on relations with the United States, and India began friendship with the Soviet Union.

The Americans very successfully introduced their “masterpiece” Lockheed F-104 “Starfighter” to Pakistan.


Before this, they no less successfully supplied the German Air Force with this flying misunderstanding, and the German pilots gave the aircraft the well-deserved nickname “Widowmaker.” In the United States itself, the F-104 was not welcomed; only two squadrons were armed with it. But this is far from the first case in world history when the leading countries of the world “shared” something that they did not need at all.

The F-104 was a modern aircraft, very fast and well armed. Its downside was its difficulty in control and the resulting accident rate.

When these aircraft appeared in the Pakistan Air Force, the Indian military realized that they had to respond with something. And this something became the MiG-21F. And, as it turned out, it was absolutely not in vain, because two years later the MiG-21s met with the Pakistani F-104s.


During the Second Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, Indian aviation shot down at least a couple of F-104s. If we judge objectively, this is how the Indians announced 11 shot down, but... we won’t. You can draw anything you want in reports, and modernity only proves this once again.

But the Third Indo-Pakistani war became a real triumph of the MiG-21. Pakistan really wanted, if not revenge (each country believed that it had won the Second War), then to put India in its place. And therefore, the military department purchased well not only F-104s, but also French Mirage-3s. Plus, as a bonus to the F-104, the Americans sold several of the most modern air combat control radars.

In general, the Pakistani Air Force was truly a “formidable force” and... and it all ended in simply a shameful defeat, because, having lost only one MiG-21, the Indians shot down 21 F-104s. The Starfighters lost all air battles in which they faced the MiG-21.


It is not surprising that after such a defeat, Pakistan donated all F-104s to Jordan. I would say - naturally, like “give to others, God, what is not good for you” or something like that. As a result, East Pakistan was given a long life, and the state of Bangladesh that appeared in its place is still alive and well.

And the MiG-21 became a symbol of the victory of the Indian Air Force in the skies of that war. And in general, it is not even surprising that the Indians formed such an attitude, which was expressed in the fact that the aircraft served until the last. Of course, modernizing from time to time. At the beginning of the XNUMXs, it was significantly “shook up” with the help of Israeli avionics and a set of new weapons. This modification was called “Bison” and fought in all Indo-Pakistani conflicts until recently.

And of course, the last combat milestone was the victory over the Pakistani F-16, that is, the second-generation fighter defeated the fourth-generation fighter. This happened in that memorable battle over Kashmir on February 27, 2019.


The battle, of course, was unique, the main merit in the results of the Indian pilot Abhinandan Varthaman, who attacked a numerically superior enemy (24 Pakistani aircraft against 8 Indian) and shot down a Pakistani F-16. True, the Indian MiG-21 was also shot down by the enemy using the JF-17 “Thunder”, this is the Pakistani name for the Chengdu FC-1 “Xiaolong” which... is a further development of the MiG-21! Or rather, its deepest modernization, carried out in China by local specialists.


An interesting picture: the MiG-21 and its descendant were being dismantled, while the Su-30 and F-16 were watching everything from the side. True, “Falcon” came under attack like that, but what can you do, battle is such a thing...

In general, the result is obvious, or rather, on the ground. Which once again proves the “timelessness” of the MiG-21 as an aircraft. Of course, there are planes that last even longer, but we won’t compare them now. Yes, we are talking about long-lived aircraft, which are strategic bombers such as the B-52 and Tu-95. But here’s the aspect: the strategist does not need to take off often to patrol and intercept targets; these planes are frankly saved for the day when their use becomes expedient. And a fighter is needed every day in war.

But what else can be said about the MiG-21, which was such an aircraft? “For every day” without breaks and weekends? After all, there are still a dozen, albeit not the most wealthy, countries such as the DPRK and Angola, where the MiG-21 is still operated? Eat. And note that we are talking specifically about the Soviet MiG-21, and not about its Chinese counterpart. Although the Chengdu FC-1 is also exported, although not as massively as it was with the MiG-21.

So what is the secret to longevity?


Many words have already been said on this topic, but they can all be summarized as follows: the MiG-21 is an extremely balanced aircraft.
The aircraft was developed almost immediately after the war, following the MiG-17 and MiG-19, precisely as a fighter with a delta wing, capable of reaching speeds twice the speed of sound. It so happened that the MiG-21 turned out to be not only very low-cost, but it was the cheapest supersonic fighter in the world to produce. Plus, the plane turned out to be very reliable and - extremely important for export - repairable.

World aviation experts believe that in terms of price/efficiency there has never been an equal to the MiG-21 and, most likely, there never will be. In general, Anatoly Brunov truly created a masterpiece.

But more than that, this masterpiece could be produced in the thousands. Structurally, the aircraft was not complex; on the contrary, the situation turned out to be where catching up and overtaking in terms of the number of aircraft being produced turned out to be as easy as shelling pears.

On one specialized forum I read an opinion: if the Third World War had broken out 50 years ago, somewhere in the early 70s, then the MiG-21 would definitely have conquered the skies over Europe, and this could have been done easily and naturally.

Of course, the NATO countries had good aircraft. The same American F-4, the French Mirage III mentioned above, the British Hunter. But their number could not be compared with the masses of MiG-21s that were produced at Soviet factories. “Phantom” - 5 thousand, “Mirage” - 1,5 thousand, “Hunter” - less than 2 thousand. MiG-21 - 11,5 thousand in 1970.


Yes, the NATO aircraft had every chance of running out before the industry of these countries would compensate for the losses. As it happened to Germany in 1944.

And they, American, British, French, cost an order of magnitude more than Soviet ones, or even more.

There were, of course, other types of aircraft, but it was the Phantoms and Mirages that the MiG-21 fought throughout Asia, Africa and the Middle East for almost thirty years. And, I must say, they looked more than worthy.

There is, however, one small aspect here. Our “respected” Western experts have done a titanic job in trying to belittle the merits of our aircraft. Of course, the Vietnamese pilots were inferior in training to the Americans, and the same Arabs were worse trained than the Jews. But if the MiG-21 had not been an outstanding aircraft, it would not have been adopted by 65 countries around the world, and would not have been produced under license by Czechoslovakia, China and India. Sorry, this is not an F-104.

It’s difficult to count how many military conflicts the MiG-21 took part in, because the MiG-21 pilots carried out combat missions without declaring war, like, for example, Chinese pilots shot down American reconnaissance vehicles, North Korean pilots sank a South Korean patrol ship without any war, and what was going on in Africa, we don't even know. We can simply say: those who were armed with the MiG-21, almost all used them for their intended purpose.


So, why did the MiG-21 serve for more than 60 years and what is its secret?

Naturally, there is no secret, or rather, it is not a secret at all. First, one more fact: the MiG-21 scored its first victory on August 18, 1962, 61 years ago. It was a Sea Hawk F.101 jet fighter of the 2nd squadron of the MFG.1 air wing of the Bundesmarine, which violated the airspace of the GDR in the area of ​​​​the East German city of Eisenach. At an altitude of 11 km and a speed of 850 km/h, it was intercepted by a Soviet MiG-21 fighter, and during an air battle the Sea Hawk was shot down by fire from the MiG cannons.

The last victory was the fight above on February 27, 2019. After 57 years. Of course, maybe something happened in Africa, but there is simply no data.

It is clear that these were completely different aircraft. The German of American origin was met by a 2nd generation fighter, without radar, armed with cannons and unguided projectiles. The Pakistani F-16 was equipped with a third or even fourth generation fighter, with a radar, with completely modern homing missiles (if they weren’t modern, the Falcon would definitely have gone away).

A fighter that was able to step into another generation is, of course, nonsense. But it's a fact.


