What's new

Falcon V Fulcrum Turkey Shoot

Alright Irfan.

Mr. Windjammer please answer these question. I would like to know the truth

1. What proof do you have that a Su-30 was locked on by the PAF? What proof do you have that a Su-30 even intruded over Lahore?

2. Who was the IAF pilot that you claim was awarded a medal for locking onto a Viper? Name please, I mean this as a genuine question, no sarcasm here.

3. Ok, you now claim that 2 transport planes were shot at over Kargil airspace? Any supporting information? Can you share which plane this was and where I can find this story other than in your imaginative posts?

4. Any proof or supporting info to your fantasy of the PAF Vipers 'creeping' behind IAF MiG-29's? Do you even understand how air combat works? ! ? !

Ok, nothing but simple questions here. Remember YOU are the one making all the above claims, so the onus is on you to prove that these are not figments of your imagination.
 
.
@ INDTAM, albeit I stand by all of my claims, some which are present somewhere in this very forum, others like No.3, i never said there were two transport planes shot since I am only aware of one.
However i suggest, you, rather than taking leads from sick minded individuals should come up with your own thoughts and ideas.
 
.
@ INDTAM, albeit I stand by all of my claims, some which are present somewhere in this very forum, others like No.3, i never said there were two transport planes shot since I am only aware of one.
However i suggest, you, rather than taking leads from sick minded individuals should come up with your own thoughts and ideas.

well i will do my research and find the truth anyways cheers
 
.
well i will do my research and find the truth anyways cheers

Always the best move.
I suggest you start with the link that I have posted earlier from Indian Express.
Air Marshal's plane hit by Pak fire - Express India

This should tell you that there was only one transport plane that was shot and damaged, which happened 2 (!!!) years after the Kargil conflict. It was flown by Air Marshal Bhatia, who was the main culprit in flying by mistake across the LOC.

This WJ person is completely inventing the other incidents such as a transport plane being shot in the Kargil conflict. Or whatever else he said about some minister's plane being shot at.

Rest , well , WJ's muted reaction should tell all that there are some missing words in his dictionary: PROOF, EVIDENCE, HISTORICAL FACTS, etc.

Cheers bro!
 
.
Always the best move.
I suggest you start with the link that I have posted earlier from Indian Express.
Air Marshal's plane hit by Pak fire - Express India

This should tell you that there was only one transport plane that was shot and damaged. This person is completely inventing the other incidents such as a transport plane being shot in the Kargil conflict. Or whatever else he said about some minister's plane being shot at.

Rest , well , WJ's muted reaction should tell all that there are some missing words in his dictionary: PROOF, EVIDENCE, HISTORICAL FACTS, etc.

Cheers bro!

will do bro:tup:
 
.
A couple of things one can figure out by looking at the video..
1. The F-16 pilots were flying the aircraft to its edge.. and comfortably..
2. The Mig pilot seems to be getting himself into no-win situations .. despite maneuvering like anything.

What must be kept in mind.. is that although the mig-29.. all the way upto model 9-15(also known as the 29M) were excellent WVR fighters.. and are equal to or better than in the F-16 in all theaters of flight on mathematical models.. they are EXTREMELY uncomfortable, unforgiving aircraft for even the most experienced pilot.

Put an experienced pilot into the F-16.. and an experienced pilot into the Mig-29.

The F-16 pilot sits comfortable on this seat, his instruments are clear and visible to him... his switchology is simple.. his control stick needs a slight touch and his jet will dance across the sky. All his emergency switches, warning.. symbols..in a nutshell.. he has the best situational awareness he could ask for. He is one with his machine.. and has a lot more of his physical and mental strength available to fight his fight.

The Mig-29 pilot.. on the other hand, has a rather stiff control column to deal with, his view is restricted, his cockpit switchology is still scattered and confusing. His radar while one of the best in terms of paper detection range and tracking, needs a lot of pilot input to make all the modes work properly. Even with HOTAS, the mig pilot will still need to reach into his cockpit to perform the crucial tasks. His mind and his body are so busy flying the aircraft.. that the time he is able to devote to the fight is sacrificed for it.

Its not always about the numbers as I keep insisting.. and some stick to that logic.
Your radar range, G's you can pull.. are all dependent on how often and how easily you can perform that task.
You may be able to track 20 targets at a 100 miles.. but if that requires you to spend 2 minutes adjusting the radar angle, moving an odd tiny joystick to select 20 targets .. and then decide who to shoot at first. You will be killed by the guy who can only track two at 70miles with an automated mode selection, target prioritization and weapons cueing system.

Which is why I do support the idea of having two heads in any russian cockpit.. they still dont have the idea of SA and user friendliness completely cracked yet.

The Su-37 wowed the world with its flips and spins.. but its throttle function was manipulated by a clumsy dial.
 
