MiG-29 Fulcrum Vs F-16 Falcon

[KSRaj]

Self-delete

 

[TexasJohn]

Anyone know if the MIG-29K is up to SMT standards besides being Navalised?

 

[MastanKhan]

shchinese was molested by indians in australia that is why he is so pissed off

Do we need people like him over here!

 

[PAFAce]

Do we need people like him over here!

Sir, it's just pure class on display. The other day I wanted to show somebody at work why many Pakistanis believe India would assist anti-Pakistan elements, and all I had to do was show him a couple posts by a few Indian members. His words were something along the lines of: If that's the way the average Indian thinks, then I don't blame you guys for testing the A-bomb.

But you're right, we need to cut that kind of sludge off this forum.

 

[gogbot]

Sir, it's just pure class on display. The other day I wanted to show somebody at work why many Pakistanis believe India would assist anti-Pakistan elements, and all I had to do was show him a couple posts by a few Indian members. His words were something along the lines of: If that's the way the average Indian thinks, then I don't blame you guys for testing the A-bomb.

But you're right, we need to cut that kind of sludge off this forum.

See this is something i never get, Even Lock33d tried to tell me this but i simply dont see this.

sure they may be Indian trolls on this site.

But
How Bloody aggressive can we be. You speak as if all we want is the Complete and utter destruction of Pakistan. We simply want change in Pakistan. But that's not the main issue.

from what angle can u say that we are the, blood thirsty maniacs

 

[normalindiancitizen]

Bro, even IAF Mig -21's carry them !

An R-77 on a MiG-21 Bison:One of the first pictures that showed an RVV-AEE fitted to a MiG-21 Bison - from 2002.

I am aware of the fact. Its not "even the Mig 21" the Bison is a really superior aircraft. It has been upgraded dramatically, but the Mig 29 has not. The IAF has not confirmed that it can carry the r-77 yet, so its not safe to assume that they do. However, the ranges of the r-27s itself are magnificent enough . More than a match for any f-16. If any one has any confirmation of Indian mig 29s with r-77s please do tell.

 

[beckham]

I am aware of the fact. Its not "even the Mig 21" the Bison is a really superior aircraft. It has been upgraded dramatically, but the Mig 29 has not. The IAF has not confirmed that it can carry the r-77 yet, so its not safe to assume that they do. However, the ranges of the r-27s itself are magnificent enough . More than a match for any f-16. If any one has any confirmation of Indian mig 29s with r-77s please do tell.

I wasn't marginalizing mig-21, i was trying to show the level of upgrades given to an old airframe provided its being retired.I would consider it the best fighter in IAF after MKI and mirage.

And about the Mig-29 carrying R-77, MiG-29s are already believed to be capable of firing the R-77/AA-12 “AMRAAMski” medium range air-air missile, but photos consistently show the R-27/ AA-10.


according to wiki,

The MiG-29’s good operational record prompted India to sign a deal with Russia in 2005-06 to upgrade all of its MiG-29s for US$888 million. Under the deal, the Indian MiGs were modified so as to deploy the R-77RVV-AE (AA-12 Adder) air-to-air missile, also known as the Amraamski. The missiles had been successfully tested in October 1998 and were integrated into IAF's MiG-29s. IAF has also awarded the MiG Corporation another US$900 million contract to upgrade all of its 69 operational MiG-29s. These upgrades will include a new avionics fit, with the N-109 radar being replaced by a Phazatron Zhuk-M radar. The aircraft is also being equipped to enhance beyond-visual-range combat ability and for air-to-air refuelling to increase endurance.[22] In 2007, Russia also gave India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited a license to manufacture 120 RD-33 series 3 turbojet engines for the upgrade.[23] The upgrade will also include a new weapon control system, cockpit ergonomics, air-to-air missiles, high-accuracy air-to-ground missiles and "smart" aerial bombs. The first six MiG-29s will be upgraded in Russia while the remaining 63 MiGs will be upgraded at the Hindustan Aeronautics facility in India. India also awarded a multi-million dollar contract to Israel Aircraft Industries to provide avionics and subsystems for the upgrade

Even I had some doubts about that, generally confusion arises due to the lack of details available on Upgrade Package.

First thing to know is,

R-77=RVV-AE = AA-12 Adder=Amraamski

Indian AF Embarks on a $800 Million MiG-29 Upgrade

India and Russia have signed a us$800 million program to improve the air-combat capability of its MiG-29s. 78 of the aircraft currently deployed with the IAF will receive a new phased array radar and long range (beyond visual range) missiles. They will also the Klimov-33 engines with digital fuel injection, aerial refueling capability and a modern 'glass cockpit'. The majority of the work will be done in India by HAL through 2010, after prototype work is completed in Russia.