1. Huge modernization potential, which was ensured by a very thoughtful design of the aircraft. And here it is not only the installation of radar and sighting systems, but the use of the aircraft as a whole. Conceived as a superiority fighter, the MiG-21 became an interceptor, a front-line fighter, and a fighter-bomber. In other words, the design of the aircraft ensured the flexibility of using the vehicle in combat conditions.

2. Maintainability. This is not subject to discussion at all; the aircraft is both simple and easy to repair. There are simply a mountain of memoirs on this topic, but the very fact that the MiG-21 served in the Air Forces of African countries speaks exclusively to the fact that the 21st is simple and reliable, like a Kalashnikov assault rifle, because it is worse operators of military equipment than gentlemen Africans there wasn't, there isn't and there never will be.

3. Performance. Here the MiG-21 is generally a masterpiece, since it could be used not only from concrete runways of civilized countries, but also from small, conditionally high-quality airfields, and it could also easily take off from unpaved runways. This is precisely what provided a wave of customers interested in purchasing from African countries, where everything with runways is very sad today, but what happened 70 years ago is hard to imagine.

“We took off like ducks from muddy fields” - this is also about the MiG-21 in Africa during the monsoon rains. Although in Asia it was no better. But they took off.

4. Control. There was order here. Good visibility from the cockpit, automatic regulation of the power system, maintaining the air temperature in the cabin (air conditioners appeared much later), a comfortable workplace with compactly located instruments - let's say this: if Arabs and Africans flew on the plane, and even did it effectively - this is chic an aircraft with very simple and reliable controls.


5. Accident rate. Here I will give an example. One fan of American aviation poked statistics at me at one of our aviation forums. They say, I’m writing nonsense and the F-104 has BETTER accident statistics than the MiG-21. Fewer Starfighters fought, which means he is better.

How many Starfighters were produced? 2 pieces. How many MiG-578s? 21.

Who flew the F-104? Pilots from Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Spain, Taiwan, Jordan, Pakistan and Turkey. Well, a little like the USA.

Who flew the MiG-21? Pilots from Algeria, Guinea, Bangladesh, Egypt, Zambia, Laos, Nigeria, Tanzania, Somalia, Uganda, India and so on.

By the way, especially India. Apparently, there is such a karma there, but when they say that the MiG-21 in India is considered a very dangerous aircraft, I want to ask (and asked) in response: what kind of aircraft is not considered emergency? I can say with authority: “Boeing 707”, owned by the country’s Ministry of Defense. He is alone and practically does not fly, apparently out of harm’s way. Everything else in the Indian Air Force was beating, falling and exploding, let's say, systematically. And the history of any aircraft in the Indian Air Force since the formation of this Air Force is the history of how this aircraft was destroyed in a variety of ways by Indian pilots.

But there were a lot of MiG-21s there, so they ruined the statistics. And the same is true in more exotic countries, not burdened with well-trained flight personnel. And to compare this camp with those who flew the F-104, where Pakistan does not fit into the general outline, to put it mildly, is unfair.

So the accident rate of the MiG-21 is not only less, but if only European and American pilots had been at the controls, it would have been zero. Well, this is an opinion, of course, but it is justified by the fact that the European school of flight personnel has more than a hundred years of history, but about the African school there are doubts about its existence. They teach it all over the world.

6. Armament.


It is clear that over 70 years the aircraft’s armament has changed, and changed a lot. From the initial set of two 30-mm NR-30 cannons and two blocks of 57-mm NURS to what, say, the MiG-21bis or MiG-21-93 “Bison” had:
- double-barreled 23-mm cannon GSh-23L;
- X-31A anti-ship missiles;
- R-27R1 medium-range air-to-air guided missiles;
- RVV-AE missile launcher with medium-range active radar seeker;
- R-60 melee missiles;
- anti-radar missiles Kh-25MP and Kh-31P;
- KAB-500KR laser-guided bombs
- free-falling bombs of caliber from 100 to 500 kg.
- unguided aircraft missiles S-5, S-8, S-13 and S-24.

The MiG-21bis is considered to be the third generation of aircraft, but with the MiG-21-93 there are already doubts about this. A very deep modernization of avionics and avionics by Israeli specialists made this aircraft, if not the fourth generation, then very close to it. Indeed, in combat terms, the MiG-21-93 is capable of:
- conduct all-aspect air combat at medium and short ranges;
- conduct highly maneuverable close combat using missiles with thermal seekers and a gun;
- intercept attack and reconnaissance aircraft and helicopters;
- conduct aerial reconnaissance using radar operating in the mode of terrain mapping and detection of radar-contrasting targets;
- hit both area and small-sized ground (sea) targets with unguided weapons and adjustable aerial bombs (KAB);
- combat naval targets and enemy radars using surface-to-air missiles.

So, what is the difference from the F-16? Only the latter has more modern longer-range missiles. Otherwise, the MiG-21 is no worse. A new weapons control system with a multifunctional radar "Spear", a helmet-mounted target designation system, information display equipment based on a modern indicator on the windshield and a multifunctional display.
This is the secret to an aircraft's longevity: the balance between capabilities and the costs of implementing those capabilities. Can the F-35 deliver a nuclear weapon from point A to point B? Of course, if point B is within the range of the aircraft. Can the Su-34 do this? Definitely. Question of delivery price. The MiG-21 can do this too. But somewhat cheaper.


This is just an example of opportunity and cost. Of course, no one will equip such an old aircraft with special ammunition, although from the point of view of military cunning, this is quite an option. Just as if this modernized version is capable of easily taking down a fourth-generation fighter - well, it’s simply wonderful.

Of course, in reality there can be no secrets to longevity. There were simply aircraft whose service life was very short (the same F-111, F-117, our Yak-23), and which did not leave such a noticeable mark on history as the MiG-21 and F-4. By the way, the eternal rival of our fighter in many wars is also still in service in several countries. And there is a place on the world map where both MiG-21 and F-4 serve wing to wing in the country’s army. This is North Korea. But the Phantom is generally a special conversation, although the plane is from the same cohort, from those times when they were made for years.

Of course, someone can seriously support the opinion voiced by one politician that in the USSR, apart from galoshes and blue chickens, nothing else was produced, but you yourself understand that this is not so. They knew how to design and produce not only galoshes. And the MiG-21 is one of the confirmations of the opposite thesis.

"Balalaika" was a very specific and original aircraft, but at the same time a very reliable weapon. Even the Indians admitted this, having smashed more than 60 of these aircraft over 200 years. That is, to some extent, experts on the MiG-21. And the way in which India saw off its MiGs into history only confirms our gratitude and high appreciation.

Yes, there are not many aircraft in the world whose service life has exceeded half a century. And there are actually three combat ones, and all from the same era: Mirage III, F-4 Phantom and MiG-21.

And at the end I would like to quote an excerpt from an interview with retired Lieutenant Colonel of the Indian Air Force Suren Tyagi.


Suren Tyagi, call sign "Vandal", has seen many types of aircraft in his 34 years of service. I hope his call sign doesn't mean that he changed them after the accidents. But nevertheless, the Vandal’s track record includes the De Havilland DH.100 “Vampire”, Hawker “Hunter”, SEPECAT “Jaguar”, “Mirage 2000”, Su-24, MiG-29 and MiG-21. The latter is quite natural, since for many years it was the main aircraft of the Indian Air Force.

Tyagi's flight time on the MiG-21 was 4 hours versus more than 900 hours on other types of aircraft.

We received the MiG-21 in 63. Initially, the first batch of MiG-21 for the Indian Air Force was created as a high-altitude interceptor. Compared to other airplanes I had previously flown, it had very good acceleration.

At first we were forbidden to do anything on it except sit in it, give full thrust and rush straight and upward. Climb it 22 km at a speed of Mach 2,1-2,2. At that moment I was happy to do it on the MiG-21, it was magical.

