Military Review

MiGs on the cheap does not happen

110



For the past two years, Hungary has been trying to sell its 24 MiG-29 without much success. Now she is going to put them up for auction with an additional engine for the initial price of $ 21 million with the 43. Bets are accepted until 14 June 2013 of the year, and if no one is interested, they are ready to put the aircraft at an even lower price. Previous efforts to find buyers were unsuccessful, and it is believed that the reason for the high price. Less than $ 2 million for every MiG looks like a real discount. Appearance, however, can be deceiving.

Hungary received 28 MiG-29 in 1993 year as a return to Russia’s debt in the amount of $ 800 million. This came out to about $ 29 million per aircraft, each of which remained in service for about 14 years. However, Hungary decided that the aircraft was expensive to maintain. However, half of them were repaired in order to extend their service life. In the meantime, two aircraft were lost in disasters, and those that were not repaired were currently being dismantled for replacement parts. Hungary removed its MiG-29 from service and purchased the Swedish Gripen. These are excellent fighters both easier and cheaper to operate.



But not everyone is tired of the MiG-29. Although many countries (Algeria, Hungary, Malaysia) refuse or write off MiG-29, Syria, for example, is very keen to get them. This is because the Syrian economy is destroyed, and its patron Iran is becoming less generous with military equipment subsidies (due to its own economic problems, including additional sanctions). In 2010, Russia announced the sale of another 24 (or more) MiG-29 to Syria (which already has about fifty MiG-29 in service). Syria would also like to upgrade the MiG-29 in its armament, but it is not able to afford it. Supply and modernization were frozen until the end of the civil war in Syria.

Other countries abandon the MiG-29 because of problems with reliability and durability. Several times last year in Russia, MiG-29 flights were banned due to accidents and concerns about the existence of some fundamental flaw in the design. In the end, the ban on flights was lifted. This was not conducive to sales, and most foreign customers prefer large Su-27 (and its variant Su-30).

MiG-29 entered service with the USSR in 1983, in response to the American F-16. Approximately 1600 MiG-29 was produced, with the majority (about 900) being exported. The largest customer was India, which received its first MiG-29 in the 1986 year, while deliveries continued in the 1990's. A twenty-ton aircraft is in fact roughly comparable to the F-16, largely depends on the version of the aircraft being compared. Then the notorious problems of reliability began. Compared with Western aircraft such as the F-16, the MiG-29 is about a third less available for use.
Originator:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/articles/20130528.aspx
110 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 1 June 2013 09: 33 New
    23
    Somehow the author is not expressive - he tries to say a lot, but somehow he doesn’t agree ...
    1. Quartermaster
      Quartermaster 1 June 2013 10: 39 New
      44
      Yes, the article itself is anti-Russian, the author is trying to convey that these planes are no good, it’s better to buy western flying buckets.
      1. astra
        astra 1 June 2013 11: 55 New
        10
        I can’t wait until we start releasing Mig-31 interceptors? Then I read somewhere that they are going to cut Migi - 31? !! what for? these are unique planes, cutting them is simply a betrayal and a crime.
        1. Rink
          Rink 1 June 2013 12: 11 New
          18
          ... Syria would also like to upgrade the MiG-29s in its arsenal, but it is not able to afford it. Supply and modernization were frozen until after the civil war in Syria. ...

          But I am surprised by this position of Russian functionaries from the defense industry.
          A spoon is expensive for dinner, and weapons are bought just for warfare.
          If Russian weapons then, when they are needed, turn out to be inaccessible, and they can be used only in peacetime - what for such supplies of weapons are needed at all ?!
          It is as if America froze the supply of lendlise to the USSR until the end of World War II. "Now the war is over, then we'll talk about what weapons and how much to sell to you!"
          So what? !!
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 1 June 2013 12: 42 New
            -44
            Quote: Skating rink

            So what? !!

            not so sure. But Lend-Lease was free aid due to the fact that Germany was a strategic threat to the United States. And Russia is selling its weapons to Syria, because the military-industrial complex needs to pay its production and pay salaries to people. Well, Syria can make orders only by receiving a gift from Iran, because Syria does not have its money.
            1. Borat
              Borat 1 June 2013 13: 37 New
              29
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              land lease was gratuitous help

              Post-war gold payments for "gratuitous" aid were a gesture of gratitude from the USSR and allies ?!
              1. pogis
                pogis 1 June 2013 15: 10 New
                -8
                For land-lease, we still owe it!
              2. freedmen
                freedmen 1 June 2013 15: 22 New
                +5
                Yes of course. Do not tell tales !!!
                That is still gold-bearing bulk carriers are still looking for in the Baltic. And by the way, these dry cargo ships and the Britons cruiser with gold on board, the Germans were sunk.
                1. a
                  a 1 June 2013 15: 57 New
                  11
                  Quote: freedmen
                  Yes of course. Do not tell tales !!!
                  That is still gold-bearing bulk carriers are still looking for in the Baltic. And by the way, these dry cargo ships and the Britons cruiser with gold on board, the Germans were sunk.


                  Gold for the supply of equipment was exported to the British cruiser Edinburgh of their Murmansk (or Arkhangelsk), but not the Baltic.
                  The cruiser was sunk by the Germans. As far as I remember, he was found in the late 80s. Gold was raised and divided in proportions of 3 to 1. 3 parts were taken by the USSR and one part was taken by Britain. Something else of gold went to the western firm, which lifted the cargo and the sunken Edinburgh. Gold was distributed in such a proportion because it was in that proportion that cargo insurance was carried out.
                2. old man54
                  old man54 1 June 2013 19: 04 New
                  +4
                  Quote: freedmen
                  Yes of course. Do not tell tales !!!
                  That is still gold-bearing bulk carriers are still looking for in the Baltic. And by the way, these dry cargo ships and the Britons cruiser with gold on board, the Germans were sunk.

                  Oh how !? :)) Well, on the map, please tell us how it is across the Baltic Sea, and even through the Danish straits, completely controlled by the Germans all 2-th MV until April 1945, we carried GOLD to the amers for LandLiz, by sea, yes still on NK! Funny !!
                  And that sending gold from Murmansk to Zdinburg was not the only one, but they don’t like to talk about the rest, and this will of fate was “advertised” by the Germans, or rather, K. Dönitz’s submariners ..
                3. pogis
                  pogis 2 June 2013 09: 07 New
                  0
                  http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B4-%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7
              3. Kazanok
                Kazanok 1 June 2013 16: 24 New
                -17
                how much you can write .. Lend-Lease was free .. everything that was left was paid only ...
                1. stranik72
                  stranik72 1 June 2013 22: 14 New
                  +8
                  YOU ARE PERFECTLY RIGHT UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF LL:
                  1. Only military equipment / materials or dual-use supplied
                  2. Everything supplied within the framework of LL should be used for war with the enemy
                  3. Lost during fights and expended "for its intended purpose" is not payable
                  4. Remaining after the war is subject to return to the owner or payment.
                  According to the Americans, Lend-Lease brought considerable benefits to the United States. “By deliveries from the USSR,” said former US Secretary of Commerce J. Jones, “we not only returned our money, but also made a profit, which was far from a special case in trade relations regulated by our government bodies.” Lend-lease turned out to be a source of enrichment for American monopolies.
              4. old man54
                old man54 1 June 2013 18: 58 New
                +7
                Quote: Borat
                Post-war gold payments for "gratuitous" aid were a gesture of gratitude from the USSR and allies ?!

                why post-war payments? During the Second World War, we, the USSR, paid gold to Jews from the USA! What did you forget? read how it was.
            2. freedmen
              freedmen 1 June 2013 15: 18 New
              +5
              who told you that landlis was free? Actually, they paid for it with gold!
            3. Armata
              Armata 1 June 2013 16: 09 New
              +6
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              But Lend-Lease was free aid due to the fact that Germany was a strategic threat to the United States.
              Not free, that is, Dada (owl from Winnie the Pooh). so this is help with deferred payments.
              1. old man54
                old man54 1 June 2013 19: 12 New
                +3
                Quote: Mechanic
                Not free, that is, Dada (owl from Winnie the Pooh). so this is help with deferred payments.

                In today's economic language, there is a deferred payment, but not "on after the war", but there was a payment schedule after the fact of receiving the mat. help. Here, the Yankees in 1940 refused to deliver weapons to small-shirts under such conditions, only on an "advance payment", because they themselves did not believe that Britain would be able to successfully confront Hitler on the European theater of operations. And only after the 1941 year, when it became clear that Germany was “stuck” in the USSR for a long time and thoroughly, they also changed the terms of delivery!
            4. APASUS
              APASUS 1 June 2013 20: 51 New
              +3
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              But land lease was gratuitous help

              Where do you get such information ??
              Maybe you can strike a couple of articles in popular publications, otherwise we are not stupid
              1. Rink
                Rink 1 June 2013 21: 33 New
                +1
                Quote: APASUS
                Where do you get such information ??

                Correct a little: not "information", but "misinformation."
                And so the question is correct.
            5. Rink
              Rink 1 June 2013 21: 31 New
              10
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              .... But Lend-Lease was free aid ....

              Oh, these tales! Oh, these storytellers! ...

              Good mister, you can tell this first-grader to your first-graders at your school — they will believe. But in a serious company it’s better to keep quiet, they will laugh at the depth of such “knowledge”.
              Google to help you, read first about the "gratuitous help", for which the USSR paid with pure physical gold. And America for this gold supplied obsolete tanks and soap stew, and even sent transports to Murmansk without a convoy so that German submarines did not have problems with torpedoing. Why worry about the Yankees? Russia paid in gold even for cargo on sunken transports. (And with what the sunken transport was really loaded - go check ... Good business?)

              I wonder what fairy tales will tell in about twenty years?
              Probably about how America alone defeated everyone: Germany, Japan and the USSR, which were in the same fascist bloc and Roosevelt personally saved Europe.

              Something urgently needs to be done with these "historians" ...
            6. reichsmarshal
              reichsmarshal 2 June 2013 12: 19 New
              +6
              Lend-Lease in the USSR amounted to 11 billion dollars for all 4 years of the war (of which 65% came in 1944-1945, when field assistant Walter Model had already told Hitler that the defeat of the Reich was absolutely inevitable). The refusal from Lend-Lease to the defeat of the USSR would not have led (this is the opinion of US Secretary of State Stettinus), but would have dragged on the war for another 1-1,5 years. It would cost the United States another 400-500 thousand killed in Europe and $ 100 billion in expenses. So not the United States, but the USSR provided free aid.
            7. Ivanovich47
              Ivanovich47 2 June 2013 20: 26 New
              0
              Lendlis gratis !? And the gold that the USSR sent to America, is this lipstick?
            8. Pu239
              Pu239 3 June 2013 00: 27 New
              0
              No, of course
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              Quote: Skating rink

              So what? !!

              not so sure. But Lend-Lease was free aid due to the fact that .....

              NON-BREAKFAST ???? !!!!
              Until the year 72, the USSR paid this UNAWAY assistance.
              He paid, as it is now visible to the organizers of World War II - the Rhodschilds, Rockefellers, Mogran, Loebam, Kuhn, etc.
              In general, I like to read enemies on this forum.
              After Netanyahu’s statements on the S-300, these are enemies, with the same conceit as Saakashvili’s.
              So comrades PROFESSORS and Arona Zaavi, Zebulun and other crap:
              "Learn Military Science Properly ...."
          2. vBR
            vBR 2 June 2013 01: 40 New
            +3
            Exactly, you are absolutely right. But just to say that she behaved like (or a corrupt goof) power can not. Dmitry Medvedev is still sitting as prime minister, but Putin was hoping to see something like that at that time. And time is lost, it is quickly impossible to help create a normal defense against a serious attack by the West. Yes, and our military-industrial complex deprived of decent funds
          3. rJIiOK
            rJIiOK 2 June 2013 13: 30 New
            0
            Most likely, they have no money for this yet. But I would provide them all these services free of charge. Or long-term installments.
    2. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ 1 June 2013 13: 50 New
      +4
      Quote: svp67
      Somehow the author is not expressive - he tries to say a lot, but somehow he doesn’t agree ...

      Well, this is because it is difficult for the author to lie, but he has such a task. In such cases, always get a similar vyser.
    3. Reasonable, 2,3
      Reasonable, 2,3 1 June 2013 14: 38 New
      16
      Well, Algeria returned 15 MiGs due to corrosion of the keel, and here, after eliminating the defect, they serve excellently. About Malaysia-lies, they are written off on the sly of "fatigue", but they are waiting for new developments. And Hungary due to non-compliance with NATO weapons . Conclusion: you don’t give a damn about the mirror if you don’t know how to repair and fly. The author is generally an amateur, he tore apart the tops from somewhere and published. Minus.
      1. Vasya Ivanov
        Vasya Ivanov 1 June 2013 15: 01 New
        +4
        Professor dizuhu throws.
        1. Professor
          1 June 2013 15: 57 New
          -5
          Where is the disinformation? The fact that the Hungarians are trying to sell them almost at the price of colormet, but there are no gels? Or about the fact that the F-16 on earth spends a third less time than the MiG-29? These are known facts.
          1. reichsmarshal
            reichsmarshal 2 June 2013 12: 25 New
            +5
            The F-16 spends less time on the ground than the MiG-29 because, according to the developed staff, the F-16 has three times more ground personnel than the MiG. MiGs were created for the mass war, and in its case (USSR vs. NATO - 1986), the F-16 miserably lost to MiG. But the fact that the first versions of the MiG-29 (which the Hungarians apparently soldered) had a poor engine with quick wear, as it has long been known. In a mass war, one fighter makes an average of 10-15 sorties before it is shot down or sent for repair.
      2. old man54
        old man54 1 June 2013 19: 17 New
        +6
        but why should he expect this from the author, if he constantly chases all Russian and Soviet, and praises only Western developments, well, another Middle Eastern country. :)) Therefore, he selects such articles for translation from an Internet. Others he somehow do not want to translate. :))
    4. Vadivak
      Vadivak 1 June 2013 17: 38 New
      10
      Quote: svp67
      and bought the Swedish Gripens. These are excellent fighters and simpler and cheaper to operate.


      We can say the ideal machine for countries with a small territory and modest resources. One shitty American engine and this is a critical element of production, the Americans can always block the contracts nor they do it, namely Poland and Jordan, would prefer to buy a small Swedish plane at one time, but under US pressure was forced to choose an American F-16 that was not optimal from the point of view of the needs of the air forces of these states. As a result, until now, Gripen has only four foreign customers, and two of them - the Czech Republic and Hungary - did not buy airplanes, but leased them. Now the future of the machine depends entirely on the outcome of their purchase by the Swiss Air Force, who are ready to order 22 units


      The direct European counterparts of the MiG-29 in terms of overall dimensions - the twin-engine fighters Rafale and Typhoon - as half-generation platforms are more modern than the Mikoyan machine and passed the battle test (against defenseless Libyans and even more defenseless Islamists in Mali
  2. Su24
    Su24 1 June 2013 09: 40 New
    +3
    43 million for a pack of MiGs, I wonder why no one takes it. Belarus at least)
    1. evgenii67
      evgenii67 1 June 2013 09: 44 New
      17
      Hello everyone!
      Quote: Su24
      43 million for a pack of MiGs, I wonder why no one takes it. Belarus at least)

      perhaps because most of the aircraft from this "pack" can only be used as monuments or stands.
      1. Civil
        Civil 1 June 2013 09: 52 New
        +3
        There are trade-offs in Miga-29, for example, on management, because not everyone wants to continue to operate them
      2. wheel
        wheel 1 June 2013 19: 25 New
        0
        moreover, in Belarus there are enough of such monuments
    2. ded
      ded 1 June 2013 11: 16 New
      10
      I wonder why no one takes it. At least Belarus


      What for? Luke, as it always has been, picks something newer from Russia for free!
      1. Akim
        Akim 1 June 2013 11: 20 New
        +8
        Quote: ded
        Luke, as it always has been, picks something newer from Russia for free

        With a competent approach, they can be upgraded to generation 4 + or even 4 ++ (be new engines)
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Kazanok
        Kazanok 1 June 2013 16: 26 New
        +2
        absolutely true .. his soul is so .... and nature ....
    3. Vadivak
      Vadivak 1 June 2013 17: 58 New
      +4
      Quote: Su24
      Belarus at least)



      The main competitor in the conclusion of an export contract for the sale of Russian MiG-29s (and this is a deal worth 410 million euros for the supply of 20 cars to Myanmar) was not China, but Belarus. In fact, in the summer of 2009, the Burmese agreed on everything with Minsk, and only the urgent and very effective intervention of Rosoboronexport and the specialists in foreign economic activity of RSK MiG corrected the situation.

      Like this
      1. old man54
        old man54 1 June 2013 19: 21 New
        0
        what are we talking about? Do not understand? Belarus MiG-29 began to release without a license? :)
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 1 June 2013 23: 24 New
          +1
          Quote: old man54
          what are we talking about? Not understood? Belarus MiG-29 began to release without a license


          Those in stock
  3. report4
    report4 1 June 2013 09: 56 New
    20
    The article is about nothing. kg / am
    There are no real facts or real comparisons.
    Without numbers, this is some kind of miserable scribble worthy of some kind of tape.
    1. Nu daaaa ...
      Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 11: 42 New
      -17
      The real facts are the old F-16s sold on average for 10 mil. dollars per plane and behind them is a turn, and 2 mil. dollars for the MiG-29- someone doesn’t want them ... Moldova wanted to give its 10th plane for the worst, just like that, and they didn’t want it.
      1. Akim
        Akim 1 June 2013 11: 54 New
        +7
        Quote: Nu daaaa ...
        Moldavia, its 10th plane, wanted at the very end just to give it back, and they didn’t want it.