The aircraft will be equipped with the Phazotron Zhuk-ME phased array radar, a modified version of the Zhuk used in the original version. A different version, known as Zhuk AE will be used in the MiG-35 model which is one of several options considered for the IAF future multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) program. Current MiG-29s are armed with R-27 (AA-10) and R-77 (AA-12) beyond visual range missiles for offensive air superiority operations.

Under a parallel plan the IAF plans to upgrade its 52 French made Dassault Mirage 2000H fighters. India is currently in the final stage negotiating the 1.5-billion euro program with Thales and Dassault. Officials said, the upgrade of the Mirage 2000s will begin by June.

 

[МиГ-29]

Well, first off the Mig-29 upgrade is yet to be completed. And it would seem our current Mig-29Bs are only capable of firing the R-27. But I can live with that. People are conveniently forgetting that R-27s hit probability is more than the R-77. IIRC, R-77's probability is 0.7 and R-27's is 0.8 . That is a LOT of difference. Most of our Fulcrums are Mig-29Bs but a few are Mig-29S. So this means some of our Fulcrums can fire 2 simultaneous R-27 missiles at 2 different tracked targets(Remember the kargil incident). Mig-29B's can only track and fire at one. An R-27s range is around 100 kms. But our Fulcrums can't utilize their full range. Mig-29B's radars N019EB(don't know about Mig-29s' radar) can detect a 3sq mt target at 50-70km and track the target at 40-60 km(that drops to 40-70 & 30-60 if the target flies below 3000m). An F-16's rcs is around 3 sq mt. So you can track an F-16 at 30 km and launch an R-27 well beyond the range of Aim-9ls. So BVR goes to Fulcrums.

Close range missile fight, I'm not sure if Mig-29B's have HMS but I have heard Mig-29S have them. With HMS(which current PAF F-16s don't have) Mig-29 wins this round as well.

Close range Missile(without HMS) depends on the circumstances, but high alpha performer like Mig-29 will get a firing solution quickly than a F-16 if the many switches to launch the missile does not suck too much time. For additional detailed parameters during the fight see below paragraph.

Close range cannons. This is without any shred of doubt, would go with the fulcrums. That is because you have read though the history of Mig-29 and F-16's development. Mig-29(contrary to popular internet users beliefs) was made with F-15s in mind. It was Russia's first 4th generation fighter. When the U.S fielded their first 4th generation super-fighter a.k.a F-15, there was panic among the soviet brass. Mig-23 can only fly straight, Mig-23ML & Su-15T were only reasonably maneuverable, and had poor thrust weight ratios compared to F-15s. So the Soviet fight command submitted a list of requirements to Mikoyan to build a super fighter which could counter the F-15. That's the story. After building the fighter, Mikoyan said, the only limiting factor in this plane is the pilot. Mig-29 can easily do 9.5Gs. I saw a documentary where a pilot said it can do 10 for a few seconds safely. This is something a F-15, F-16 and a flanker can only dream of. Although they can do 9, 8-8.5 Gs is their safe limit. The U.S Navy(or was that the Airforce) which uses F-16s to simulate Russian fighters in their training, had fatigue in their airframe so much, some had to be replaced. I heard they bought second hand F-5s from Netherlands(not sure) as a stop gap measure. However Mig-29's drawback when compared to F-15 is TWR. F-15 beats it. Also F-15 and F-16 bleed less energy. This energy save along with TWR advantage means F-15 outclasses Mig-29. Even though it can pull high Gs, it can't sustain its fight with F-15 due to large turn radius because of low TWR. In other words, even though its instantaneous turn rate(due to High G limit and Excellent AoA) is higher than F-16, F-15 & Su-27, it's sustained turn radius(at corner velocity) is higher. In a cannon fight, Mig-29 is toast when compared to F-15. F-16 is a different matter. F-16 is a multirole platform, not a primary dogfighter like the Mig-29. The only advantage F-16 has is its energy bleed. But Mig-29s twin engine TWR is high enough to compensate for F-16s comparatively less energy bleed easily. In a turn fight, the clear victor is the fulcrums. In an energy fight, the fight lasts longer but in the end the Fulcrum will emerge victorious if the Mig pilot has some patience to endure the incrementally small gains of angle, and doesn't turn abruptly utilising his full AoA. F-16 has good handling in super sonic speeds than mig-29, but dogfights, generally take place in low, mid subsonic and high sub-sonic speeds.

When IAF got Su-30MKIs, there was a dogfight between the 2, and guess who won. Our Fulcrums have no G limiter nor a AoA limiter, everything depends on pilot skill. They have high TWR compared to MKIs, and MKIs are draggier than Mig-29s. So the outcome was evident. Most of the time TVC is only useful in a Missile engagement to get a quick firing solution, not a cannon fight.

Mig-29 is IAFs best dogfighter, and will remain so for a long time.