I was young then, and when I heard that a Soviet pilot flying a MiG-21 in 60 set a record by climbing 34 km, I said to myself - let's try. Of course, our planes were different, but I tried and crossed the 24 km mark.

However, at this altitude I experienced an engine stall at Mach 2,4 without slowing down. There was no resistance at all. I gave the handle away from me, I wanted to lower my nose, but I couldn’t do it.

At an altitude of about 27 km, the nose of the aircraft began to gradually descend. I hoped that in the end I would still be able to start the engine again.

Having reached an altitude of 10 km on a clear glide path, it was only there that I was able to start the engine. Fortunately, in those days we did not have a flight profile recording system, and no one found out about this crazy act of mine.

By 1967, the MiG-21 configuration for the Indian Air Force was slightly changed, and it was already capable of operating on the ground. It did not have a built-in cannon, but could carry an additional ventral fuel tank or an outboard container with two cannons.

Later, the built-in 23 mm double-barreled cannon finally appeared on our MiG-21MF and MiG-21MS, which later began to be built in India under license. And I want to note that this vehicle was universal, stable, very maneuverable and good both for air combat and for work on the ground.

The MiG-21 had a record combat radius. It could fly another 280 km after it had flown the fuel-allowed range. It was the best plane, especially when there was a need to violate instructions.

We often engaged in dogfights with the types of aircraft we had at our disposal.


It's smart to know what aircraft, both yours and the enemy's, are capable of. The MiG-21 won 6 out of 8 air battles against Jaguars and Mirages. Can you imagine it? It is my personal belief that in situations in which the pilot is responsible, where he is not assisted by various systems, combat effectiveness is limited by his capabilities and the capabilities of the aircraft. However, in general, it (the MiG-21 - note) did its job, and even very well.

The big advantage was that it had a delta-shaped wing with a span of 7,15 meters, combined with a small radar signature, which directly affected its low visibility to enemy radars. He was noticed when it was already very late.

Today, this aircraft is still on combat duty, and it is still in great demand. Of course, it already has more systems, avionics and displays. I can tell you with great confidence that the F-16, which was created in the 70s, was designed as a response to the MiG-21BIS.

The flight characteristics of the MiG-21bis, which it had in emergency afterburner mode, were superior to the American. At an altitude of 12 km, it made a 360-degree turn in 12,5 seconds, while the F-16 turns in just over 14.

Of course, you cannot maintain such a turn all the time, but with the proper level of training, the MiG-21bis against the F-16 is capable of turning the situation in its favor.

Today he has everything, including a helmet-mounted aiming system and a head-up display, to give anyone a good fight. Its radar with the Bison radar, developed specifically for our requirements, can track up to 8 targets simultaneously.

However, due to the limited number of air-to-air missiles, the MiG-21 cannot fight more than 2 modern opponents at the same time.

In the exercises that we conducted with American, French and British pilots during exercises in India, the potential of the MiG-21 was appreciated by them. Basically, the MiGs were cooler due to the fact that the “enemy” pilots noticed our planes too late. It is also worth considering the overall low cost of this machine.

The MiG-21, with a new radar, helmet-mounted target designation system and an autopilot system with improved stabilization that prevents surge when firing missiles, is still an excellent second-tier aircraft.


This is my opinion about the plane. These are the conclusions. However, everyone may have their own opinion on this matter, but 60 years in military service is an indicator that very few aircraft in the world can repeat.


There is only a moment"...
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -72
    29 December 2023 04: 30
    Looks like a flying pipe. I personally like 29 better, but it’s so old that I’m too lazy to even discuss it.
    1. +19
      29 December 2023 04: 51
      Quote from new.ad
      Looks like a flying pipe.

      I’ve been working on the trumpet all my life since 89, and before that I studied on it
      Wind tunnel T-1

      Wind tunnel parameters:

      Diameter of the working part - 1.007 m
      Working part length - 1.8 m
      Speed ​​range - 3.5 - 34 m/s
      Initial turbulence coefficient - 0.9%

      The T-1 wind tunnel was built in 1936 and underwent a major overhaul in 1992. The material from which the pipe is made is wood. An electric motor with a power of 12 kW is used as a power plant. A 4-blade propeller is used to create air flow. In the event of destruction of the model under study, the screw is protected from debris by a metal grill. The maximum size of the model under study is 0.5 x 0.5 m.

      In terms of its aerodynamic characteristics, the T-1 tube is currently one of the best in the Russian Federation among educational institutions.

      Supersonic wind tunnel T-3 (as part of the T-3 IAB-451 complex)

      The T-3 short-term wind tunnel consists of 60 air cylinders into which air is pumped with a pressure of 45-50 atmospheres, shut-off valves, a receiver and a flat Laval nozzle. The Laval nozzle has dimensions of 50x10 mm. The flow velocity at the nozzle exit reaches 1.8 M.
      1. +5
        29 December 2023 08: 48
        I’ve been working on the trumpet all my life since 89, and before that I studied on it
        Where is this, if not a secret? By the way, the IAB-451 can easily operate at 35 m/s if it is carefully configured. So you can drag it to T-1, it probably works better than T-3. drinks
        1. +2
          29 December 2023 09: 43
          Where is this, if not a secret?

          https://www.sgu.ru/structure/mechmath/kafmekm/labmikm
          IAB-451 can easily operate at 35 m/s

          Unfortunately, the space just doesn't allow it. There is a second device, but in a different place.
          1. +3
            29 December 2023 16: 13
            Notable office. You have a good optics course edited by Professor V.P. Ryabukho. As for the location, you can place the collimators of the lighting and receiving parts on one side, one above the other, and use flat mirrors on the other side. We did this on one installation. It’s just that a subsonic tube works much more often than a supersonic one, and for some reason the Tepler is used only at supersonic ones. Students will find it interesting.drinks
            1. +10
              30 December 2023 06: 03
              edited by Professor V.P. Ryabuho

              I see him about once a week, in the same building, we have half a basement.
              I love my job, mathematics, and I consider the Ministry of Education and Science to be traitors.
              Bring back the Soviet education system.
              https://new.sgu.ru/person/blinkov-yuriy-anatolevich
              1. +7
                30 December 2023 13: 40
                I consider the Ministry of Education and Science to be traitors
                Likewise. What is the current rector of MIPT D.V. worth? Livanov, who from 2012 to 2016 “led” the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation with well-known results. Now the results of his activities at MIPT are the same as at MAI under Pogosyan, who is already ready to sell the territory of MAI for development of buildings that are by no means educational.
              2. +2
                30 December 2023 17: 36
                I love my job, mathematics
                By the way, Yuri, why don’t you come to the OMIP conference (optical methods for studying flows) at MPEI in Moscow or to the KIMILA industry conference in Zhukovsky? True, they take place in odd years, the next ones will be in a year. And tell Ryabukho too, he should know about OMIP, it is a specialized optical one, I am a member of the organizing committee. KIMILA - about the methodology and technique of measurements in an aerodynamic experiment. We also have annual ones, in early March there will be one on aerodynamics. Write to me in a personal message, I’ll give you a link.
    2. +17
      29 December 2023 05: 03
      Then I was young and when I heard that a Soviet pilot on a MiG-21 in the 60th set a record by climbing 34 km
      ,Soviet test pilot Georgy Konstantinovich Mosolov on a lightweight version of the MiG-21F-13 fighter (under the code name “E-66”) with an accelerator installed under the fuselage - rocket engine SZ-20M5A liquid-propellant rocket engine rose to a height of 34 meters. Judging by the readings from the aircraft's instruments, Mosolov's fighter rose even higher - up to 714 meters.
      1. +15
        29 December 2023 08: 37
        Success has its reasons, and these are:

        Anatoly Grigorievich Brunov (1905-1972) - Soviet aircraft designer.
        Born in 1905 in the village of Obukhovo (now Noginsk district, Moscow region) in the family of a factory shop seller at a local flax spinning factory. There were thirteen children in the family. Anatoly was twelfth.