        Moldova wanted 6 million apiece for 2,5 fighters. Now Ukrainka has brought down this price to 1,200 -1,400.
        1. Nu daaaa ...
          Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 12: 00 New
          -6
          Meant that for 6 Mig-29 wants 8,6 mil. dollars and there is "just give away" ...

          http://topwar.ru/16830-moldaviya-predprimet-esche-odnu-popytku-prodat-istrebitel
          i-mig-29.html
          1. Akim
            Akim 1 June 2013 12: 23 New
            +2
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            which for 6 MiG-29 wants 8,6 mil. dollars

            This is not so. They were going to sell them at the tender. Indeed, the starting price was 8,6 million, but Moldova wanted to get 12-14 million for them at the finish line. Do you think why the tender was canceled twice? In the mid-90s, they sold 20 planes with the United States for 40 million. Now they wanted to sell even more expensive and agreed with Ukraine to modernize them (they wanted to spend 30 million bucks). But then they changed their minds. In April, unofficial information appeared that Ukraine was ready to buy them at a differentiated price. (depending on the condition).
            1. Nu daaaa ...
              Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 13: 10 New
              0
              "... Indeed, the starting price was 8,6 million, but Moldova wanted to receive 12-14 million for them at the finish ..."

              Well, Moldova could have wanted at the finish line 250 million, it’s not harmful to get the mark, and most importantly, it’s free.

              "... And you think why the tender was canceled twice? ..."

              The Ministry of Defense of Moldova failed to find buyers for the MiG-29 fighters. Not for 2001, when they were in relatively good technical condition ....

              http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=434

              ... for 2010 ...

              http://lenta.ru/news/2010/09/06/mig29/

              ... not for 2011 ...

              http://www.pravda.ru/news/economics/20-01-2011/1064195-sell-0/

              ... and not for 2012. Bidding was disrupted due to a lack of buyers.
        2. tomket
          tomket 1 June 2013 23: 17 New
          -2
          in fact, at the time, the USA bought the MiG-29 from Moldova, which they are known to be, were suitable only for familiarization with the design and for further transfer to museums.
      2. Tambov we ...
        Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 13: 53 New
        +7
        This is by inertia (about buckets F16). Amas are strong in self-promotion, no more. And many more countries are fawning before the striped.
      3. tomket
        tomket 1 June 2013 23: 14 New
        +2
        but can you get a list of lined up and suffering people the most real, albeit worn f-16 ????
  4. bars280
    bars280 1 June 2013 10: 04 New
    18
    This is a great plane. We are innocent that their ass hands are growing.
  5. Alikovo
    Alikovo 1 June 2013 10: 22 New
    +8
    ours is cheaper than f-16 and even superior in performance characteristics.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 1 June 2013 10: 51 New
      +8
      Quote: Alikovo
      ours is cheaper than f-16 and even superior in performance characteristics.

      In something it surpasses in something inferior. Two years ago, the AOI Air Force magazine talked about training battles with the MiG-29 from Poland. At the helm of the MiGs were Israeli pilot instructors. There are very positive reviews about the aircraft, although a number of shortcomings have been identified. By the way, MiGs were covered with a network of sensors giving a picture of their actions in real time, which allowed us to create a very good model for the Air Force simulators. Very worthy opponent.
      1. Nu daaaa ...
        Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 12: 07 New
        -5
        By the way, the Polish planes have long been not clean MiG-29, in the Luftwaffe they were upgraded twice. In my opinion, even the motors were replaced, not to mention the rest ...


        http://www.16va.be/mig-29_experience.htm
      2. Rink
        Rink 1 June 2013 14: 34 New
        14
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        In something it surpasses in something inferior.

        In PR, in PR, inferior ...

        ... To clarify the picture, I’ll 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 air show in Farnborough), p.81: “For the Western Air Force was a big shock when F- 16, armed with SIDEWINDER missiles (AIM-9M - DS) were compared in tests (apparently in the same Germany - DS) with the MiG-29 armed with the R-73. From 50 fights against P-73 AIM-9M won only one. Training fights at a short distance between the F-15 with the AIM-9M and the MiG-29 with the helmet-mounted sight and the R-73 showed that Mig can capture targets in airspace 30 times larger than the F-15. "

        Source http://topwar.ru/2291-fulcrummig-29-protiv-hornet.html

        But the MIG-29 is a light fighter. But as it turned out, even F15 is able to withstand.
        And the helmet-mounted sight of the Americans, even now on the F35, is practically not working yet ...

        But of course, in the American version it is always like this: losing almost every single parameter, American equipment is exceptionally the best and invincible.
        We heard this before, from the French, from the Germans, from the Japanese ...
        1. Nu daaaa ...
          Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 14: 55 New
          -9
          As the classics of Marxism-Leninism wrote, the practice is the criterion of truth ... The NATO operation against Yugoslavia - 11 MiG-29s were lost, of which 6 were shot down (in air battles and 5 were decommissioned for various reasons ...

          March 24, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18112, 127th fighter squadron). Shot down southwest of Pristina by the F-15C fighter

          March 24, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18111 or 18106, 127th fighter squadron). Shot in the vicinity of the village of Titel with an F-16A / MLU fighter

          March 24, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18106 or 18111, 127th fighter squadron). Shot down by an F-15C fighter


          March 26, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18113, 127th fighter squadron). Shot down in the region of Trnava, Bosnia, fighter F-15C

          March 26, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18114, 127th fighter squadron). Shot over Bosnia F-15C fighter

          March 26, 1999 —— MiG-29B (number 18110, 127th fighter squadron). Lost due to unclear reasons in the Ponikwe area, possibly during a non-combat flight.

          May 4, 1999 - MiG-29B (number 18109, 127th fighter squadron). Shot down by an F-16CJ fighter

          Can someone help me, how many NATO members lost their fighters in aerial combat?
          1. Akim
            Akim 1 June 2013 15: 17 New
            +6
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            Can someone help me, how many NATO members lost their fighters in aerial combat?

            http://army.lv/ru/mig-29/primenenie/102/132
            I am inclined to partially trust this information, because I remember the Euronews (the only import channel that we showed then) and the interview of the French pilot, who said that they did not expect such resistance from the Yugoslav Air Force with their complete superiority in the air.
          2. lazy
            lazy 1 June 2013 15: 31 New
            13
            and how many twins and amers participated in each battle. if ten strokes come up to you and break your skull, does that mean you're a bad fighter?
          3. Норд
            Норд 1 June 2013 15: 41 New
            18
            What the hell are you talking about here? NATE aviation, having a 46-fold superiority in aviation, heroically shot down as many as 6 aircraft of the south, which had neither AWACs, nor refuellers, nor jammers. At the same time, not a single duel match was recorded. All MiGs were shot down in conditions of complete air supremacy of the democrats, who even in these conditions, when they appeared in a panic, dropped bombs anywhere.
            Mig-29 is an excellent device in skillful hands and when used correctly.
            1. Vadivak
              Vadivak 1 June 2013 18: 07 New
              +9
              Quote: Nord
              NATE aviation with a 46-fold superiority in aviation heroically shot down


              They lie. As an example

              An example of how Americans are able to hide losses, was the story of the German “Tornado”. The Serbs announced the downing of the aircraft, and it was confirmed by other competent sources - our GRU. But the Americans immediately denied this message. But how? They simply stated that “all the planes returned to Aviano base”! And not one of our commentators explained that the German “Tornado” with Aviano did not work.
              Then, however, the Germans themselves had to explain themselves. There’s something to come up with about a “battle group” of seven Tornadoes, although anyone who is more or less familiar with aviation knows that the main combat unit of the Air Force is a couple and there are no odd combat units.


              After the end of the war, the Hungarian press reported several times with stories by peasants of border regions that NATO planes were falling near a village. As soon as American helicopters flew to the crash sites, the paratroopers cordoned off the crash areas for several days, and then announced that it was “falling and exploded outboard fuel tanks” that were transported by closed trucks at night from the crash site. What it really was - you don’t have to guess for a long time ...


              Former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, General Klaus Naumann, in an interview with The London Times. Having expressed the opinion that the planes of the USA and NATO, allegedly crashed for technical reasons, or suspended from flight and “transferred for repair” were actually shot down by air defense systems of the FRY. The figure of these aircraft is also given: “more than 60 ...”