 

[GLOBAL HAWK]

Well, first off the Mig-29 upgrade is yet to be completed. And it would seem our current Mig-29Bs are only capable of firing the R-27. But I can live with that. People are conveniently forgetting that R-27s hit probability is more than the R-77. IIRC, R-77's probability is 0.7 and R-27's is 0.8 . That is a LOT of difference. Most of our Fulcrums are Mig-29Bs but a few are Mig-29S. So this means some of our Fulcrums can fire 2 simultaneous R-27 missiles at 2 different tracked targets(Remember the kargil incident). Mig-29B's can only track and fire at one. An R-27s range is around 100 kms. But our Fulcrums can't utilize their full range. Mig-29B's radars N019EB(don't know about Mig-29s' radar) can detect a 3sq mt target at 50-70km and track the target at 40-60 km(that drops to 40-70 & 30-60 if the target flies below 3000m). An F-16's rcs is around 3 sq mt. So you can track an F-16 at 30 km and launch an R-27 well beyond the range of Aim-9ls. So BVR goes to Fulcrums.

Close range missile fight, I'm not sure if Mig-29B's have HMS but I have heard Mig-29S have them. With HMS(which current PAF F-16s don't have) Mig-29 wins this round as well.

Close range Missile(without HMS) depends on the circumstances. For additional detailed parameters during the fight see below paragraph.

Close range cannons. This is without any shred of doubt, would go with the fulcrums. That is because you have read though the history of Mig-29 and F-16's development. Mig-29(contrary to popular internet users beliefs) was made with F-15s in mind. It was Russia's first 4th generation fighter. When the U.S fielded their first 4th generation super-fighter a.k.a F-15, there was panic among the soviet brass. Mig-23 can only fly straight, Mig-23ML & Su-15T were only reasonably maneuverable, and had poor thrust weight ratios compared to F-15s. So the Soviet fight command submitted a list of requirements to Mikoyan to build a super fighter which could counter the F-15. That's the story. After building the fighter, Mikoyan said, the only limiting factor in this plane is the pilot. Mig-29 can easily do 9.5Gs. I saw a documentary where a pilot said it can do 10 for a few seconds safely. This is something a F-15, F-16 and a flanker can only dream of. Although they can do 9, 8-8.5 Gs is their safe limit. The U.S Navy(or was that the Airforce) which uses F-16s to simulate Russian fighters in their training, had fatigue in their airframe so much, some had to be replaced. I heard they bought second hand F-5s from Netherlands(not sure) as a stop gap measure. However Mig-29's drawback when compared to F-15 is TWR. F-15 beats it. Also F-15 and F-16 bleed less energy. This energy save along with TWR advantage means F-15 outclasses Mig-29. Even though it can pull high Gs, it can't sustain its fight with F-15 due to large turn radius because of low TWR. In other words, even though its instantaneous turn rate(due to High G limit and Excellent AoA) is higher than F-16, F-15 & Su-27, it's sustained turn radius is higher. In a cannon fight, Mig-29 is toast when compared to F-15. F-16 is a different matter. F-16 is a multirole platform, not a primary dogfighter like the Mig-29. The only advantage F-16 has is its energy bleed. But Mig-29s twin engine TWR is high enough to compensate for F-16s comparatively less energy bleed easily. In a turn fight, the clear victor is the fulcrums. In an energy fight, the fight lasts longer but in the end the Fulcrum will emerge victorious if the Mig pilot has some patience to endure the incrementally small gains of angle, and doesn't turn abruptly utilising his full AoA. F-16 has good handling in super sonic speeds than mig-29, but dogfights, generally take place in low, mid subsonic and high sub-sonic speeds.

When IAF got Su-30MKIs, there was a dogfight between the 2, and guess who won. Our Fulcrums have no G limiter nor a AoA limiter, everything depends on pilot skill. They have high TWR compared to MKIs, and MKIs are draggier than Mig-29s. So the outcome was evident. Most of the time TVC is only useful in a Missile engagement to get a quick firing solution, not a cannon fight.

Mig-29 is IAFs best dogfighter, and will remain so for a long time.

Geeees U know a lot about mig 29's

U truly stand upto u'r name. F-15 strike eagle is my blind fold winner compared to Mig-29. Sorry but that's offtopic.

 

[gambit]

Mig-29B's radars N019EB(don't know about Mig-29s' radar) can detect a 3sq mt target at 50-70km and track the target at 40-60 km(that drops to 40-70 & 30-60 if the target flies below 3000m). An F-16's rcs is around 3 sq mt. So you can track an F-16 at 30 km and launch an R-27 well beyond the range of Aim-9ls. So BVR goes to Fulcrums.

An aircraft's RCS depends on its aspect angle to the aggressor radar. An F-16's frontal RCS, even when loaded with external stores, is about 3 meters squared, less if the aircraft is configured for air combat. But RCS also depends on distance and if the -29 cannot detect the F-16 when it is within the F-16's AMRAAM, then the BVR advantage goes to the F-16. The official 'unofficial' standard for any 'fifth generation' aircraft is to be one meter square at 200 km in the X-band.