        This was his country. Now this is impossible.
        1. +15
          29 December 2023 21: 24
          Well, unlike one politician, I would like to say a huge thank you to the USSR for creating such a “galosh” that was able to effectively swat down many of its flying “opponents”! What fails is a politician who prefers to reach an agreement with his opponents.
          1. 0
            2 January 2024 13: 39
            That’s why they are trying to come to an agreement because there is nothing to force
    3. +15
      29 December 2023 05: 16
      You shouldn't be doing that. This plane is a legend. Thanks to Roman for his work!
      1. +19
        29 December 2023 11: 53
        Quote: Alien From
        You shouldn't be doing that. This plane is a legend.

        The plane, or rather the MiG-21 family, is truly legendary.
        Quote: Alien From
        Thanks to Roman for his work!

        You know, when I read Roman’s articles on air defense or aviation topics, I very often want to write an article “to catch up.”
        1. +2
          29 December 2023 12: 26
          Sergey! You have wonderful articles, now I’m studying about jet fighters of the Reich! I’m waiting, maybe you’ll master submarines too! hi
          1. +11
            29 December 2023 12: 38
            Thanks for the kind words!
            There should be a separate series about German submarines in particular and the fleet in general.
            As viewing statistics show, a review of the post-war use of German weapons and equipment is not interesting to the general reader. Also, not many will read about German boats and ships.
            1. +8
              29 December 2023 20: 45
              As viewing statistics show, a review of the post-war use of German weapons and equipment is not interesting to the general reader.

              The fact that “the general reader is not interested” is, in modern times, an indicator of the high level of the article.
              And for the “mass reader” there are the Ryabovs with the Mitrofanovs and others like them.
            2. 0
              2 January 2024 16: 53
              I personally read reviews. Not everything, but it worked for me.
        2. +6
          29 December 2023 14: 19
          You know, when I read Roman’s articles on air defense or aviation topics, I very often want to write an article “to catch up.”

          I will destroy it.
          1. +8
            29 December 2023 14: 55
            Quote: Dekabrist
            I will destroy it.

            I would like the authors to understand at least a little about what they are undertaking to write about.
            1. +8
              29 December 2023 15: 06
              I would like the authors to understand at least a little about what they are undertaking to write about.

              Today on the site the trend is completely opposite.
    4. +19
      29 December 2023 05: 38
      Quote from new.ad
      Looks like a flying pipe. I personally like 29 better, but it’s so old that I’m too lazy to even discuss it.

      The pilots of the 60s called the SU-7 a pipe. The plane is blown, and the pilot is blown.
      And we were very pleased with the MIG-21 aircraft! The MIG-21 is the stuff of legends, and many thanks to Roman for the interesting story about this plane!
      1. +4
        29 December 2023 07: 27
        Quote: your vsr 66-67
        Pilots of the 60s called the SU-7 a pipe

        Single-engine planes - they are all like a pipe! I also heard this - this is a large barrel of kerosene, on which a pilot sits astride... wink
        1. +3
          29 December 2023 16: 39
          Quote: your vsr 66-67
          Pilots of the 60s called the SU-7 a pipe
          If a Su-7 looks into the afterburner nozzle, it ends (the engine turbine blades are visible) in the area where the rear part of the wings is attached. That is, the afterburner has a length of almost a third of the aircraft body.
    5. 0
      29 December 2023 09: 47
      If we consider the MiG-21 as a deliverer of bombs and missiles, then it is still wonderful. I said this 10 years ago. Modern means of detecting and destroying air defenses have reduced the capabilities of aviation to the extreme.
      1. 0
        9 January 2024 21: 15
        By the way, it so happened that despite their aerial victories, the MiG-21 worked a lot on the ground and was quite successful
    6. +1
      29 December 2023 10: 36
      that it’s too lazy to even discuss.
      ******
      Your testosterone is lazy....
    7. +1
      29 December 2023 20: 13
      There are old things in your closet, dear. There is no need to express yourself this way in relation to a real air fighter and honored Air Force veteran.
  2. +4
    29 December 2023 04: 53
    An amazingly talented and erudite author, equally brilliantly versed in aviation, air defense systems and anything else in general, wrote another “unparalleled” article, for which of course we are endlessly grateful to him.
    And some of his thoughts are striking in depth, for example this: [quote][/quote]
    1. +1
      29 December 2023 23: 02
      He was best versed in Wagner, but the topic somehow died out...
  3. +3
    29 December 2023 04: 53
    An amazingly talented and erudite author, equally brilliantly versed in aviation, air defense systems and anything else in general, wrote another “unparalleled” article, for which of course we are endlessly grateful to him.
    And some of his thoughts are striking in depth, for example this:
    The most popular and most purchased Soviet fighter, the service life of which in the air forces of some countries has exceeded 40 years of operation, and for some even more - 60.

    The respected author seriously believes that aircraft built 60 years ago are still in operation, and the MiG-21F-13 is no different from the MiG-21bis?
    1. -2
      29 December 2023 09: 57
      Is the MiG-21F-13 no different from the MiG-21bis?

      Judging by this expression, are you sure that the Vietnamese Phantoms and those that still fly in Africa are also twins?
      Haha three times...
      1. +5
        29 December 2023 11: 54
        In which African country do Phantoms fly?
        Haha five times...
        1. 0
          2 January 2024 16: 38
          Phantoms are in Japan and fly quite a lot and will continue to fly for now.
          1. 0
            2 January 2024 16: 48
            Quote: Yellow bubble
            Phantoms are in Japan and fly quite a lot and will continue to fly for now.

            It's been a couple of years since the Japanese F-4Js have been taken out of service.
    2. +5
      29 December 2023 11: 59
      Quote: Tucan
      The respected author seriously believes that aircraft built 60 years ago are still in operation, and the MiG-21F-13 is no different from the MiG-21bis?

      The MiG-21F-13 was written off in Egypt in the early 90s. As for the differences, there is more in common between the Su-35S and Su-27P than between the MiG-21F-13 and MiG-21bis. The latest modifications of the 21st, with an outwardly similar airframe, differed from the earlier versions in almost everything: engines, avionics, weapons, fuel system and much more.
      1. -1
        29 December 2023 12: 49
        there is more in common between the Su-35S and Su-27P than between the MiG-21F-13 and MiG-21bis.

        And what do 35C and 27 have in common? They differ in the same way that you wrote for 21
        engines, avionics, weapons, fuel system and much more
        .
        In addition, within the framework of the fourth generation alone, a “small revolution” took place in terms of combat use for air combat, which never happened in previous generations. Su-35S and Su-27 are on opposite sides of that “revolution”! This is why I believe that all variants of the Mig-21 are essentially the same as a fighter!
        1. +2
          29 December 2023 13: 07
          Quote: Hexenmeister
          This is why I believe that all variants of the Mig-21 are essentially the same as a fighter!

          And you wonder how the weapons control system, other equipment and weapons of the first and last Soviet versions of the MiG-21 differed from each other.
          1. -3
            29 December 2023 13: 12
            And you ask,
            Also ask how the Su-35S SUV differs from the Su-27 SUV, then you will understand that all SUV options for the Mig-21 as a fighter are no different.
            1. +3
              29 December 2023 13: 14
              You sincerely amuse me, I worked in the weapons laboratory of KnAAPO in the past, and I understand a little what I’m talking about.
              1. 0
                29 December 2023 13: 36
                I used to work in the weapons laboratory of KnAAPO
                In this case, you are ashamed not to know that between the Su-35S and Su-27 the difference in detection range is 5 times, the possibility of attacking several air targets, instead of just one, and even without any secrecy in carrying out an attack, the range of azimuth angles is four times wider ! And why did the Mig-21 have such changes???
                1. +7
                  29 December 2023 14: 51
                  Quote: Hexenmeister
                  In this case, you are ashamed not to know that between the Su-35S and Su-27 the difference in detection range is 5 times...