              Serbian data:
              24.03
              MiG-29 vs F-16 - 1 R-16 shot down, 1 MiG-29 lost
              24.03
              MiG-21 vs F-16 - 1 F-16 shot down, 1 MiG-21 lost
              24.03
              MiG-21 vs NATO fighters - 1 NATO aircraft was shot down, 1 MiG-21 was lost
              MiG-29 vs NATO fighters - 1 NATO aircraft was shot down, 1 MiG-29 was lost
              26.03
              A pair of MiG-29 vs a pair of F-15C -
              Two F-15Cs shot down, 1 MiG-29 lost
              27.03
              MiG-29 vs F-117A - F-117A shot down by R-60M missile
              20.05
              MiG-29 vs F-117A - F-117A shot down
              1. tomket
                tomket 1 June 2013 23: 29 New
                +6
                by the way about f-117, they were pretty quickly removed from service, possibly just because of unacceptable losses from the impact of the Yugoslav aviation. Actually it’s quite clear that the nighthawk against the MiG turned out to be a lame goblin and there is no talk of any invisibility. By the way, the first time the f-117 was shot down in Iraq in the 91 from Osr
          4. a
            a 1 June 2013 16: 10 New
            11
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            As the classics of Marxism-Leninism wrote, the practice is the criterion of truth ... The NATO operation against Yugoslavia - 11 MiG-29s were lost, of which 6 were shot down (in air battles and 5 were decommissioned for various reasons ...


            you do not forget in what conditions then the Serbs fought. Because of the embargo, spare parts were not supplied. Some of the aircraft had faulty sighting equipment. In addition, NATO had a tremendous air superiority in the number of aircraft. In addition, other systems were used, such as AWACS early warning systems. In general, I would even say that the loss of 5-6 aircraft by the Serbs is a normal result under those conditions of hostilities. And especially considering the fact that the Serbs did not sit out on the ground, but accepted fights in the air.
            So I think that if three or four dozen ordinary street guys pounce on the Klitschko brothers, then they are doing the brothers. But brothers, world heavyweight champions in almost all versions.
            1. bublic82009
              bublic82009 1 June 2013 20: 57 New
              +2
              Klitschko brothers can only fight by the rules. if he doesn’t follow the rules, the boy will put his foot in the groin, I think not one brother Klitschko will not stand it.
              1. old man54
                old man54 1 June 2013 22: 07 New
                +1
                Well, actually, Klitschko was engaged in kickboxing, from a young age, to professional boxing.
              2. tomket
                tomket 1 June 2013 23: 33 New
                +3
                I think after that, as you put it, the boy just won’t leave alive))))) and by the way, you fought with Klitschko that you say that they can only fight by the rules? tea is not a computer programmed))))) and throw this Jewish jargon like a kid, we do not live in Israel))))
            2. tomket
              tomket 1 June 2013 23: 30 New
              0
              first wrote koment about Klitschko then your saw, thoughts converge as they say)))))
          5. Rink
            Rink 1 June 2013 16: 11 New
            16
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            Can someone help me, how many NATO members lost their fighters in aerial combat?

            I, I will help !!! With pleasure!
            Итак ...


            .... In total, by May 20, during the aggression against Yugoslavia, the NATO bloc lost 109 aircraft ([g] certainly shot down [/ u]), another 15 aircraft were shot down, probably 12 aircraft were damaged. 16 helicopters and 18 UAVs were shot down, as well as 164 Tomahawk cruise missiles (these episodes are not in this document).

            Among those destroyed are one B-2 “Spirit” invisible plane, three or four F-117s (another one is damaged), 10 “Tornado”, eight F-16 (one more is damaged), five F-15 (another two damaged), three A-10 (another damaged), two Mirage-2000, five Harrier (Sea Harrier / AB-8B). From helicopters: two MH-53 "Stallion", one HH-60 "Pave Havk", three AH-64 "Apache" (another one is damaged).

            Losses in personnel among pilots and rescue teams amounted to 313 people. Including 247 killed and 66 missing. To this must be added the 19 corpses of American servicemen, whom 8 of April secretly, through 424-th military hospital in Thessaloniki, sent home. The total number of dead and missing amounted to 20.05.99 g. 332 person. Captured 30 of NATO troops, including at least eight Germans, one Frenchman, one or two Englishmen. Among the downed - two Danish F-16, at least one Danish pilot was killed.

            Source http://topwar.ru/15180-poteri-nato-v-yugoslavii.html


            About the victory of the MIGs there too. For example:
            ... May 20, 1999 ... An UAV was shot down over the Slatina (Pristina) airfield at 15:10. MiG-29 pilot Iliya Arizanov shot down a NATO aircraft over Kosovo (possibly F-117).


            But in general, the NATO operation in Yugoslavia should be considered a failure, and the number of losses suggests that NATO can only fight in tanks against the Papuans. At NATO, target designation was carried out using AWACS aircraft, and they had total numerical superiority in the air. While the Yugoslav troops acted in the absence of communication between themselves and the command. “Yugi” managed to buy French communication systems, which, thanks to the bookmarks, were disconnected by the French on the very first day of hostilities, as a result of which they only had communication with the help of antediluvian radio stations. If the NATO pilots operated in a flock with reconnaissance guidance, then the Yugoslav pilots were forced to fight relying only on their own aircraft, their experience and skill.
            In such circumstances, SUCH NATO losses (not only from air defense, but also in air battles) are a shame for fascists from the European Union! What superiority of their technology can you still whisper about? Yes, they should be ashamed of looking into people's eyes, both for what they did and for the way they did it.
            1. old man54
              old man54 1 June 2013 19: 37 New
              +3
              thanks, it was interesting to read these real results! As it was not in the know!: ((You "+++"
          6. a
            a 1 June 2013 16: 25 New
            10
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            As the classics of Marxism-Leninism wrote, the practice is the criterion of truth ... The NATO operation against Yugoslavia - 11 MiG-29s were lost, of which 6 were shot down (in air battles and 5 were decommissioned for various reasons ...



            one more nuance. we can always know exactly what the losses of one of the parties were. but little we can know about what the real losses of the NATO troops were. because even if their planes were shot down or damaged, then if the other belligerent did not provide conclusive evidence to this fact, then the NATO will reject all the way that there were some losses of flying equipment. and all aircraft that even landed somewhere, but then could no longer fly into the air, then were already written off as simply due to some damage during non-combat operation.
            characteristic example. The American A10 was on a mission to attack the ground Serb forces in Kosovo. Manual MANPADS (I will not say, but it seems to them) "Beardman" was shot by one engine, which fell not the territory controlled by the Serbs. The Serbs even showed a fallen engine on the telly. And the NATO press officer assured everyone at the press conference that the Serbs had no idea where the engine was coming from, that not a single plane had been shot down, and all the planes had returned to their bases. but in fact, the Borodochnik pilot landed on one engine at the Skopje International Airport (Macedonia) and this plane was then decommissioned. but not like a battle loss. but in fact this is a combat loss. and it doesn’t matter that the plane reached GDP.
            PR, PR and once again PR. that's what, and America knows how to PR
            1. bublic82009
              bublic82009 1 June 2013 21: 03 New
              +3
              no one has yet to cancel the information war. thus, the Serbs became aggressors, and all the former republics suffered. Does it look like the collapse of the USSR? all former republics of the victim, one Russia aggressor.
            2. Windbreak
              Windbreak 1 June 2013 22: 48 New
              0
              Quote: uno
              and this plane was then decommissioned.
              What is it? The damaged aircraft 81-0967 was promptly repaired and it is still flying
              [Center]
              1. lazy
                lazy 2 June 2013 14: 29 New
                0
                Well, this engine is damaged but in place, but I mean a-10 which the engine "lost" and the Serbs showed it on TV on different airplanes
                1. Windbreak
                  Windbreak 2 June 2013 16: 42 New
                  +1
                  This is the A-10 sat in Skopje. And here’s the lost “engine”, or rather a piece of the engine nacelle. And it’s in the Belgrade Museum
                2. Windbreak
                  Windbreak 2 June 2013 17: 10 New
                  +1
                  here is a photo of the nacelle

            3. tomket
              tomket 1 June 2013 23: 37 New
              +1
              why guinea pigs ??? rats and rats ... and they have better PR !!!
          7. Vadivak
            Vadivak 1 June 2013 18: 03 New
            +9
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            Can someone help me, how many NATO members lost their fighters in aerial combat?

            You don’t believe it anyway

            For example, the Yugoslavs said they shot down two F-15s trying to break out of Hungarian territory. The Americans refuted - they say that they shot down two Serbian Mig-29s. The local television company immediately removed the report from the crash site, and Western television companies could not resist the temptation - they showed it. The shooting is nightly, and the operator shows a piece of the fuselage illuminated by a hand torch. The announcer speaks of “Serbian Mig-29,” and in the illuminated circle there is a clear inscription: ANNUAL INSP .... In English, this means “annual review”. Such inscriptions are made near the nodes that need to be checked periodically, and there are several of them on the fuselage of the aircraft. But even an idiot becomes clear that the downed plane was not Serbian.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          8. tomket
            tomket 1 June 2013 23: 21 New
            +1
            if Klitschko is marked out by say two dozen thugs with bats, will you say that Klitschko is a useless boxer ???? They shot down NATO, there were even videos with the hobbling and smoking F-15, who will you officially recognize? Another thing is that we can study in detail the experience of using both the MiG-29 and Su-27 in Eretria.
          9. vyatom
            vyatom 4 June 2013 12: 57 New
            0
            Quote: Nu daaaa ...
            As the classics of Marxism-Leninism wrote, the practice is the criterion of truth ... The NATO operation against Yugoslavia - 11 MiG-29s were lost, of which 6 were shot down (in air battles and 5 were decommissioned for various reasons ...