Close range Missile(without HMS) depends on the circumstances, but high alpha performer like Mig-29 will get a firing solution quickly than a F-16 if the many switches to launch the missile does not suck too much time. For additional detailed parameters during the fight see below paragraph.

There is no 'if' about it. Ergonomics in the -29 is far inferior to the F-16. NATO found that out when the East German Air Force was incorporated back into the main. The motto is 'Lose sight. Lose fight.' And the guy who can switch to air-air mode the quickest improved his odds of winning the fight.

After building the fighter, Mikoyan said, the only limiting factor in this plane is the pilot. Mig-29 can easily do 9.5Gs. I saw a documentary where a pilot said it can do 10 for a few seconds safely. This is something a F-15, F-16 and a flanker can only dream of. Although they can do 9, 8-8.5 Gs is their safe limit. The U.S Navy(or was that the Airforce) which uses F-16s to simulate Russian fighters in their training, had fatigue in their airframe so much, some had to be replaced. I heard they bought second hand F-5s from Netherlands(not sure) as a stop gap measure.

Utter BS. When an aircraft is configured with external stores, the g-limiter will be active to prevent centrifugal forces from over stressing the wing roots. But the F-16 can EASILY achieve and MAINTAIN 9g in a continuous turn. Longer than a few seconds. I have been in those turns. As for your claim about Aggressor F-16, source please. But even if we grant you the latitude, one has to understand that adversary air pilots are not as operationally constrained as the 'regular' pilots. The more aggressive the flying in training, the sooner the aircraft will require depot level maintenance to correct any major structural problems. That is not unusual so your comment is loaded and open to false interpretations. But support your claim with sources.

Mig-29 is IAFs best dogfighter, and will remain so for a long time.

Sure...

 

[МиГ-29]

An aircraft's RCS depends on its aspect angle to the aggressor radar. An F-16's frontal RCS, even when loaded with external stores, is about 3 meters squared, less if the aircraft is configured for air combat. But RCS also depends on distance and if the -29 cannot detect the F-16 when it is within the F-16's AMRAAM, then the BVR advantage goes to the F-16. The official 'unofficial' standard for any 'fifth generation' aircraft is to be one meter square at 200 km in the X-band.

Ofcourse. But i'm talking bout PAF F-16A/B with currently don't have Amraams.
And 3 sq mt on fully loaded F-16 is highly unbelievable. A low-observable design requirement in the 1970's design?

Utter BS. When an aircraft is configured with external stores, the g-limiter will be active to prevent centrifugal forces from over stressing the wing roots. But the F-16 can EASILY achieve and MAINTAIN 9g in a continuous turn. Longer than a few seconds. I have been in those turns. As for your claim about Aggressor F-16, source please. But even if we grant you the latitude, one has to understand that adversary air pilots are not as operationally constrained as the 'regular' pilots. The more aggressive the flying in training, the sooner the aircraft will require depot level maintenance to correct any major structural problems. That is not unusual so your comment is loaded and open to false interpretations. But support your claim with sources.

I'll read that some time ago in a detailed article. I'll try to get that. Maybe you can Pull 9 Gs but the Airframe life will be shortened? Or was it just F-15? My memory is hazy because it was a long time ago. Anyway i found this on a quick google search:

"Despite the fact that (T)F-16Ns were strenghtened, the airframes were experiencing metal fatigue before the end of their operational lifetime. This resulted in their premature withdrawal from service. In 1991, the Navy temporarily grounded its F-16 fleet. The adversary training mission was more and more shifted to F-14s and F-18s. Finally, in 1994, the US Navy announced the retirment of the (T)F-16N fleet; the last F-16N arrived at Davis-Monthan AFB in January 1995."
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article24.html

I'll try to get that article if it's hiding in my many dvds if it has been pulled offline.

Sure...

Dogfighter as in close in cannon Dogfighter.

U truly stand upto u'r name. F-15 strike eagle is my blind fold winner compared to Mig-29. Sorry but that's offtopic.

The new engines on F-15 Es are a beast. unless klimov comes up with something around more than 21000 lbf thrust, Mig-29 will remain underpowered compared to F-15s.

 

[TexasJohn]

MIG-29.... could you answer my earlier question:

Anyone know if the MIG-29K is up to SMT standards besides being Navalised?

 

[МиГ-29]

Anyone know if the MIG-29K is up to SMT standards besides being Navalised?

Yup. As far as avionics are concerned. However in hardpoints, the SMT will have only 6(excluding center line and multi racks) while the K will have 8(excluding center line and multi rack hard points). The SMT upgrade promises only 4500kg weapon load increase, K can carry 5500 kgs. Ks G limit is lowered to 8.5 gs & SMT will also be lowered and wont be the same as a Mig-29B. K & smt is a lot heavier and hence their TWR takes a beating(but Rd-33 series 3 is said to have a marginal thrust increase). Ks fuel capacity is 5240 kgs, compared to Mig-29Bs 3200 kgs(or 4300l). SMTs fuel capacity is 6100l. Everything above is for standard SMT upgrade, IAF may be requesting more than a standard upgrade or not. This should prove a fascinating reading:

T/W ratio = Max Thrust of Engine(s) / (Empty Weight + (3.505 tonnes of fuel & weapons, or only internal Fuel))

1.37 - F-22
1.30 - Su-35BM
1.29 - F-15K
1.26 - Su-27S
1.25 - Eurofighter
1.23 - Su-27SK & J-11A
1.19 - F-15C
1.19 - Rafale C
1.18 - Mig-29M/M2
1.16 - Su-30MKK

1.15 - F/A-18E/F
1.15 - Mig-29B (9-12)
1.14 - Su-30MKI
1.13 - Rafale M
1.13 - Mig-29 (9-13), S & SM
1.10 - Mig-29 BM & SMT
1.09 - F-16E Block 60
1.09 - F-18C
1.09 - J-8III(or J-8C)
1.08 - F-35A

1.08 - Mig-29K
1.08 - F-14 B & D
1.06 - F-16C Block 52 (Block 50: T/W = 1.055)
1.05 - J-8IIm
1.04 - AV-8B+ Harrier II
1.03 - F-2A (F-2B: 1.02)
1.03 - JH-7
1.02 - F-16A Block 10
1.01 - J-8II & J-8IIb & J-8IId
1.00 - F-35B

1.00 - Harrier GR7A
0.99 - Su-34 & Su-32FN & Su-27IB
0.99 - Sea Harrier FA2 & FRS51
0.99 - F-16A Block 20
0.98 - J-10
0.97 - Su-15T
0.95 - MiG-23 ML, MLA & MLD
0.95 - Mig-23P
0.94 - F-35C
0.94 - Gripen NG

0.94 - F-4E
0.94 - J-8
0.93 - Mirage 2000-5
0.93 - Su-15TM
0.93 - F-101B
0.92 - Harrier GR7
0.92 - E E Lightning F6
0.91 - F-16C Block 25
0.91 - Yak-28 I & P
0.91 - F-111F

0.91 - Su-24
0.90 - Su-15
0.88 - Mirage-2000 C & H
0.88 - LCA
0.87 - F-14A
0.87 - Mig-23 MF & MS
0.87 - Su-24 M, MK & M2
0.86 - FCK-1
0.86 - JF-17
0.86 - Su-9

0.84 - Su-11
0.84 - Su-17M
0.83 - Tornado F3 Air Defence Variant
0.83 - Tornado GR1
0.83 - Su-20
0.82 - Su-22
0.81 - Gripen A
0.81 - Su-7B
0.81 - F-20
0.80 - Gripen C

0.80 - Mig-27K
0.80 - Su-7BM
0.79 - Mig-21 Bis (T/W = 1.11 in emergency thrust mode)
0.79 - JA-37 Viggen
0.79 - Mig-27
0.79 - Su-17M2
0.78 - Mig-23BN
0.78 - Su-7 BKL & BMK
0.78 - Javelin FAW MK9
0.77 - Mig-23S

0.77 - J-7IIIa
0.76 - Mig-27 D & ML
0.76 - Mig-23M(E)
0.76 - F-106A
0.76 - F-7MG & F-7BG & F-7PG & J-7E & J-7G (WP-7N: T/W = 0.69)
0.76 - Q-5D
0.75 - Kfir C.7
0.75 - Kfir C.2
0.75 - AJ-37 Viggen
0.75 - J-7III

0.74 - Mig-21SM
0.73 - Su-17
0.73 - Mig-21MF
0.73 - Su-17M3
0.73 - Mig-19S** (MTOW T/W = 0.86)
0.72 - Yak-27K
0.72 - Su-17M4
0.72 - F-104G
0.71 - Mig-19P** (MTOW T/W = 0.84)
0.71 - Mig-21PF

0.71 - Supermarine Scimitar F.1
0.71 - Cheetah C
0.70 - Mig-21M
0.70 - Su-25SM
0.69 - Jaguar GR1
0.69 - J-35F Draken
0.69 - Mig-21F
0.69 - Mig-21 F-13
0.69 - J-7II
0.69 - Su-25 or Su-25T

0.68 - F-105F/G
0.68 - Mirage 50
0.68 - F-7M(or F-7MP or F-7MB) & F-7P
0.67 - F-1
0.67 - F4D-1/F-6 Skyray
0.66 - Mirage F-1
0.66 - F-8P
0.64 - F-102A
0.63 - Sea Vixen FAW.2
0.63 - Su-25TM or Su-39