                  Damn, do you really have anything to do with aviation? About 5 times you bent.
                  Quote: Hexenmeister
                  And why did the Mig-21 have such changes???

                  It seems that some people live in an information vacuum.
                  The MiG-21 had much more serious changes.
                  The first MiG-21F did not have radar at all and did not carry missile launchers. You can also compare the avionics and weapons of the MiG-21PF and MiG-21bis that appeared later; even for these vehicles the gap will be huge. The same applies to thrust-to-weight ratio. Essentially, these are fighters of different generations.
                  1. -1
                    29 December 2023 14: 54
                    About 5 times you bent
                    And why did he bend it? The detection range of the "Sword" is 80 km, the detection range of the "Irbis" is 400 km.
                    1. +1
                      29 December 2023 15: 10
                      Let's talk about real values?
                      1. -1
                        29 December 2023 15: 12
                        Let's! Let's start with the first figure, 80 km - will you refute it, obtained in tests?
                      2. +2
                        29 December 2023 15: 16
                        If you want to believe what you write about the Su-27P and Su-35S, I don’t dare argue with you.
                        Let's better compare the first and last Soviet modification of the MiG-21? You will still insist that
                        Quote: Hexenmeister
                        all variants of the Mig-21 are essentially the same thing, like a fighter!
                      3. -4
                        29 December 2023 16: 22
                        If you want to believe what you write
                        What does it mean to believe? This figure is from tests, and if you doubt it, then we can conclude that you live by “talks from smoking rooms”, and your “trump card from the laboratory” should know that this same figure, taking into account recalculation, was used for passing aircraft at the factory.
                        Now to the Mig-21, at the beginning there was nothing there, so tell us about the detection range of its radar, not just like that, but in comparison with others, just don’t forget to say that after the advent of fourth-generation technology, its fighter can could be considered only in the absence of this same fourth-generation technology as his opponent.
              2. +4
                29 December 2023 14: 40
                Olya, you can’t play trump cards right away. lol
      2. +6
        29 December 2023 14: 43
        The MiG-21F-13 was written off in Egypt in the early 90s.

        The last of the Egyptian Air Force's 38 McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantoms was replaced in 2019/2020 by the F-16C/D Block 52 (https://www.key.aero/article/why-egyptian-air-force-has- such-varied-fighter-fleet)
        So there really is no F-4E Phantom in Africa anymore. But in Greece, Iran, South Korea and Turkey there are still. But this is not Africa.
        1. +8
          29 December 2023 15: 06
          In fact, the Egyptian F-4E Phantoms stopped flying earlier. The Egyptian Air Force also lists the MiG-21PFM/MF, but in fact it is “real estate”.
          Quote: Dekabrist
          Greece, Iran, South Korea and Turkey still have them.

          In Iran, there may be individual copies maintained by heroic efforts in working order. In the Republic of Korea they were most likely written off. Only RF-4E reconnaissance aircraft remained in Greece and Turkey. And as you rightly noted, this is not Africa at all.
          1. +3
            29 December 2023 15: 08
            At your leisure, you will need to look at this issue in more detail. I was wondering if these planes were fully operational.
            1. +6
              29 December 2023 15: 21
              In the absence of a replacement, they are kept in service by reconnaissance aircraft, which even by modern standards have good equipment. F-4E fighter-bombers are, at best, “in storage.”
      3. +2
        30 December 2023 01: 22
        I was in Egypt in 2013, I saw with my own eyes the flying Chinese clones of the MiG-21, as far as I understand, their modifications of the F-13
  4. +2
    29 December 2023 05: 05
    60 years in military service

    Don't think that the car is frozen in the 60s. It has repeatedly and throughout its life undergone deep modernization, both for our Air Force and for its export versions, which in no way detracts from its performance characteristics
  5. +4
    29 December 2023 05: 14
    At the peak of mass production, the cost of the MiG-21 was equal to the cost of the BMP-1. And you can compare how much money they make on the Su-75
  6. +4
    29 December 2023 05: 43
    The MiG-21 can safely be called a legendary aircraft for its military merits and duration of service. This aircraft had enormous potential, and this is the merit of Soviet aircraft designers.
    1. +6
      29 December 2023 11: 30
      As one of the commanders of the wild geese in Africa said, the blacks there should not be given anything more complicated than a bolt-action rifle, because anything more complicated will definitely break it. Then he thought and added - well, except for Soviet equipment... They are too tough to break it...
      1. +2
        29 December 2023 12: 20
        He simply did not see our conscripts from Central Asian villages. The technical level is approximately the same. And there were problems with the Russian language.
      2. Alf
        +3
        29 December 2023 19: 56
        Quote: paul3390
        As one of the commanders of the wild geese in Africa said, the blacks there should not be given anything more complicated than a bolt-action rifle, because anything more complicated will definitely break it. Then he thought and added - well, except for Soviet equipment... They are too tough to break it...

        Not just “one of...”, but Bob Denard, “King of Mercenaries” and “Nightmare of Presidents,” a legendary figure.
  7. +5
    29 December 2023 05: 52
    Can the F-35 get from point A to point B? nuclear weapon? Of course, if point B is within the range of the aircraft. Can the Su-34 do this? Definitely. Question of delivery price. The MiG-21 can do this too. But somewhat cheaper.

    Great idea! “This thing is stronger than Brezhnev’s “The economy must be economical”.” I mean the economic effect of the A-bomb delivery plane model.
  8. Eug
    +2
    29 December 2023 05: 55
    I would also add to balance - concept. During development, it was not “overloaded” with difficult-to-comply requirements. And I’m not sure about taking off from the ground - more likely from metal perforated runways. An epoch-making aircraft...
    1. Alf
      +2
      29 December 2023 19: 57
      Quote: Eug
      During development, it was not “overloaded” with difficultly compatible requirements.

      This time the military managed to stop...
  9. +5
    29 December 2023 07: 21
    In Vietnam, it was the MiGs that forced the Americans to return the guns to their Phantoms! I read the memoirs of an American pilot. Of course, he lied a lot, but he expressed his tribute to Migu, saying that most of all they did not want to meet 21st in battle...
    1. -1
      29 December 2023 08: 27
      Especially if Li Si Tsing was at the MIG.
      1. +4
        29 December 2023 12: 07
        Quote: nesoglasen
        Especially if Li Si Tsing was at the MIG.

        Do you have reliable information about the participation of Soviet pilots in air battles in Vietnam?
        1. -2
          29 December 2023 17: 18
          You will not find reliable information. Familiar pilots told me.
        2. Alf
          0
          29 December 2023 20: 01
          Quote: Bongo
          Quote: nesoglasen
          Especially if Li Si Tsing was at the MIG.

          Do you have reliable information about the participation of Soviet pilots in air battles in Vietnam?