            Give it to such an x ​​.. glass one, so he will cut his hands and x ... he will break it.
      3. Odysseus
        Odysseus 1 June 2013 15: 56 New
        +4
        Quote: Aaron Zawi
        In something it surpasses in something inferior. Two years ago, the AOI Air Force magazine talked about training battles with the MiG-29 from Poland. MiG pilots sitting at the helm

        The shortcomings of the first 29s are well known. The short range and the radar is quite outdated by modern standards. Plus common to our 80s planes: EW is not very and medium-range missiles are not a fountain.
        But in the BVB with an experienced pilot, he is still good.
        Upgraded Mig-29 is a separate issue.
  6. Akim
    Akim 1 June 2013 10: 34 New
    +6
    40 million is a gift! The Hungarians could not ditch aircraft in 20 years.
    1. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 14: 08 New
      +4
      It was they from the Pentagon who were ordered to get rid of the MiGs. The business is called. And so they would not sell them.
      1. old man54
        old man54 1 June 2013 19: 46 New
        0
        Well, it’s not officially business at all, but NATO’s “standards” type, there shouldn’t be any warplanes of a "potential partner".
    2. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 15: 42 New
      0
      You forget about the modernization of the same aircraft, another + 40 million will be released.
      1. Akim
        Akim 1 June 2013 15: 55 New
        0
        Quote: Phantom Revolution
        modernization of the same aircraft, another + 40 million will be released.

        If you then sell them at least at 10 million apiece - profit in 300%
        1. Phantom Revolution
          Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 17: 36 New
          0
          Quote: Akim
          If you then sell them at least at 10 million apiece - profit in 300%

          Not everything is so simple, depending on the condition of the machines. And the second you forget about the competition with the Russian Federation, which simply may not allow them to sell.
          1. Akim
            Akim 1 June 2013 18: 02 New
            0
            Quote: Phantom Revolution
            RF, which simply may not allow to sell them.

            How can Russia prohibit reselling planes, even those issued by Russia itself, to a third country? Only by introducing an embargo with the purchasing country, as the United States likes to do.
            1. Phantom Revolution
              Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 19: 00 New
              +1
              Quote: Akim
              How can Russia prohibit reselling planes, even those issued by Russia itself, to a third country? Only by introducing an embargo with the purchasing country, as the United States likes to do.

              How did it with South Korea. And in other ways from diplomacy to economic.
              1. Akim
                Akim 1 June 2013 19: 19 New
                0
                Quote: Phantom Revolution
                How did it with South Korea

                Seoul is different there. The right of re-export is simply prohibited. This is normal practice. But let's say Albania (conditionally) buys Hungarian MiGs, podshamanit over them, putting their counterparts and that's it - a long way to export! If the terms of the contract were a clause on the re-export of equipment, then there were no obstacles — only a diplomatic agreement. That’s why it happened with Belarus when there was a question of competition somewhere in Asia. And with Ukraine in the early 2000s (its MiG-23MLDU1 in Africa). Only diplomacy. But there are countries to which Russia is neither a decree nor a friend.
                1. Phantom Revolution
                  Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 20: 08 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Akim
                  But there are countries to which Russia is not a decree or comrade.

                  Of course there is, but how to say, they have their own specifics. Starting from NATO technology, ending with fin. position.
                  Too lazy to dig, call me the rockets that Ukraine can provide to a potential buyer, engines, radar and other things without which the plane will purely remain 20-year-old? And most importantly, where she finds it and from whom. It's just that the thing is different, if you sell an airplane, you sell armaments, although it is possible they will write them off from your warehouses.
                  1. Akim
                    Akim 1 June 2013 20: 57 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Phantom Revolution
                    tell me the missiles that Ukraine can provide to a potential buyer,

                    Ukraine produces R-73, R-27M, Gran, and X-27 missiles. The main buyer of missiles (mainly GOS) is Russia. The work on an air-to-surface missile is nearing completion. Also helmet-mounted target designators such as "Sura-M" and Sh3UM1U, objective control system, satellite navigation system SN3307. AFAR is domestic, but so far it is put only on the MiG-29U2 and only two of them are the 4+ generation (U1 is much easier to upgrade). On-board computers (digital computing devices). There is much more. They also make fuselage elements for all MiGs (21-29). + new glazing cabs. Here are engines of such traction, Ukraine does not produce, and iterates overhaul. All optics and electronics are own or partially imported.

                    But if you think I had in mind Ukraine as a potential buyer of Hungarian aircraft, then you are mistaken. There are more than 140 of them in reserve (MiG-29). There is no one to push them. Just as a buyer of Russian airplanes, Ukraine has retired for twenty years. Of interest was the Yak-130, but even here the Chinese stepped over from the L-15. (but they planned to produce it in Odessa).
                    1. Phantom Revolution
                      Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 21: 48 New
                      0
                      Quote: Akim
                      There are more than 140 units in reserve (MiG-29). There is no one to push them.

                      You yourself answered this dispute. hi The specifics of Mig-29 is very large and not without the lobby of the SU.
                      1. Akim
                        Akim 1 June 2013 23: 04 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Phantom Revolution
                        You yourself answered this dispute

                        It's not just about the MiG-29. The market is oversaturated with front-line fighters of 2-4 generations. MiG-23MLDU1, with comparable combat characteristics, the widow is cheaper in operation than his younger brother. (Therefore, there was an African conflict). In addition, the Chinese actively entered the market with FC-1 (JF-17). Now the WS series engines will be brought to mind and ousted from the J-10B American, European and Russian competitors. The law of the market in crisis - demand is much less than supply. That dumps all and sundry.
  7. Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 1 June 2013 10: 34 New
    +8
    The article is really about nothing, some kind of troll, just to blurt out.
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. Black
    Black 1 June 2013 10: 59 New
    11
    With the level of danger that the Magyars threaten, the U-2 would also suit them.
    1. si8452
      si8452 1 June 2013 11: 11 New
      +5
      I think the Air Force is generally superfluous :-)
    2. pensioner
      pensioner 1 June 2013 11: 50 New
      +2
      Even without an engine.
    3. Aleks21
      Aleks21 1 June 2013 12: 31 New
      +2
      What if the Romanians want to return Transylvania back.
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 1 June 2013 14: 19 New
        +2
        Let them fly on the wings of the night. so worse.
        1. old man54
          old man54 1 June 2013 19: 49 New
          +2
          they have Dracula, hiding in the mountains, so let him cover the air of the Magyar army with vampires! :)
  10. Clonol
    Clonol 1 June 2013 11: 02 New
    -22
    There have not yet been downs in the world of your own free will they will buy the MiG-29 under-plane, instead of the Su-30 or F-16 / F / A-18.
    1. Alexey Prikazchikov
      Alexey Prikazchikov 1 June 2013 11: 11 New
      +3
      Well, why mi29 m 2 or smt or up. Very yes, and their price is normal. Another thing Hungarians having such machines could easily fly with repair or even modernization on them for another 7 years.
      1. Know-nothing
        Know-nothing 1 June 2013 11: 23 New
        +4
        Yah? What is the MiG-29 airframe resource?
        1. Tambov we ...
          Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 13: 59 New
          0
          Googling. You will find.
          1. Know-nothing
            Know-nothing 1 June 2013 15: 22 New
            +1
            Googled. 2500 hours. Not enough to fly on them for another 30 years.
    2. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 13: 56 New
      +9
      You yourself impassable, if so speak of the MiG-29.
      1. Clonol
        Clonol 1 June 2013 14: 38 New
        -14
        Only for some reason the MiG-29 does not have a single aerial victory at all. In the same Ethiopia, the Su-27SK without a chance destroyed the amusing 29th. In Yugoslavia, the MiG-29 could not do anything at all. The only aerial victory of Iraq - and that on the ancient MiG-25 as the world. What to do if the plane is only suitable for the May 9th parade? Nothing.
        1. tomket
          tomket 1 June 2013 23: 43 New
          0
          in general, there were good chances for Ethiopia, and the good ones, that they can’t use it, well, sorry, someone can and someone can’t. there was no tangible dominance of su-27.
  11. si8452
    si8452 1 June 2013 11: 06 New
    +4
    Mig 29, in modern terms, is a niche product. The machine as a whole is inferior to su27, but it is lighter and cheaper and it has its own place in the structure of the air force
  12. si8452
    si8452 1 June 2013 11: 09 New
    +9
    And the refusal of the Hungarians from our machines due to the high cost of operation is cunning. It’s just that their owners changed more than 20 years ago, and it’s not comme il faut to use Russian cars for an “independent” Eastern European country.
    1. Akim
      Akim 1 June 2013 11: 23 New
      +4
      Quote: si8452
      It’s just that they have changed owners over 20 years ago,

      The Poles also changed the "feeding trough" However, they are not in a hurry to abandon Soviet aircraft, but even want to upgrade the MiG-29 and Su-22 in Ukraine.
    2. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution 1 June 2013 15: 46 New
      +5
      Quote: si8452
      And the refusal of the Hungarians from our machines in connection with the high cost of operation is cunning.

      This is not cunning, they do not pull so many planes. They would have to sell them, but they won’t think about new ones, maybe 1 and 16 will buy everything.
  13. misham
    misham 1 June 2013 11: 20 New
    12
    MIG-29 is an excellent aircraft. The trouble with avionics and gluttonous engines. In the combat units he was called the "front-line fighter." Now everyone considers grandmas, and Hungarians are no exception. Give everyone a universal combat platform, so that both the Swiss and the reaper and the igrets are on the dude. MIG did not offer anything for its modernization .... Unlike Sukhoi. Su-30 (35) just can almost everything (both in the air and on ground targets).
    Ultimately, it is all about cost-effectiveness criteria. A good owner will not lose anything. The Bundeswehr for a long time exploited the GDRovsky MIG-29. Apparently, it’s cheaper (or free) to get used Swedes or Americans than to maintain the Migov fleet in flight condition.
  14. fisherman
    fisherman 1 June 2013 11: 37 New
    +4
    Quote: ded
    I wonder why no one takes it. At least Belarus


    What for? Luke, as it always has been, picks something newer from Russia for free!

    quieter geta same syakret
  15. ankh-andrej
    ankh-andrej 1 June 2013 11: 44 New
    +5
    Meanwhile, the good news:
    MiG RSK in June plans to sign a contact for the supply of the Russian Air Force to MiG-35 fighters
    http://warfiles.ru/show-32043-rsk-mig-v-iyune-planiruet-podpisat-kontakt-na-post

    avku-vvs-rf-istrebiteley-mig-35.html
    1. Clonol
      Clonol 1 June 2013 11: 50 New
      -15
      Quote: ankh-andrej
      good news

      Quote: ankh-andrej
      plans to sign a contact for the supply of the Russian Air Force fighter MiG-

      This is bad news. The hell didn’t get our hell out of our Air Force. It is better to buy a Su-30 instead.
  16. pensioner
    pensioner 1 June 2013 11: 48 New
    +6
    Hungary received 28 MiG-29s in 1993 as a repayment of Russia's debt in the amount of $ 800 million.

    I don’t understand this at all! What a debt on ..! Life is not enough for you to pay for Voronezh stsuki. I don’t remember about reparations from Hungary. I perfectly remember the Hungarian measuring instruments, electrical appliances, electronics (even computers), etc. Where?? Everything is asking ... and. Well, eat your tomatoes yourself. By the way, are they generally exporting them anywhere now or not?
    1. Aleks21
      Aleks21 1 June 2013 12: 35 New
      +5
      C'mon, we recovered debt from them in 1945. And in 1956 we also calculated the interest ...
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 1 June 2013 13: 40 New
        +3
        mean little.
  17. KononAV
    KononAV 1 June 2013 11: 49 New
    +2
    F 16 is much more expensive to operate
    1. Nu daaaa ...
      Nu daaaa ... 1 June 2013 11: 56 New
      +1
      What are you saying ... a single-engine machine with an engine resource of 4000 hours (or even more) is more expensive to operate a twin-engine machine with an engine resource of 2000 hours ... You are right Einstein.
      1. Argon
        Argon 1 June 2013 14: 08 New
        0
        Two engine options are offered for Falcon; I don’t remember the names; one has a full resource of 6000 l / h and the second has 16000 l / h.
      2. Tambov we ...
        Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 14: 13 New
        +3
        And the motor resource in which climatic zone does the F-16 have?
        1. Argon
          Argon 1 June 2013 21: 25 New
          -1
          And what's the difference? The percentage of the numerical values ​​of the resource of the MiG and F-16 engines will not change. In the "climate zone"!? - the question is not correct, there are operational categories.
          1. Aleks21
            Aleks21 2 June 2013 10: 33 New
            +5
            Ours have always made wartime engines - which aircraft will survive in the war for 6000 hours? Front-line fighter - a furious, bright, but short life ...
  18. ankh-andrej
    ankh-andrej 1 June 2013 12: 45 New
    14
    The article is explicitly anti-advertising for the aircraft and written solely for this purpose. Do not pay attention. MiG today has good positions in the world market and is not going to lose them, despite the fact that the glad countries of the former Warsaw Pact began to abandon Soviet technology due to a change in ownership, like the last mongrel.
    1. 4fedor1
      4fedor1 1 June 2013 13: 15 New
      +2
      Yes, that's how it is .
    2. tomket
      tomket 1 June 2013 23: 48 New
      +4
      actually why as the last mongrel ??? If we merged them at the end of 80x, then what else should they do? The Serbs resisted and smeared them; in general, I don’t understand what the former satellite of the USSR are accused of, the same Gadaffi who was trying to sit on two chairs. We only showed vividness and voice in relation to Syria, so they had to try on the role of opportunists.
      1. ankh-andrej
        ankh-andrej 2 June 2013 11: 07 New
        +3
        Quote: tomket
        If we leaked them in the late 80s

        Yes, we ourselves almost cracked at the seams thanks to Hunchback and Ebn. And now, in general, the occupying enemies for former "friends." Now everyone is trying, if not to bite, then bark.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. Abakanets
    Abakanets 1 June 2013 13: 13 New
    -3
    Mig-29 is outdated, and it’s easier to buy new aircraft than firewood from Hungary.
    1. Akim
      Akim 1 June 2013 13: 20 New
      +7
      Quote: Abakanets
      MiG-29 is out of date

      Really? Then why does rich Japan still have Phantoms flying ?, and they stopped releasing them in the same period when they began to produce the MiG-29.
    2. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 14: 04 New
      +1
      But what, does the whole world fly on f-22 or PAK-FA? Basically the 3rd and 4th generation in the mass.
  21. Larus
    Larus 1 June 2013 14: 04 New
    +2
    Influenza is cheaper and better, and MIGs are more expensive and worse .... The author started with one and ended up with the MIG type being bad, so de all refuse it ....------ although it’s clear that politics is pure and nothing more.
    1. Tambov we ...
      Tambov we ... 1 June 2013 14: 16 New
      +2
      To say so, you need to fly on one and the other and not as Ivan Ivanitch.
  22. Kirgudum
    Kirgudum 1 June 2013 14: 36 New
    +5
    The MiG-29 is a very good aircraft, it’s only to be slightly modernized, put more modern radars, electronics, adapted to new, modern missile weapons systems - and it’s not a plane, but a candy.
    Indeed, in the end, the launch of an Air-to-surface missile can also be carried out from a corn carrier, if the appropriate equipment is installed on it - the aircraft is just a platform that carries weapons and electronic stuffing for different tasks! yes
  23. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 1 June 2013 14: 43 New
    +2
    I wonder what the legendary Swifts from Kubinka would say to the author of the article? Although this is a rhetorical question. I suppose they would send him ... to fly on the MiG-29.
    1. Clonol
      Clonol 1 June 2013 14: 56 New
      -9
      There is a huge gap between the combat pilot and the clown from the air group. All these antics for the public in a real battle will not help.
      1. Ivanovich47
        Ivanovich47 1 June 2013 17: 04 New
        +4
        Elements of aerobatics, "Swifts" are not "antics" but elements of air combat. "Swifts" - aces of air combat.
        1. Clonol
          Clonol 1 June 2013 17: 45 New
          -2
          This is exactly what circus antics.
        2. Roman_999
          Roman_999 1 June 2013 20: 06 New
          +1
          Knights are the same, Russian Knights are masters of attack aircraft ... it's not about window dressing, but about flying hours and skill of thought. Let them teach the young, otherwise there is no need to fly - only in the transfer of Experience and Mastery to new Fighters can we judge the Masters of today. We are all mortal - but the Essence and the Affair - lives EXACTLY in those who go After the current Masters. It is in the Disciples that the Master lives.
          1. aviamed90
            aviamed90 2 June 2013 12: 23 New
            0
            Roman_999

            In fact, the “Russian Knights” fly on a Su-27.

            And here is attack aircraft ???
  24. Megatron
    Megatron 1 June 2013 15: 50 New
    +1
    Why do Hungary fighters in general, and the army at the same time, with whom will they fight ??
    1. Akim
      Akim 1 June 2013 16: 13 New
      0
      Quote: Megatron
      who will fight with ??

      Transcarpathia they consider their
      1. pensioner
        pensioner 1 June 2013 18: 58 New
        +1
        I also have a great power. Here not so long ago I watched a program about Hungary on RBC. And their business is very "not very". Soon they will queue for loans. So, if you make a fuss, you can squeeze out some of them yourself.
  25. Odysseus
    Odysseus 1 June 2013 16: 06 New
    0
    Evaluation of this proposal of Hungary is impossible if it is not known in what technical condition the Mig-29s sold are located.
    1. Clonol
      Clonol 1 June 2013 16: 19 New
      -6
      What is the difference in what condition they are. Mikopodopie only at the price of scrap and buy. Not F-16 / Su-30 what.
  26. GEO
    GEO 1 June 2013 16: 50 New
    +1
    article "-", author, IMHO, to put it mildly, not a very educated person.

    "... Although many countries (Algeria, Hungary, Malaysia) refuse or write off MiG-29s, Syria, for example, is eager to get them. This is because the Syrian economy is destroyed and its patron Iran is becoming less and less generous with military subsidies technicians ... "
  27. GEO
    GEO 1 June 2013 16: 51 New
    +5
    Well, Hungary would advise you never to forget what they did in the Second World War on our land. We remember...
  28. xomaNN
    xomaNN 1 June 2013 16: 52 New
    +7
    History, almost like in Ukrainian. airfields in Uzin and Priluki at the direction of Western friends brought to the state of the Tu 160 scrap metal, which Ukraine had inherited. And then, in every possible way, they thought it through in the controlled media that Soviet aircraft was nothing, and there was a nickle per bunch :))
    1. Ivanovich47
      Ivanovich47 1 June 2013 17: 09 New
      +3
      I want to add. Soviet aircraft, fucking "friends" from across the ocean in both Korea and Vietnam. "Druzya were scared: where did these bears get such a technique?
  29. Kowalsky
    Kowalsky 1 June 2013 17: 10 New
    +2
    Quote: Nu daaaa ...
    Can someone help me, how many NATO members lost their fighters in aerial combat?

    Here in NATO and ask. Their military casualties strangely turn out to be among those written off. What you quote is information from official documents (essentially propaganda) aimed at creating the image of the invincibility of the NATO Air Force. According to Yugoslavia and Russia, the MiGs had victories (at least five). In Iraq, the NATO troops themselves allow the loss of at least two Tornadoes precisely from the MiG-29, but officially these machines are listed as lost "under unclear circumstances."

    And do not forget about the enormous numerical and technological superiority that NATO had in Iraq and, especially, Yugoslavia. "Herd and Old Man are easier life."
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 1 June 2013 19: 02 New
      +1
      After a Yugoslavia, 99 people were awarded at one factory in the Urals. All were awarded for 60. So ... Something tells me that it is no coincidence ...
  30. Andrey Skokovsky
    Andrey Skokovsky 1 June 2013 17: 27 New
    +2
    perhaps the fact is that any technique requires support that is absent in this situation, for cheap to do it needs some kind of political meaning, which is clearly missing completely, but for expensive money
    Again, there is a possible upgrade to NATO standards ...
    bargain a little more and sbagut someone for cheap, who have similar planes and norms of relations with Russia
    or maybe they will throw the same amers of money, but bury the twinkles in the nearest ravine, if only they would not fly away to some kind of Syria ...
    so a little dough hungarians will fall, how to sell will ......
  31. Hemi cuda
    Hemi cuda 1 June 2013 18: 18 New
    +1
    Fuck and not an article with which fright the author decided that the Syrian economy was destroyed and what does Iran have to do with it, Syria lives better than Russia, taking into account that the 2 war is going on there. I put a well-deserved minus, write an article either about the MiG-29 or about Syria with Iran.
    1. a
      a 1 June 2013 18: 30 New
      0
      Quote: Hemi Cuda
      Fuck and not an article with which fright the author decided that the Syrian economy was destroyed and what does Iran have to do with it, Syria lives better than Russia, taking into account that the 2 war is going on there. I put a well-deserved minus, write an article either about the MiG-29 or about Syria with Iran.


      You would at least look at some video about Syria. there, from some cities, some ruins remained, unfortunately.
    2. Professor
      1 June 2013 19: 22 New
      +1
      Quote: Hemi Cuda
      Fuck and not an article with which fright the author decided that the Syrian economy was destroyed and what does Iran have to do with it, Syria lives better than Russia, taking into account that the 2 war is going on there. I put a well-deserved minus, write an article either about the MiG-29 or about Syria with Iran.

      When you land on planet Earth, give us an excursion into the wonderful economy of Syria that has not suffered from the 2 years of the war. fool
  32. pensioner
    pensioner 1 June 2013 19: 06 New
    +1
    AND! So the Professor translated it! So maybe also something to say about this. After all, he means something, since it is this article that he offers for reading.
    1. Professor
      1 June 2013 19: 26 New
      0
      The trigger for the transfer was the ridiculous price at which the Hungarians are trying to get MiGs down, as well as the voiced availability of the aircraft compared to the F-16 (it spends more time on the 30%).
      In yesterday's article, I was attracted by the average raid per month of the A-10 pilots. 100 hours !!! However, this news somehow passed by the attention of members of the forum. hi
      1. Akim
        Akim 1 June 2013 19: 44 New
        +4
        Quote: Professor
        average monthly flight time for A-10 pilots. 100 hours !!

        not too much 4 hours a day. He will definitely have hemorrhoids. If a US Air Force fighter pilot flies only 200 hours a year (he said everything - it’s most ridiculous. It would be ours to pull a quarter of this).
        1. Professor
          1 June 2013 19: 55 New
          -3
          The last American attack aircraft A-10 left Europe
          A-10 is actively used in Afghanistan. For example, the A-10 squadron consists of a dozen aircraft and 18 pilots. The average flight time of pilots is about 100 hours per month: about twenty sorties, on average, 5 hours each.

          I tend to trust these numbers - why should they lie here?
          1. Akim
            Akim 1 June 2013 20: 10 New
            +1
            Airplanes barrage over the entire south of Afghanistan awaiting command to provide air support to ground forces

            So it is in Afghanistan. In combat conditions it can be and most likely it is. UN helicopters in Africa are also gaining up to 1000 hours a year. And then their houses are "soaked" - so they wear out.
            1. Professor
              1 June 2013 21: 46 New
              0
              And in peacetime, where so much kerosene will be picked up to patch on 1000 hours?
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. radio operator
        radio operator 2 June 2013 11: 55 New
        +3
        Quote: posad
        What kind of professor is he? I suggest dubbing it simply: "CUTTED"
        Please support

        Dear, even if the author is not right, you should not insult him.
        There are arguments that can and should be objected with numbers in hand.
        This weapon is stronger, believe me.
  33. old man54
    old man54 1 June 2013 20: 09 New
    +5
    The article disappointed, "-" unequivocal and well-deserved! Although from the general outline of the opinions of the author of the article, the “professor”, about the Russian rifle and the level of design thought in his homeland, this article is not out of the ordinary, by no means, everything, as always, has remained to achieve the Israeli military-industrial complex, to sing it again and that’s all! Why did I translate, why did I publish, is it not clear?
    There is no analysis, in fact, there is no opinion of the author, there is no critical view on the topic! There is only a specially concocted article from the Western media aimed at undermining the positions of our military-industrial complex in world arms markets, and its translation! guess for yourself who this article is written!
  34. Semurg
    Semurg 1 June 2013 20: 38 New
    +3
    I wonder the price of an empty Mig-29 glider, what and how much it costs to put a new engine and filling. If these planes can be so brought to mind why the Mig corporation or its aircraft repair plants do not deal with this, or if they have doubts if they can then sell them? If there is a buyer for a plane that is good after such a modernization, and why is the price drop for 15 years of operation from 29 ml to 2 ml everywhere and all planes are falling in price or not? Do not throw poop if anyone can enlighten?
    1. Clonol
      Clonol 1 June 2013 20: 51 New
      -3
      Quote: Semurg
      enlighten?

      I enlighten: The MiG-29 has established itself as a rather sad aircraft, unable to solve the tasks that lie before it. It is not surprising that everyone is trying to vpar him for at least some money. There was somehow no one who wanted to buy it, except for Serbia (and why the second time to step on the same rake, however what else to expect from an uneducable breed) and Syria (which could buy a similar amount of Su-30MK MFIs for the same money, which by the way saying they need it).
      1. Argon
        Argon 1 June 2013 22: 36 New
        +6
        Justify the phrase “not able to solve the problems that lie before him?” I don’t know what and who put it somewhere, but he coped perfectly with the tasks for which the 29th was designed. Let us recall what the pilot armed for the first time in human history F-117, an airplane whose appearance has changed the face of military aviation around the world. Or, according to your Defense Ministry of Germany, kept the MiGs armed for more than 12 years from poverty.
        1. Clonol
          Clonol 2 June 2013 00: 23 New
          -1
          Quote: Argon
          designed, he did a great job

          Well, plowing the land - no doubt. This MiG-29 is going well. But in a dogfight, he cannot, as conflicts with his participation proved. And actually, now in the world multifunctional fighters are more in demand, rather than specialized aircraft, and the MiG-29 can be called multifunctional only with a stretch, unlike the Su-27S, which initially had the opportunity to work on ground targets. Su-27P is generally a different opera and was intended for another soviet insanity - air defense aviation, which had a very mediocre attitude to the air force.
    2. Sochi
      Sochi 2 June 2013 00: 28 New
      +4
      here's the opinion - Both aircraft are rated as magnificent fighters and pilots are happy to fly them. They are a highly complex weapons system, which is something more than the sum of its components and therefore it is useless to emphasize individual advantages.
      It is necessary to consider the components of the aircraft weapons system in the complex. MiG-29 even in training close air combat proved superior to the F-16.
      Both cars have their advantages and disadvantages. When using air-to-air weapons at close range, the MiG-29 is probably the best machine, at an average distance both fighters depend on the quality of the missiles on the plane.
      Like the MiG-29 and the F-16 are outstanding aircraft for air combat, which can optimally perform their tasks. The differences between them are not so great that they could not be compensated by good pilots. Probably the decisive factor for victory is again what kind of training the pilot has.
      If you ask the personal opinion of the author, the MiG-29 is slightly superior to the F-16. But, as already mentioned, this is a personal opinion with which one can argue wonderfully. Flieger Rewue, Germany, February 1998
      and everything else is PR, the full article is http://www.airbase.ru/hangar/planes/compare/mig29-f16.htm
  35. Petr1
    Petr1 1 June 2013 21: 01 New
    +6
    It’s not true, instantly reliable planes, and certainly the Americans and Swedes, especially. The author is a Russophobe! NAKOL WOLF !!!!
    1. Clonol
      Clonol 1 June 2013 21: 11 New
      -9
      Quote: Petr1
      certainly do not give in to the Americans