0.62 - Yak-27
0.61 - Yak38M (TWR during takeoff: 1.20)
0.61 - Mirage-5A
0.61 - J-32B Lansen
0.60 - A-4S1
0.59 - Mirage-III E & D
0.58 - Yak-38 (TWR during takeoff: 1.16)
0.58 - IAI Nesher
0.58 - F-5E Tiger-II
0.56 - F-100D

0.56 - A-6E
0.55 - A-7E
0.51 - Super Étendard
0.50 - F3H-2 Demon
0.49 - A-10A
0.49 - F-11A
0.49 - AMX
0.47 - Étendard-IV M
0.46 - F-89D
0.46 - Super Mystère B.2

0.46 - Hunter F 6
0.45 - Marut Mk.1
0.43 - Yak-25
0.43 - F-94C/F-97A
0.43 - F9F-8/F-9J Cougar
0.41 - A-37B
0.37 - Mystère IVA
0.37 - FJ-4 Fury
0.36 - F7U-3M
0.34 - F-84F

0.33 - J-29F Tunnan
0.33 - P-80C
0.32 - Supermarine Attacker F.1
0.31 - F2H-3 Banshee
0.30 - Ouragan M.D.450B
0.30 - F3D-2 Sky Night
0.29 - Venom FB.1
0.29 - F-84G


Pure Interceptors
1.30 - Mig-31M
1.30 - Mig-31BM
1.28 - Mig-31B
1.27 - Mig-31FE
1.27 - Mig-31E
1.22 - Mig-31
1.21 - Mig-25M
1.00 - Mig-25 P & PD
0.93 - Mig-25BM
0.74 - Tu-128


Empty Weight - Thrust - Fighter

43,340 - 35,000 X 2 - F-22
41,447 - 31,967 X 2 - Su-35BM
37,500 - 29,160 X 2 - F-15K
36,111 - 27,557 X 2 - Su-27S
24,250 - 20,000 X 2 - Eurofighter
37,192 - 27,557 X 2 - Su-27SK & J-11A
20,948 - 17,000 X 2 - Rafale C
31,700 - 23,450 X 2 - F-15C
25,573 - 19,580 X 2 - Mig-29M/M2
39,903 - 27,557 X 2 - Su-30MKK

30,600 - 22,000 X 2 - F/A-18E/F
24,030 - 18,300 X 2 - Mig-29B (9-12)
40,565 - 27,557 X 2 - Su-30MKI
22,478 - 17,000 X 2 - Rafale M
24,692 - 18,300 X 2 - Mig-29 (9-13), S & SM
25,573 - 18,300 X 2 - Mig-29 BM & SMT
22,000 - 32,500 X 1 - F-16E Block 60
24,700 - 17,700 X 2 - F-18C
22,509 - 16,535 X 2 - J-8III(or J-8C)
29,300 - 39,900 X 1 - F-35A

28,550 - 19,580 X 2 - Mig-29K
43,600 - 27,800 X 2 - F-14 B & D
19,700 - 29,160 X 1 - F-16C Block 52(Block 50: 420lb & 240lbf more)
21,671 - 15,422 X 2 - J-8IIm
14,865 - 23,400 X 1 - AV-8B+ Harrier II
21,000 - 29,600 X 1 - F-2A (F-2B: 21,235)
31,967 - 20,515 X 2 - JH-7
15,600 - 23,830 X 1 - F-16A Block 10
21,671 - 14,815 X 2 - J-8II & J-8IIb & J-8IId
32,000 - 39,900 X 1 - F-35B

15,708 - 23,400 X 1 - Harrier GR7A
49,163 - 28,219 X 2 - Su-34 & Su-32FN & Su-27IB
14,052 - 21,450 X 1 - Sea Harrier FA2 & FRS51
16,285 - 23,830 X 1 - F-16A Block 20
20,394 - 27,557 X 1 - J-10
22,818 - 14,770 X 2 - Su-15T
22,553 - 28,660 X 1 - MiG-23 ML, MLA & MLD
22,520 - 28,660 X 1 - Mig-23P
34,800 - 39,900 X 1 - F-35C
15,653 - 22,000 X 1 - Gripen NG

30,328 - 17,845 X 2 - F-4E
20,470 - 13,219 X 2 - J-8
16,000 - 22,045 X 1 - Mirage 2000-5
23,970 - 14,770 X 2 - Su-15TM
28,495 - 16,900 X 2 - F-101B
15,708 - 21,450 X 1 - Harrier GR7
28,042 - 16,360 X 2 - E E Lightning F6
18,238 - 23,770 X 1 - F-16C Block 25
21,980 - 13,448 X 2 - Yak-28 I & P
47,481 - 25,100 X 2 - F-111F