.
A couple of things one can figure out by looking at the video..
1. The F-16 pilots were flying the aircraft to its edge.. and comfortably..
2. The Mig pilot seems to be getting himself into no-win situations .. despite maneuvering like anything.

What must be kept in mind.. is that although the mig-29.. all the way upto model 9-15(also known as the 29M) were excellent WVR fighters.. and are equal to or better than in the F-16 in all theaters of flight on mathematical models.. they are EXTREMELY uncomfortable, unforgiving aircraft for even the most experienced pilot.

Put an experienced pilot into the F-16.. and an experienced pilot into the Mig-29.

The F-16 pilot sits comfortable on this seat, his instruments are clear and visible to him... his switchology is simple.. his control stick needs a slight touch and his jet will dance across the sky. All his emergency switches, warning.. symbols..in a nutshell.. he has the best situational awareness he could ask for. He is one with his machine.. and has a lot more of his physical and mental strength available to fight his fight.

The Mig-29 pilot.. on the other hand, has a rather stiff control column to deal with, his view is restricted, his cockpit switchology is still scattered and confusing. His radar while one of the best in terms of paper detection range and tracking, needs a lot of pilot input to make all the modes work properly. Even with HOTAS, the mig pilot will still need to reach into his cockpit to perform the crucial tasks. His mind and his body are so busy flying the aircraft.. that the time he is able to devote to the fight is sacrificed for it.

Its not always about the numbers as I keep insisting.. and some stick to that logic.
Your radar range, G's you can pull.. are all dependent on how often and how easily you can perform that task.
You may be able to track 20 targets at a 100 miles.. but if that requires you to spend 2 minutes adjusting the radar angle, moving an odd tiny joystick to select 20 targets .. and then decide who to shoot at first. You will be killed by the guy who can only track two at 70miles with an automated mode selection, target prioritization and weapons cueing system.


Which is why I do support the idea of having two heads in any russian cockpit.. they still dont have the idea of SA and user friendliness completely cracked yet.

The Su-37 wowed the world with its flips and spins.. but its throttle function was manipulated by a clumsy dial.

have you flown either of the plane to describe the feel of the plane.
you may quote some pilots' experience but i can quote an IAF pilot saying MIG 21 bison better than F16.
Each pilot will claim their bird is the best.
Views are subjective only in a Mano e Mano experience we may get the real picture but again it wont be the real and only determinant as pilots experience and capabilities are everything even in this modern era of Air fights.
 
. .
have you flown either of the plane to describe the feel of the plane.
you may quote some pilots' experience but i can quote an IAF pilot saying MIG 21 bison better than F16.
Each pilot will claim their bird is the best.
Views are subjective only in a Mano e Mano experience we may get the real picture but again it wont be the real and only determinant as pilots experience and capabilities are everything even in this modern era of Air fights.

Sure .. I think my Toyota drives better than a Beamer..
But some claims are acceptable.. others are not.

If my flying the plane is subject to any comment on the matter, than your comments in this thread too are completely null and void.. and should be taken with zero weight..and given zero importance.
Infact..why discuss it in the first place.. nobody here has flown the F-16 against the mig-29.. who are we to comment.
nobody of us had even experienced the subject of Kargil.. or fired a bullet in it. Who are we to comment.. lets not comment, lets not talk.. and go back to looking for watchable prints of newly released movies then..shall we?

Ill keep of this thread.. so should you then.
 
.
@ Santro, kindly tell these guys about the MKI incident and ROE.

In fact, no need since they weren't flying in the Flanker and neither of us in the Falcon. :cheesy:
 
.
@ Santro, kindly tell these guys about the MKI incident and ROE.

Yaar - You can take a horse to water but you cant force it to drink it. In the same way nowadays we have all the ability to google and find out for ourselves. If there is any doubt in the likes of people such as INDTAM i am sure if he tries he will see what you are trying to justify.
 
.
Sure .. I think my Toyota drives better than a Beamer..
But some claims are acceptable.. others are not.

If my flying the plane is subject to any comment on the matter, than your comments in this thread too are completely null and void.. and should be taken with zero weight..and given zero importance.
Infact..why discuss it in the first place.. nobody here has flown the F-16 against the mig-29.. who are we to comment.
nobody of us had even experienced the subject of Kargil.. or fired a bullet in it. Who are we to comment.. lets not comment, lets not talk.. and go back to looking for watchable prints of newly released movies then..shall we?

Ill keep of this thread.. so should you then.

well santro to talk and discuss about F16,MIG 29 specifications, Designs, Performance and its strenghts and weakness through well established and well researched source ain't a crime.

But to comment on how something feels just based on self intuitive feeling like
The F-16 pilot sits comfortable on this seat, his instruments are clear and visible to him... his switchology is simple.. his control stick needs a slight touch and his jet will dance across the sky. All his emergency switches, warning.. symbols..in a nutshell.. he has the best situational awareness he could ask for. He is one with his machine.. and has a lot more of his physical and mental strength available to fight his fight.