          I came across this.
          Officially, the USSR recognized the participation in hostilities only of its air defense specialists. However, representatives of other branches of the military also fought unofficially. Thus, already in the 2000s, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation began to publish calendars of memorable dates, according to which on April 4, 1965, Soviet fighter pilots flying MiG-17 aircraft “opened a combat account in the skies of Vietnam” by shooting down 2 American F-105 aircraft. Moreover, according to official Vietnamese data, this merit belongs to four local pilots, three of whom died that day, and the fourth was awarded the title of Hero of Vietnam. However, there were also cases when Soviet specialists sent to Asia for completely different purposes entered the battle. Thus, test pilot, Hero of the Soviet Union Vasily Kotlov was in Vietnam on a business trip to train local pilots. During a training flight on a MiG-21 with his Vietnamese student, he had to engage in battle with an American F-4 Phantom fighter that suddenly appeared in their sector, giving commands to the student over the intercom (it was forbidden to speak Russian on air). As a result, the enemy plane was shot down. For this, Kotlov was awarded the title “Honorary Citizen of Hanoi” and a certificate from the Vietnamese government. At the same time, they preferred to hide the incident from the Moscow command, since the pilot was threatened with punishment: he violated a strict order not to engage in battle under any pretext.

          Source: https://fishki.net/4221367-letchik-li-si-cyn-protiv-fantoma-kak-sssr-vyigral-vojnu-vo-vyetname.html © Fishki.net
    2. +9
      29 December 2023 08: 43
      In Vietnam, it was the MiGs that forced the Americans to return the guns to their Phantoms!
      Absolutely right, but not these MiGs, but MiG-17s, which operated from ambushes. The Mig-21 fired rockets, the Vietnamese cosmonaut Pham Tuan even managed to kill a B-52 with two rockets.
    3. +6
      29 December 2023 12: 06
      Quote: Magic Archer
      In Vietnam, it was the MiGs that forced the Americans to return the guns to their Phantoms! I read the memoirs of an American pilot. Of course, he lied a lot, but he expressed his tribute to Migu, saying that most of all they did not want to meet 21st in battle...


      Controversial statement. It may be a discovery for you, but in Vietnam, front-line MiG-21PF interceptors, which did not have cannon armament and carried only two R-3S missiles, were not drawn into maneuver battles. What the Americans feared most was not the MiG-21, but the MiG-19 armed with 30 mm cannons. Well, the light, although outdated by that time, MiG-17F with powerful cannon armament in close combat was also not an easy enemy.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  10. +4
    29 December 2023 07: 27
    The story of how an Indian shot down an F-21 on a Mig-16 does not inspire confidence.
    1. +1
      29 December 2023 09: 04
      But he shot it down. Mig 21 shot down a lot.
  11. +2
    29 December 2023 07: 57
    Thanks to the author: the MiG-21 aircraft is a masterpiece.
    1. -5
      29 December 2023 08: 30
      It would be modernized and a square-section fuselage would be made, plus a V-shaped tail, it would become completely inconspicuous, and then it is still small on the ground, it is easy to hide it in a shelter, unlike the Su family
  12. 0
    29 December 2023 08: 24
    Thanks for the insightful article. And there are always spiteful critics. But the dogs bark, and the caravan moves on.
    1. +2
      30 December 2023 02: 50
      nesoglasen
      Thanks for the sensible article.

      Did you want to thank me for the children's article? (designed for stupid children who haven’t read anything about the MiG-21?
      Minus one.
      Read something more in-depth
  13. +2
    29 December 2023 08: 40
    The F-104 was a modern aircraft, very fast and well armed. Its downside was its difficulty in control and the resulting accident rate.
    It would not be surprising if the radius of curvature of the leading edge of the wing was 2 mm. It went to supercritical angles instantly; pilots had to be recruited from circus performers.
  14. +5
    29 December 2023 08: 47
    In terms of longevity, the MiG-21 has every chance of catching up with the 31st and even surpassing it, taking into account the modernization and phenomenal strength of the airframe. But in terms of the combination of price - simplicity - efficiency - longevity, the 21st is unattainable.
  15. +2
    29 December 2023 08: 56
    Indeed, the plane is a legend.
    And most importantly, the successful concept and design made it so popular. Someone in the comments even said that one of the reasons for such success is that during the design it was not overloaded with requirements. It seems true, since the plane is incredibly simple. Single-engine delta-wing interceptor fighter! What could be simpler)?
    And the gigantic reserve for modernization made it almost an “eternal” aircraft.
    The MiG-21 is the living embodiment of the fact that the best fighters are simple and reliable fighters that simply carry out their mission.
    Attempts to pursue maximum, almost record, limits in design can of course lead to the creation of masterpieces such as the Su-35. But you can’t rely on such masterpieces for the army, and because of the price, on the contrary, sometimes it will be scary to send them to the front. But it is these simple and mass-produced aircraft that become the workhorses of war, and they are the ones who forge victory.
    But, this is the 21st century, and in the countries of the world the leadership of the countries is so confident that they are able to contain force issues within the framework of “local” conflicts, that for a long time the armies of the world have simply been flooded with “masterpieces”.
    those. very expensive, complex and complex weapons systems, which in the event of a major war will run out quite quickly. And as a result, if God forbid, a new global war begins, then its scenario will slightly repeat the First World War.
    During the first months/year, active combat operations will be conducted using all types of troops, and most importantly, with any equipment. And then everything will stall for many years, because such complex and expensive equipment will simply run out, and the industry will not be able to produce it faster than it is destroyed.
    1. +4
      29 December 2023 10: 48
      The key mistake (sabotage?) of the USSR Air Force and MiG was the refusal to develop the MiG-21 concept. The United States, on the contrary, realized all the potential and created the F-16 - the successor to the Mig-21 and completely alien to the concepts of American fighters.
      1. +5
        29 December 2023 11: 36
        The concept is really correct. The problem is not sabotage, but rather with the general military doctrine and vision of the military period of the late 60s, early 70s
        Where in aviation the main thing was the strategic air force, as part of the nuclear triad. And in the event of a non-nuclear conflict, the main force was built around ground forces, with aviation as support.

        While in the USA, even according to the work of the concept of “air dominance” founded by the Italians in the First World War, they relied on aviation as the main striking force of the army.

        In fact, in our military history, there were many moments when we created successful designs and weapon concepts, but due to military doctrine, this successful concept was already developed by other countries, including potential adversaries.

        We had a wonderful concept of simple and reliable fighters with powerful weapons.
        The MiG-17 and the MiG-21 can be called standards.
        But for some reason our military decided to completely abandon the concept of single-engine aircraft, thereby simply ruining an entire direction of development. And now, as practice shows, the mass production, simplicity and maintainability of single-engine aircraft have a greater positive price than having two engines.

        Even the presence of two engines does not increase reliability by 2 times. After all, firstly, the plane may be shot down, or will be forced to return to the airfield without damage to the engines, because the fuselage, fuel system or electronic equipment is severely damaged. Secondly, the very development of air defense missiles has made weapons much more effective. And now, if an air defense missile hits a twin-engine aircraft, then it has a greater chance than before and will damage both engines. In addition, 2 engines are good when creating a heavy fighter (such as our Su-27 and Su-30), since due to the dimensions of the aircraft, the engines are far enough away for the chance of redundancy to work. But on light fighters, 2 engines, simply due to the size of the aircraft, will be so close that most likely they can be easily hit by one missile/burst.

        So there is an urgent need to return to the concept of light, mass-produced and multifunctional single-engine fighters! At the same time, heavy twin-engine aircraft must remain (otherwise they will think that I am proposing to abandon heavy fighters altogether)
        1. +5
          29 December 2023 23: 30
          Quote: Mustachioed Kok
          Even the presence of two engines does not increase reliability by 2 times.

          It doesn't work that way. Airplanes don’t fight all the time, usually the other way around. A fighter can last for decades (the Mig-21 and Mirage III are still flying). During this time he flies thousands of hours. The chance that during these thousands of hours the engine will fail at least once is very high. The chance that two engines will fail at the same time is very small. Accordingly, where a twin-engine vehicle lands on the remaining engine, a single-engine vehicle will go with its snout into the ground. While the planes were equipped with imperfect, cracking engines from the 50s and 60s, this was a huge problem - widowmakers like the F-104 or Su-7 demonstrated a monstrous accident rate by today's standards, and the famous MiG-21 and Mirage III were only better than very Badly). Then Western engine builders achieved sufficient reliability by the time the F-16 and Mirage 2000 appeared, so that even for a single-engine vehicle, a crash due to engine failure became an acceptable rare accident. However, their Soviet colleagues had not achieved such success by the time the 4th generation aircraft were created (or the air force authorities had already formed a strong opinion about Soviet engine building). Therefore, new aircraft were immediately designed strictly as twin-engine aircraft, and then single-engine aircraft were simply withdrawn from service by directive. They blame Yeltsin’s hard times for this, but Yeltsin clearly did not understand such subtleties; the decision came from the Air Force command. Although it would be in vain, the MiG-27 would still serve.
      2. +2
        29 December 2023 12: 45
        What is the concept of the MiG-21 in your opinion? And how is the F-16 its successor?
      3. 0
        29 December 2023 23: 10
        Well, why, it fits perfectly into the F-5 concept.
    2. -1
      29 December 2023 10: 50
      What is the first world war? In the event of a global war, tactical nuclear strikes will be used very quickly, and there will most likely be an escalation to strategic ones.
  16. 0
    29 December 2023 09: 07
    . “Phantom” - 5 thousand, “Mirage” - 1,5 thousand, “Hunter” - less than 2 thousand. MiG-21 - 11,5 thousand in 1970.

    Excellent ratio. It's just a pity that now it's the other way around. Especially the fifth generation.

    . This is a gorgeous airplane with very simple and reliable controls.

    I heard that the MiG-21 was strict to control.
    1. +2
      29 December 2023 10: 25
      "...I heard that the MiG-21 was strict in control..."
      But I heard just the opposite. A neighbor, a summer resident and former military pilot, once said about the MIG-21: “Petya, put you on it and you’ll fly in a week..”.
    2. 0
      1 February 2024 10: 26
      In control, no, he forgave all mistakes, it’s just that the landing speed was high and required concentration, especially before the boundary layer blew off, maybe, of course, if compared with the F5, it’s stricter because there were slats and ATP. And turns, loops, half-loops, rolls were a pleasure to make)
  17. +10
    29 December 2023 10: 58
    Western countries produced a thousand aircraft each, we have ten. Delivered to dozens of countries. I just want to ask - where is the money, Zin? Where is the return on these supplies to the ordinary Soviet person? Well, okay, they couldn’t overwhelm us with cars, the countries there are poor. So maybe we were inundated with bananas, dried dates, colored Indian fabrics, tailored clothes, cosmetics, spices?
    This is how it turned out - that Vanka produced MiGs in a communal apartment, and the government gave them away for free, and even did not bother to take what they could give in return.
  18. +4
    29 December 2023 11: 07
    Significant weapons created in the USSR after the Second World War:
    MiG-15, MiG-21, AK-47, T-54, S-125, etc., many of these are still in service! Well, maybe the MiG/15 is retired.
    This isn’t about frying burgers, this is where genius and hard work come together...
  19. +8
    29 December 2023 11: 10
    During the Second Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, Indian aircraft shot down at least a pair of F-104s. If we judge objectively, this is how the Indians announced 11 shot down, but... we won’t.

    the author started objectively, but then switched to the Indian side of power :)))
    Having lost only one MiG-21, the Indians shot down 21 F-104s

    If we use not only Indian statements, then the sturgeon will have to be cut down - four were shot down and perhaps two more were damaged.
    About the F-16 allegedly shot down by a mustachioed fighter, this is outright myth-making. There was never any evidence of this.
  20. +1
    29 December 2023 11: 15
    The machine works and reveals its potential only to those who are worthy, know and understand what they are doing and for whom they are doing it. Like your other half is female. And it will protect you from death and help you in battle. The MiG-21 is a wonderful machine that may have no analogues. Yes, and the MAPO MIG design bureau promised to work for a long time, and it is possible that information leaks about the work of the bureau have not been heard to stop the work of which the adjacent design bureaus of Sukhoi, Yaovlev and others made a lot of effort, especially the Sukhoi design bureau. It’s a pity that there was a good design bureau whose staff moved to other specialized design bureaus recourse
  21. +1
    29 December 2023 11: 25
    Quote from cold wind
    The key mistake (sabotage?) of the USSR Air Force and MiG was the refusal to develop the MiG-21 concept. The United States, on the contrary, realized all the potential and created the F-16 - the successor to the Mig-21 and completely alien to the concepts of American fighters.

    Yes, there were projects to change the wing, but the military showed no interest in the light fighter.
    1. 0
      2 January 2024 01: 14
      By the way, the Chinese have completely implemented a similar project, creating the J-7E with a wing area larger than the base J-7 (Mig-21 clone) and variable sweep.
  22. +3
    29 December 2023 11: 28
    The article, which is generally good, has one mistake.

    The MiG-21bis is considered to be the third generation of aircraft, but with the MiG-21-93 there are already doubts about this. A very deep modernization of avionics and avionics by Israeli specialists made this aircraft, if not the fourth generation....
    Israel has nothing to do with the MiG-21-93. The author confuses it with the Romanian version of modernization.
  23. +1
    29 December 2023 12: 30
    Starting from the second half of the 60s, I became “sick” of aviation. The MiG-21 has since become my greatest love. Life was so bad that I didn’t become a pilot, but I carry this love throughout my life. I read Roman’s article with great interest and even jealousy.
    I liked it, thank you.
    The topic, MiG-21, is immense! You can add, supplement, argue endlessly. Just like the immense effect of the MiG-21. Glory to its creators, glory to the pilots, mechanics, and engineers of all times and peoples who worked with this wonderful machine, glory to the great country of the USSR, where this masterpiece appeared!
    Many thanks to the author of the article.
  24. +2
    29 December 2023 12: 43
    I think it’s that, having once been burned by milk (MiG-1, MiG-3), the MiG design bureau began to blow on the cow wink, i.e. stopped chasing record performance and, as a result, built a well-balanced aircraft with great modernization potential.
    1. +1
      27 January 2024 13: 52
      What's wrong with the MiG-3? An excellent interceptor, covered the skies of Moscow and beyond, 3200 units were released, ceiling 12 km, Max speed at high altitudes 620-645 km/h, intercepted any German bombers. Due to the necessity of the difficult years of 1941-42, I fought below. An example of quickly eliminating the shortcomings of the original model is the MiG-1, that one was damp, but the “third” is a different matter.
  25. +4
    29 December 2023 13: 18
    But if the MiG-21 had not been an outstanding aircraft, it would not have been adopted by 65 countries around the world, and would not have been produced under license by Czechoslovakia, China and India.


    Well, they were mainly supplied in the form of military aid; Indians and Finns bought them for real money. China actually copied it. To put it mildly, it is not entirely correct to evaluate the Mig-21, pointing out its prevalence.

    So, what is the difference from the F-16? Only the latter has more modern longer-range missiles.


    The Falcon has a wider range of weapons, an ideal cockpit canopy, a larger combat radius, a powerful PRNK, and a higher combat load. This is why it is a fourth generation aircraft.
    The Mig-21 is an excellent and iconic car, but let's not go to extremes, shall we?
  26. +5
    29 December 2023 15: 35
    MiG-21. Where to look for the reasons for longevity?
    Where? IN THE USSR. All the serial weapons that were produced there can all be used with success. And it is still in use. sad
  27. +3
    29 December 2023 16: 27
    The best detail is the one that doesn't exist.

    The MiG-21 is beautiful in its brevity.
    It looks like an engine nacelle with wings and tail, nothing more.
    And to admire all sorts of smooth contours and futuristic design is from the evil one.
    Of course, the majority here managed to come into contact with this plane in one way or another, someone trained on it, someone serviced it, so some bias is not excluded, but if it were as bad as the same F-104 "Flying Coffin" , there would be less tenderness in the memories.
  28. +2
    29 December 2023 17: 03
    Quote: Luminman
    Single-engine planes - they are all like a pipe!

    Nothing like that. If the MiG-21 looks like a pipe, then the F-16, Gripen or Rafal do not look like a pipe at all. But if you turn on the fool, then you can talk about twin-engine ones - two pipes ..
  29. +1
    29 December 2023 19: 23
    oh well, take the phrase out of context. The article is normal - but about the "galoshes" - at least they looked in full, there too ..
  30. +5
    30 December 2023 00: 26
    The article is, let's say, propaganda.

    MiG-21 is a good plane. But many of the advantages that the author attributes to it do not belong to the plane, but... to the Soviet Union. As, by the way, the Kalashnikov assault rifle. We have a superpower (one of two in the world) with a huge army, with a huge number of dependent and allied countries. It is logical that its light fighter (as well as its machine gun) will be produced in huge quantities and will end up in a variety of countries. And over many years the design will be brought to perfection, and production will be reduced to the limit, at least due to scale. Although it’s hard to believe that the MiG-21 is “more than an order of magnitude” cheaper than its analogues, such miracles do not happen in industry.

    Further, the MiG is always compared with competing aircraft strictly according to one parameter (efficiency in air combat). Forgetting that even Mirage and Draken, not to mention the Phantom, were also bombers (the same Mirage destroyed more planes at airfields than in dogfight). The MiG, although it initially carried suspensions for bombs and NURS, was always a disgusting striker.

    In air combat, the MiG did not have superiority over the Mirage. Particularly interesting are the battles of those years when missiles were almost useless and the outcome of the battle was decided by guns. Here we can compare not weapons, but the efficiency of the aircraft themselves. The aerodynamic design of the Mirage completely won on horizontal lines (if you see a Mirage, don’t make a turn), the MiG could only win on verticals, where the Mirage had the dead “Atar” (a last-ditch improved copy of the German Humo of the end of the war), not only did it not gave out normal power, so it began to choke in all modes more difficult than a calm horizontal flight.
  31. +3
    30 December 2023 01: 19
    And afftar I was struck to the core by the fact that the phantom and the MiG-21 in the DPRK, it turns out, are “wing to wing.” Did he write this himself?
  32. -1
    30 December 2023 02: 54
    Another children's article about "good Soviet ones" And "bad bourgeois"airplanes. I wonder, has afftar read anything about the MiG-21 at all? Or, apart from the yellow press, does he not read anything at all?
  33. 0
    30 December 2023 03: 22
    Listen, maybe we can all ask Skomorokhov not to write about airplanes anymore? A person suffers, wastes time, but it doesn’t work out! Maybe it’s better not to waste time on the keyboard, but to read monographs, of which there are many now?
  34. MSN
    +1
    30 December 2023 19: 46
    The F-104 was a modern aircraft, very fast and well armed. Its downside was its difficulty in control and the resulting accident rate.

    The accident rate of the F 104 was higher than that of its contemporaries in the US Air Force, but in relation to the article, the accident rate of 100 flight hours of the Miga-000 was comparable to the Starfighter, and the Su-21 was much higher - 7 LP per 56,5 thousand sorties . 100 times more than F 2.
  35. 0
    31 December 2023 14: 10
    For its time, the MiG-21 was an advanced aircraft, which, thanks to timely upgrades and good organization of the USSR Air Force, remained relevant for a long time. I don’t understand why the author of the material doesn’t consider it a masterpiece.
  36. 0
    31 December 2023 17: 17
    As a child, I lived in a military town in the Baltic States, so every other day the 21st flew nearby at supersonic speed, we got used to it, but the newcomers were really scared out of habit. wink
  37. +1
    1 January 2024 19: 27
    Not a bad article. But to compare with the Americans at the price of 1 piece is ridiculous. An ordinary experienced worker (vocational school 2 years + experience over 5 years) on an assembly line at an aircraft factory today earns about 90-150 thousand USD per year. Let's take the average number 110. After paying taxes (about 30%), he will have 77 thousand left. Divide by 12. We get 6,400 usd per month in hand.
    Today an engineer at VASO is offered 36 thousand rubles. Let it be 40. Divide by the rate of 90. We get 444 usd per month. Those. the salary of a worker in the USA is 14.5 times higher than the salary of an engineer in Russia.
    This is where the difference in the price of the aircraft comes from
  38. 0
    2 January 2024 08: 48
    An interesting article for the general development of horizons for those interested in aviation. I think it will also be interesting for children who are interested in technology. Experts will, of course, find many inaccuracies and controversial issues.
  39. 0
    5 January 2024 21: 08
    What the hell are you going to do. And Marzhetsky began posting good articles about buffoons. Interesting )
  40. 0
    7 January 2024 12: 51
    Explain to me why the Mig-21 is worse than modern fighters? Having AWACS behind it, it is no worse than the F-35. Those. Today the problem is not expensive super-fighters. Divide the functions of destruction and detection, transport and control between aircraft...
    Any platform can carry missiles. The problem is long-range detection and coordination of actions, battle management. And the shortcomings of the Mig-21 are compensated for by the same AWACS. Or a network of ground-based radars if there is high-quality communication.
    The desire to have omnipotent technology: be it a MIG or an armata, is due to the poverty of thinking of generals who do not know how to fight and want to get out of a situation at the expense of technology. But this is a dead end. Victory and the future do not belong to individual super-warriors, but to hordes of small rats.
    If super-wons are needed, then only to impart combat stability... Numerous rats win. Their role can be played by well-armed infantry, supported by a host of small and not so small drones, primarily artillery. Well, in aviation there are cheap missile carriers, including the Mig-21.
  41. 0
    7 January 2024 20: 43
    Quote from new.ad
    Looks like a flying pipe. I personally like 29 better, but it’s so old that I’m too lazy to even discuss it.

    Can your 29th boast of downed B-52s? Same thing... And the 21st destroyed several of these bombers, reliably destroyed them, the wreckage rests on Vietnamese soil.
  42. 0
    2 February 2024 19: 25
    I remember as a kid in the early 80s, when I was drawing military equipment, I always liked to draw the MIG-21 from airplanes. I considered him the most beautiful) but what is beauty? When there is nothing superfluous. It looks very harmonious. An example of elegance and simplicity. Then I had not yet seen either the MiG-29 or the Su-27. But still, I still consider it one of the most beautiful fighters in the history of aviation.
  43. 0
    28 February 2024 20: 28
    where - where... in the low cost of production and the entire life cycle of operation, and this is not to the detriment of the performance characteristics and performance characteristics of the system.
  44. 0
    6 March 2024 00: 34
    I always thought it was a beautiful and extremely successful aircraft.
  45. 0
    26 March 2024 06: 55
    The MiG-21 is outdated. Maybe? but not for sure. maybe there is???
    MiG-21. Maximum speed at altitude: 2230 km/h /up to 2499 km/h/
    F-16. Maximum speed at an altitude of 12200 m: 2178 km/h
    Su-30 /2 engines!!!/. Maximum speed at altitude: 2125 km/h
    Maybe it’s worth upgrading, with such speed and 1 engine?
    1. -1
      29 March 2024 21: 32
      The F-16's radar is twice as long-range as the MiG's.
      He has no chance of getting close to the enemy.
      1. +1
        30 March 2024 12: 30
        well, 1 Indian was honored. and even destroyed the F-16 of the Pakistani Air Force
        But we don’t upgrade or replace the Radar for the MiG-21?