46,738 - 24,692 X 2 - Su-24
22,531 - 13,669 X 2 - Su-15
16,538 - 21,384 X 1 - Mirage 2000 C & H
14,100 - 19,100 X 1 - LCA
40,104 - 20,900 X 2 - F-14A
24,008 - 27,558 X 1 - Mig-23 MF & MS
49,163 - 24,801 X 2 - Su-24 M, MK & M2
14,300 - 09,500 X 2 - FCK-1
14,520 - 19,200 X 1 - JF-17
16,920 - 21,164 X 1 - Su-9

18,876 - 22,267 X 1 - Su-11
21,605 - 24,692 X 1 - Su-17M
31,970 - 16,410 X 2 - Tornado F3 Air Defence Variant
31,065 - 16,005 X 2 - Tornado GR1
21,936 - 24,692 X 1 - Su-20
23,027 - 25,353 X 1 - Su-22
14,595 - 18,097 X 1 - Gripen A
18,453 - 21,164 X 1 - Su-7B
13,150 - 17,000 X 1 - F-20
14,991 - 18,097 X 1 - Gripen C

26,252 - 27,558 X 1 - Mig-27K
18,629 - 21,164 X 1 - Su-7BM
12,037 - 15,654 X 1 - Mig-21 Bis (21,829 - emergency thrust*)
27,866 - 28,100 X 1 - JA-37 Viggen
24,317 - 25,336 X 1 - Mig-27
23,369 - 24,692 X 1 - Su-17M2
24,692 - 25,336 X 1 - Mig-23BN
19,599 - 21,164 X 1 - Su-7 BKL & BMK
23,955 - 12,300 X 2 - Javelin FAW MK9
21,583 - 22,487 X 1 - Mig-23S

11,629 - 14,815 X 1 - J-7IIIa
25,573 - 25,336 X 1 - Mig-27 D & ML
22,046 - 22,487 X 1 - Mig-23M(E)
24,420 - 24,500 X 1 - F-106A
11,667 - 14,650 X 1 - F-7MG & F-7BG & F-7PG & J-7E & J-7G (WP-7N: 13,450lbf)
14,054 - 08,269 X 2 - Q-5D
17,130 - 18,750 X 1 - Kfir C.7
16,061 - 17,901 X 1 - Kfir C.2
27,006 - 25,970 X 1 - AJ-37 Viggen
11,861 - 14,650 X 1 - J-7III

11,574 - 14,308 X 1 - Mig-21SM
21,164 - 21,164 X 1 - Su-17
11,795 - 14,308 X 1 - Mig-21MF
26,014 - 24,692 X 1 - Su-17M3
12,009 - 07,165 X 2 - Mig-19S** (MTOW: 16,667)
15,443 - 08,318 X 2 - Yak-27K
26,810 - 24,692 X 1 - Su-17M4
14,082 - 15,600 X 1 - F-104G
12,507 - 07,165 X 2 - Mig-19P** (MTOW: 17,042)
11,354 - 13,492 X 1 - Mig-21PF

23,962 - 11,250 X 2 - Supermarine Scimitar F.1
14,550 - 15,900 X 1 - Cheetah C
11,795 - 13,613 X 1 - Mig-21M
20,723 - 09,921 X 2 - Su-25SM
15,432 - 08,040 X 2 - Jaguar GR1
17,339 - 17,262 X 1 - J-35F Draken
10,624 - 12,654 X 1 - Mig-21F
10,739 - 12,654 X 1 - Mig-21 F-13
11,850 - 13,219 X 1 - J-7II
20,944 - 09,921 X 2 - Su-25 or Su-25T

28,393 - 24,500 X 1 - F-105F/G
15,763 - 15,870 X 1 - Mirage 50
11,629 - 13,219 X 1 - F-7M(or F-7MP or F-7MB) & F-7P
14,017 - 07,305 X 2 - F-1
16,024 - 16,000 X 1 - F4D-1/F-6 Skyray
16,314 - 15,873 X 1 - Mirage F-1
19,700 - 18,000 X 1 - F-8P
19,350 - 17,200 X 1 - F-102A
27,954 - 11,240 X 2 - Sea Vixen FAW.2
23,677 - 09,921 X 2 - Su-25TM or Su-39

15,395 - 07,165 X 2 - Yak-27
16,535 - 14,770 X 1 - Yak38M (Lift engines: 07,165 X 2)
14,550 - 13,669 X 1 - Mirage-5A
16,535 - 14,680 X 1 - J-32B Lansen
10,250 - 10,800 X 1 - A-4S1
15,540 - 13,669 X 1 - Mirage-III E & D
15,476 - 13,448 X 1 - Yak-38 (Lift engines: 06,724 X 2)
16,061 - 13,669 X 1 - IAI Nesher
09,558 - 05,000 X 2 - F-5E Tiger-II
20,638 - 16,000 X 1 - F-100D