The Mig-29 pilot.. on the other hand, has a rather stiff control column to deal with, his view is restricted, his cockpit switchology is still scattered and confusing. His radar while one of the best in terms of paper detection range and tracking, needs a lot of pilot input to make all the modes work properly. Even with HOTAS, the mig pilot will still need to reach into his cockpit to perform the crucial tasks. His mind and his body are so busy flying the aircraft.. that the time he is able to devote to the fight is sacrificed for it.


well that will raise some speculation don't you think. I drive 1.6 liter sedan but can I on gut intuition comment on how an AUDI R8 drives!!!!!

same goes for Kargil mate.

We are here for enlightenment purpose (and at times let out some rants and bravado) so when it comes to a serious discussion we need to behave like true students in search of true knowledge.

If I am wrong you can correct me but if there are some discrepancies then its ones duty to bring it to your notice.

---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------

Yaar - You can take a horse to water but you cant force it to drink it. In the same way nowadays we have all the ability to google and find out for ourselves. If there is any doubt in the likes of people such as INDTAM i am sure if he tries he will see what you are trying to justify.

take me to the water first!
Please show me the article stating windjammer's claim. If its true then i am humble enough to accept it.
 
.
overall f-16 outclass mig29 ..thats why f-16 has kills against mig29

Not quite. F-16 has better avionics that I will agree. The reason why there are more F-16 kills is because most of the countries that were fought against were small and ill-trained fighter pilots. The MiG-29s in the hands of East German pilots, squashed the USAF in exercise post unification of Germany. If NATO's European hand had gone against East Germany and USSR, the entire reputation of F-16 won't stand where it is today.
 
.
Yaar - You can take a horse to water but you cant force it to drink it. In the same way nowadays we have all the ability to google and find out for ourselves. If there is any doubt in the likes of people such as INDTAM i am sure if he tries he will see what you are trying to justify.

The point is not the horse having to drink the water..
The horse does not have to drink the water.. the horse can walk away.. it can say its not thirsty, the water is too cold or warm, it tastes bad..

But when horses go out to the water.. and tell you that since you haven't had the water you cannot be sure of its being the water and you too should not drink it.. and that not everybody will taste the water the same.. and therefore nobody can be trusted on their perception of water .. even those who drink it everyday... and only when it comes out as urine and you analyze the chemical composition of urine can you tell if water made it or not..
So.. I as a horse will not consider this water, and encourage others not to drink it.. and you arent even qualified to talk about the water.. even though you cant be sure that whether I am a horse as I claim to be or a goat.. or if you are a man as you claim to be or a unicorn..

AIMED AT NO-ONE SPECIFIC.. but a particular class of users from multiple countries here.

There is doubting sources..
There is critiquing sources..

You may critique a certain down under self proclaimed think tank founder because clearly his qualifications dont match his perceived area of interest, his reputation too is dubious as his peer's find him a joke. And his views are motivated personally.
That is three strikes.. and you are out.

But Id be a complete nincompoop to think I am smarter in my opinions of doubting a career combat pilot who has flown both aircraft in tours.

I trust those people as a source for my opinions.
not one.. but many.. and form my opinions based on that.
 
.
well santro to talk and discuss about F16,MIG 29 specifications, Designs, Performance and its strenghts and weakness through well established and well researched source ain't a crime.

But to comment on how something feels just based on self intuitive feeling like
The F-16 pilot sits comfortable on this seat, his instruments are clear and visible to him... his switchology is simple.. his control stick needs a slight touch and his jet will dance across the sky. All his emergency switches, warning.. symbols..in a nutshell.. he has the best situational awareness he could ask for. He is one with his machine.. and has a lot more of his physical and mental strength available to fight his fight.

The Mig-29 pilot.. on the other hand, has a rather stiff control column to deal with, his view is restricted, his cockpit switchology is still scattered and confusing. His radar while one of the best in terms of paper detection range and tracking, needs a lot of pilot input to make all the modes work properly. Even with HOTAS, the mig pilot will still need to reach into his cockpit to perform the crucial tasks. His mind and his body are so busy flying the aircraft.. that the time he is able to devote to the fight is sacrificed for it.


well that will raise some speculation don't you think. I drive 1.6 liter sedan but can I on gut intuition comment on how an AUDI R8 drives!!!!!

same goes for Kargil mate.

We are here for enlightenment purpose (and at times let out some rants and bravado) so when it comes to a serious discussion we need to behave like true students in search of true knowledge.

If I am wrong you can correct me but if there are some discrepancies then its ones duty to bring it to your notice.

---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------



take me to the water first!
Please show me the article stating windjammer's claim. If its true then i am humble enough to accept it.