      Here they are inferior. More precisely, the MiG-29 is now inferior to absolutely everything, starting from the ancient F / A-18.
  36. Tarn-off
    Tarn-off 1 June 2013 21: 15 New
    +7
    UG article is complete ... And Clonol just trolls everyone ... Don’t pay attention .... I know the pilots flying on the 29th .... They all admire him with one voice ..... The only thing that makes me personally, it infuriates him, so this is a huge black exhaust from the work of his engines .... Mig-29OVT - great!
    1. ankh-andrej
      ankh-andrej 1 June 2013 23: 16 New
      +1
      "Smoking Bandits" Malaysia smile
  37. posad
    posad 1 June 2013 22: 05 New
    +1
    The article was translated by the impostor "professor", a Jew by nationality, living in Israel)))) Here is an explanation of the nonsense that is written in it.
    If you notice, the Jews want to defame Russia, its armed forces and its equipment. To instill an inferiority complex.
    In the near future, we will see what Israel is steep on))))))
    1. old man54
      old man54 2 June 2013 18: 01 New
      +3
      Quote: posad
      The article was translated by the impostor "professor", a Jew by nationality, living in Israel)))) Here is an explanation of the nonsense that is written in it.

      one clarification, this ... the "professor" does not live in Israel, but in not-so-poor Russia, or rather, in Sbir it seems. And in this context, I am even more struck by the line of behavior of representatives of this fallen (God's chosen) nation, because living with us, ns and they are hay !! I just smile from surprise and arrogance :)) While I smile.
  38. Rustam
    Rustam 2 June 2013 00: 10 New
    +4
    I read the article and I will probably express myself without insult, etc., etc., although I respect my colleague a professor with respect, but!
    In order
    Everyone knows how I feel about Western systems, which I consider worthy for being introduced into our army.

    The first article was originally written (the source) in order to denigrate the Mig-1 family, in the style of some of our scribes, who are also rubbing us here that we have all the most advanced and best, the original source was written clearly not for the post-Soviet reader, but for the internal user

    2 the fact that there were problems with the sale of the Hungarians Mig-29, so these are their problems
    (Now we will not say, yes, there are questions for our engines and spare parts supplies, but this is not for this article) so they were eager to keep them in their composition, for example, in Poland and Slovakia they are being watched and are not going to write off, but these made a bet on Grippen having lost interest in Migam. yes, according to Grippen won in South Africa they couldn’t contain all of them and part of them were fun, so it all depends on the owner and how he follows the technique

    3- Yes, and it’s too early to write it off! There are excellent options for upgrading the SMT version, m2,35, and with the use of the western avionics this aircraft is a worthy example

    PS -just Hungary itself let it go by chance by betting on the Flu
    And in other Migi countries they continue to serve faithfully

    Yes, I repeat there are problems with the maintenance and supply of spare parts, but this should not seem to me to be related to the topic and property of the aircraft
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. Sirs
    Sirs 2 June 2013 11: 19 New
    +1
    Mig - 29 is a super plane but the plane of the past, it is necessary to develop, to do something more perfect. where is the MIG Design Bureau where are the new projects, where is something new from the MIGs ???
    1. ankh-andrej
      ankh-andrej 2 June 2013 12: 09 New
      +2
      Quote: Sirs
      where is the MIG Design Bureau where are the new projects, where is something new from the MIGs ???

      MiG General Director Sergei Korotkov told reporters about the company's intention in the near future, possibly already in June this year, to sign a contract with the Russian Air Force for the supply of 24 MiG-35 fighters.

      Thus, the program seemed to be frozen after the retirement of this machine from the Indian tender MMRCA, gets a second wind. The total portfolio of residual contractual obligations of MiG RSK, if this agreement is signed, will be 20 MiG-29K for the Indian Navy, 24 MiG-29K for the Russian Navy, 12 MiG-29M / M2 for the Syrian Air Force and 24 MiG-35 for the Russian Air Force , that is, a total of 80 new-built fighters.
      Touching upon other internal programs, S. Korotkov said that “on May 15 we signed a contract with the Ministry of Industry and Trade for R&D on drones, which implies determining the shape of the future unmanned aerial vehicle for the Ministry of Defense. We already have a backlog. It is based on the program "Scat"
  41. radio operator
    radio operator 2 June 2013 11: 48 New
    +3
    Hungary removed its MiG-29 from service and purchased the Swedish Gripens. These are excellent fighters and easier and cheaper to operate.

    Well, it’s unlikely!
    Gripen are easier in the sense that they are sold with the option of service and insurance. This is certainly a successful marketing move, a definite plus for the tender. Well, even a European, of course, is more comfortable in the cockpit.
    But the MiG is definitely more tenacious in battle.
    There are no light fighters equal to him in terms of maneuverability!
    In maintenance, it is cheaper than F16 and other classmates. Another thing is politics. With this sauce, you can say any nonsense.
    Power in Hungary will change and MiGs will again become normal fighters.
    Something like that.
  42. radio operator
    radio operator 2 June 2013 11: 49 New
    +1
    Hungary removed its MiG-29 from service and purchased the Swedish Gripens. These are excellent fighters and easier and cheaper to operate.

    Well, it’s unlikely!
    Gripen are easier in the sense that they are sold with the option of service and insurance. This is certainly a successful marketing move, a definite plus for the tender. Well, even a European, of course, is more comfortable in the cockpit.
    But the MiG is definitely more tenacious in battle.
    There are no light fighters equal to him in terms of maneuverability!
    In maintenance, it is cheaper than F16 and other classmates. Another thing is politics. With this sauce, you can say any nonsense.
    Power in Hungary will change and MiGs will again become normal fighters.
    Something like that.
    1. Constantine
      Constantine 2 June 2013 14: 03 New
      +5
      Just Gripeny, for political reasons, are not in special demand in NATO, but outside of NATO there is either an arms embargo, or the Russian Federation, or China. These Gripeny Hungarians most likely with jam composition and a cookie carriage drove. Recently I saw a video on Youtube, which, apparently, the author’s associates sculpted. There the flu was ordered to destroy the bridge, the Su-35s went to intercept them and the Gripenes kicked them. It was funny, very, and sad that such cheap propaganda had gone.
  43. Ruslan_F38
    Ruslan_F38 2 June 2013 13: 46 New
    +1
    Why is everybody getting rid of our twinks? Are they really worse than western samples? In my opinion, this is just politics, and our technology is definitely better.
  44. sonik-007
    sonik-007 2 June 2013 13: 57 New
    +2
    Quote: svp67
    Translation Professor


    "Our" professor found the necessary article. These are not his words. But to publish an article that talks about problems with reliability with quality is a sacred matter. Well, we all understand wink
    No, capricious patriotic reviews are not good, but you don’t need to rush to the other extreme either. MIGs were and will be great planes, and Gri ... gripens, what a wonderful planes. I’m afraid that such “beautiful airplanes” are not well known to anyone, and they don’t have any ATS on the AFAR either.
    1. Professor
      2 June 2013 15: 28 New
      -2
      Quote: sonik-007
      "Our" professor found the necessary article. These are not his words. But to publish an article that talks about problems with reliability with quality is a sacred matter. Well, we all understand

      Smart people make conclusions themselves, but nothing will help fools. I have provided information on the status of MiGs in Hungary. The information is verified and what to do with it, let everyone decide for himself. There is nothing anti-Russian in this article. hi
  45. Dmitriy2009
    Dmitriy2009 2 June 2013 15: 42 New
    +2
    MiG-29M2 is a modern two-generation multi-purpose fighter of the “4 ++” generation with an increased flight range, increased combat load and an expanded range of airborne weapons. MiG-29M (aka MiG-33) is a single-seat fighter similar in characteristics. The message "Interfax" erroneously indicated the name "MiG-29MM2".
    http://www.newsru.co.il/world/31may2013/mig29_110.html
  46. zinander
    zinander 2 June 2013 19: 51 New
    +2
    The article is a big minus ... not otherwise than Pagasyan ordered to finally ditch the MIGs
  47. Ratibor12
    Ratibor12 2 June 2013 22: 39 New
    +1
    So a certain "Professor" (sour cabbage soup) continues to practice translating all foreign trash. Recall his opus about the F-16:
    http://topwar.ru/27138-chego-ne-mozhet-delat-f-16.html#comment-id-1101708
    How is it there? "... the clever F-16 can do anything."
    Our homegrown troll zealously rewrites custom foreign nonsense, designed for fools. And he believes in all this. .......!
  48. Eric
    Eric 3 June 2013 00: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: Professor
    When you land on planet Earth, give us an excursion into the wonderful economy of Syria that has not suffered from 2 years of war. fool

    Well here you can argue, support the professor!
  49. Eric
    Eric 3 June 2013 00: 25 New
    0
    Hmm, I think gliders are no longer ice. In the wake of gloom and shock after the "occupation" of the Soviet Union, and amid lack of money, they killed our hawks! But this bird is for admiration in the world, and for usurping enemies in war!
  50. Langeo
    Langeo 3 June 2013 16: 28 New
    0
    I wonder where it is?