25,630 - 09,300 X 2 - A-6E
19,781 - 15,000 X 1 - A-7E
14,220 - 11,265 X 1 - Super Étendard
21,287 - 14,400 X 1 - F3H-2 Demon
29,000 - 09,065 X 2 - A-10A
12,610 - 04,409 X 2 - Yak-25
13,810 - 10,500 X 1 - F-11A
14,837 - 11,030 X 1 - AMX
13,007 - 09,703 X 1 - Étendard-IV M
24,200 - 07,400 X 2 - F-89D

14,087 - 09,920 X 1 - Super Mystère B.2
14,121 - 10,146 X 1 - Hunter F 6
13,658 - 04,856 X 2 - Marut Mk.1
12,708 - 08,750 X 1 - F-94C/F-97A
11,866 - 08,500 X 1 - F9F-8/F-9J Cougar
06,211 - 02,850 X 2 - A-37B
12,941 - 07,734 X 1 - Mystère IVA
13,210 - 07,700 X 1 - FJ-4 Fury
18,210 - 04,600 X 2 - F7U-3M
13,830 - 07,220 X 1 - F-84F

10,681 - 06,070 X 1 - J-29F Tunnan
08,420 - 05,400 X 1 - P-80C
08,426 - 05,100 X 1 - Supermarine Attacker F.1
13,183 - 03,250 X 2 - F2H-3 Banshee
09,132 - 04,991 X 1 - Ouragan M.D.450B
14,989 - 03,400 X 2 - F3D-2 Sky Night
09,200 - 04,856 X 1 - Venom FB.1
11,470 - 05,560 X 1 - F-84G



Pure Interceptors
48,281 - 36,376 X 2 - Mig-31M
48,115 - 36,376 X 2 - Mig-31BM
45,569 - 34,171 X 2 - Mig-31B
49,383 - 36,376 X 2 - Mig-31FE
46,297 - 34,171 X 2 - Mig-31E
48,104 - 34,171 X 2 - Mig-31
41,667 - 29,762 X 2 - Mig-25M
41,447 - 24,684 X 2 - Mig-25 P & PD
45,415 - 24,684 X 2 - Mig-25BM
54,013 - 22,706 X 2 - Tu-128



Data from Official company & military sites, Aerospaceweb.org, Airwar.ru, Globalsecurity.org, Fas.org, Warfare.ru, Wikipedia.org & its references, and Other sources.
Not all of them are fighters.
Weight in lb, and Thrust in lbf.
3505 kg = 7727 lb
* 21,829 extra thrust for 3 min & alt less than 4000m.
** Empty weight + 7727 lb exceeds max takeoff weight. Except Mig-19 all other fighters are omitted.

 

[МиГ-29]

The most advanced flanker, the МиГ-35:

Empty weight reduced by use of composites, High G load, More payload, more fuel, more engine power, more range and Aesa. Mig-35's TWR as per the table above would be 1.24.

 

[gambit]

Ofcourse. But i'm talking bout PAF F-16A/B with currently don't have Amraams.

No technical barrier.

And 3 sq mt on fully loaded F-16 is highly unbelievable. A low-observable design requirement in the 1970's design?

Low radar reflectivity have always been a consideration, but until Ufimtsev and Lockheed came along, low radar reflectivity was not given the high priority like today. The F-16's clean one meter square at 200km was incidental, not purposely designed, due to its planforming for high maneuverability. Three meters square at the same distance because of two external fuel and bombs is not incredible.

I'll read that some time ago in a detailed article. I'll try to get that. Maybe you can Pull 9 Gs but the Airframe life will be shortened? Or was it just F-15? My memory is hazy because it was a long time ago. Anyway i found this on a quick google search:

"Despite the fact that (T)F-16Ns were strenghtened, the airframes were experiencing metal fatigue before the end of their operational lifetime. This resulted in their premature withdrawal from service. In 1991, the Navy temporarily grounded its F-16 fleet. The adversary training mission was more and more shifted to F-14s and F-18s. Finally, in 1994, the US Navy announced the retirment of the (T)F-16N fleet; the last F-16N arrived at Davis-Monthan AFB in January 1995."
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article24.html

I'll try to get that article if it's hiding in my many dvds if it has been pulled offline.

If you actually read your source, you would see what I explained...

The F-16N and F-16N aircraft were based on F-16 Block 30E models, and were all built during 1987/1988. They were optimized for one thing only: the Dissimilar Air Combat Training mission. The airframes were made lighter, and they were strengthened to cope with the continuous high-G loads associated with air combat manoeuvring.

In war, continuous high-G loads are to be expected. But in peace, not every sortie will have high-G maneuvers. Some will be for air refuel training. Some will be for ground attack training. Functional check flights (FCF) does maneuver the aircraft but not for high-G loads and FCFs are usually done after major maintenance, such as exiting depot level, to verify if basic maneuvers can be performed, except if maintenance was on an item that is critical for high-G loads. Adversary air aircrafts often have twice the time they spent at high-G loads than the opponents they faced.

Look up the 'Constant Peg' program. The US have been flying Soviet fighters for years.