Read up..

German MiG-29s deployed to Switzerland to perform air combat training missions with the F/A-18C/D Hornets.


Koen Aerts/Aero Topics analyses the 'Alpine close encounters' : German Luftwaffe Fulcrums against the fighter pilots of Switzerland's Hornet-equipped Staffel 11 "Tiger" Squadron.

Although primarily tasked with a role in the German air defense system, the 'MiG-29 drivers' (of Germany) saw themselves evolve into a very different player. Obsessively trained to counter Russia's latest generation fighters, the ultimate Fulcrum confrontation was - and still is - every Western fighter pilot's dream. Consequently JG 73 was overwhelmed with requests for squadron exchanges to act as a sparring partner in aerial duels. With help from the most experienced German AMRAAM operating F-4F pilots, new MiG-29 tactics were developed, based on western ACM - Air Combat Maneuvering - techniques and AIM-120 characteristics. Russia's latest generation fighter combined with the use of Western tactics and knowledge made JG 73's aircrew without doubt the best MiG-29 pilots in the world.

During the first training week basic fighter maneuvering, i.e. air combat within visual range, was practiced and the dogfight intensity was gradually built up during the first five days from 1v1 to 2v1, concluding in 2v2 on 26 April. Like many MiG opponents during previous DACT exercises, the Swiss underestimated the Fulcrum's qualities at close range. Like the Hornet, the MiG-29 has great low speed maneuverability,
which allows it to move its nose around in slow-speed fights.

The aircraft's greatest advantage is the AA-11 Archer, a Russian-built infra-red guided missile, which in combination with the pilot's helmet-mounted sight makes the Fulcrum the most feared lethal weapon. This helmet-mounted sight consists of a monocle over the left eye and sensors on helmet and in the cockpit to detect the pilot's head position. Just by looking at the target the pilot can activate a firing solution and the thrust-vectored Archer can be launched up to 45° off the MiG's nose. This superiority is only effective if the enemy is seen as soon as possible.

One of the Fulcrum's disadvantages is the visibility from the cockpit. The Hornet drivers soon realized that the MiG-29 pilots had difficulties 'checking six'. Since an Archer launch includes illuminating the target until impact, the pilot has to keep his head turning towards the target, a very tiresome procedure when performed in heavy G dogfights.

Thirdly, the Fulcrum's cockpit avionics entail considerable workload with a lot of hands-off switches and limited HUD information. When looking inside his cockpit, the MiG-29 pilot is not able to continuously monitor his tactical situation. These elements gave the Hornet drivers the means to tackle the MiG-29's splendid close-range superior performance and partly overcome the Archer off-boresight launch authority.

The Fulcrum's greatest disadvantage was unveiled during the second week, when 4v4 BVR (beyond visual range) 'hops' were performed. Although the MiG-29's radar has a 120° detection capability, only a 50° cone can be used for target detection and tracking. Clearly, this does not give the pilot a good overview of the tactical situation. Since the radar has to be manually steered towards the target's direction,
the pilot greatly depends on GCI information to locate the bogey. During lock-on all other contacts are lost and no target altitude, range or speed information is provided.

The Hornet's low maintenance needs - one flight hour equals about 25 man hours of maintenance work - added to the high operational status throughout the exercise. In this field the German counterparts were in for a challenge, since one MiG-29 flight hour requires no less than 80 man hours of servicing. (!!!!)

Daily many DACT 'hops' were scheduled, averaging to about fourteen MiG-29 sorties per day, but these numbers have to be put into perspective. Each mission comprised a maximum of 25 minutes flying, which unveiled the MiG-29's Achilles heel. Being a real gas guzzler, the Fulcrum's autonomy is very restricted and considered a major worry in its air defense task. Mass-produced in a Cold War period, the Russian aircraft was mainly designed for scramble missions to intercept an intruder. Due to its limited autonomy the Fulcrum hardly fits into today's changed geopolitical strategies, where fighter aircraft are tasked with CAP (Combat Air Patrols) missions and long-range fighter escorts.

Although the installation of a centerline external fuel tank (EFT) can increase the aircraft's autonomy, this configuration has numerous downsides. Since the EFT blocks the discharge route of spent ammunition casings, the tank has to be jettisoned when using the 30mm cannon. This configuration also limits the aircraft's speed to 1.5 Mach and disables the activation of speed brakes. To partly overcome these problems modifications to seven single-seaters enabled the use of two 300 gal (1150 litre) under wing pylons. This configuration however limits the Fulcrums maneuverability to 4 G turns.

Fighter Aicraft, MiG-29/1

Taking the above..
My talks with F-16 flyers.. and a certain pilot who did a evaluation study of the mig-29 for the PAF back in the 90's.
I decided to form my opinion.. I am not shoving it down your throat.. but please do not tell me I am not able to form an opinion.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom