Russia is seriously concerned over JF-17's take over on MiG-29

[DESERT FIGHTER]

And you think Pakistan's F-16s are not downgraded?

Like what? Avionics?JHMS?engine?radar? Pod?EW suite?

Certain systems on the Mig-29 will always be downgraded or removed altogether but in the case of India, India always receives the better versions compared with other countries mostly because the Arabs have a history of defectons and letting westerners inspect their aircraft. In fact India operates some of the most advanced aircraft in the world because they have the option of integrating, French, Israeli, or their own avionics, along with the Russian ones that come with the aircraft all of this is possible through open architecture as well as Russia's willingness to allow it, and of course only privileged countries are sold Israli and French systems. Pakistan was denied French avionics.

?LOL.... seriously thts your excuse? take a look at Saddams Airforce... he could have bought anything in the world...and was anti America , Or ...even the Yugos-serbs during the time... your excuse in invalid!

As for avionics in indian migs... no other country including USA,EU guys are cool with foreign buyers modifying or replacing systems in their product... There is a reason for it..

Also what abt the faulty missiles,krasnopol,bursting T-72s... faullty smirchs etc..etc?

Soviets were known to prefer quantity over quality!

As for Pakistan and Spectra upgrade... view the related thread!

And your point is......?

Just bursting your false claims abt your "precieved" mighty migs!

You are very dishonest and have tendencies of making claims without verification. The E-3 flew 5,052 hours during Desert storm, do the math, the air campaign only lasted about a month. Moreover, 38 of 41 aircraft that were destroyed during Desert Storm were aided with AWACs. Yugoslovia also involved 4,800 flight hours from AWACs. AWACs aircraft detect targets for other aircraft well before those aircraft can themselves detect them. This means that without AWACs Iraqi aircraft could have flew right up to NATO aircraft and fired at them without the NATO aircraft ever knowing that the Iraqis were there. Yet the opposite occurred, AWACs vectored NATO aircraft to the best possible attack position to Stay out of Iraqi radar, in essence in Iraqis didn't know they were being detected

.

Iraqis also had AWACs... etc... anyways... the Yugo mig-29s were shot down in Bosnian territory... Serb pilots navi systems were experiencing troubles not radar.... also the Dutch F-16 shot him... without Sentry cover :

After a pause of almost a month, on 4 May finally Lt.Col. Milenko Pavlovic scrambled on MiG-29 to intercept a NATO strike in the area of Valjevo, his home-town, which the previous night was first hit by an earthquake and then by a heavy NATO-strike. Appearing too late on the scene and experiencing one malfunction of the navigation system on his aircraft after the other, Lt.Col. Pavlovic was eventually intercepted by two USAF F-16Cs. Both US fighters were flying on the end of the NATO-formation, and had to be turned around by the E-3 Sentry AWACS aircraft in order to engage – while simultaneously also attacked by the Serbian air defence units. Lt.Col. Pavlovic was shot down within a short period of time, and killed.

Both Iraqis and Serbs had BVRs... and were shot down with AIM,AMRAAMs..


What abt the African wars? same result... apart from shooting prop planes and shitty old mig-21s what did they achieve?

Apart from tht... compare the basic mig-29s to older block F-16s... in mock combat ex ... still failures?

And NATO aircraft staying outside Iraqi-29s radar range lmao.. they shot 5 Iraqi migs.. in 91.. remember?

Do some research, many countries have replaced American avionics in their F-16s such as Israel, Japan, and Turkey to an extent.

Turks only produced an IFF system not sure if they used it on their F-16s as of now) ...and also produce the jet under liscense ... F-2 again liscense produced and got help from LM...60% of F-2 produced in USA... again LM+Mitsu partnership..

Israeli "sufa" again manufactured by LM..

The Indians replace certain systems because Russia allows it, France and Isreal also allow it. If Russia said no then it wouldn't happen. It makes me wonder, do other countries allow that kind of freedom with their aircraft? Do other countries have the privilege of purchasing from France and Israel? In Pakistan's case it tried to purchase French avionics for the Rafale but was denied.



In any case, if the Indians had F-16s they would try to replace certain systems too just like many other countries have done so with the F-16.

Lmao.. which French jets system was replaced by Indians? heck they are looting Indians with the ugrade of ther mirages ...(which cost as much as the jet)... remember? just like you guys who doubled the price of their AC ?

As for JF-17 and SPECTRA upgrade yes initially we wanted tht... and the cock blocker was the indian MRCA deal....but since tht lots of things have changed and PAF is happy with the avionics which are now built by Pak+China.. apart from tht hope you know Vixen AESA was also offered to Pakistan... for more info :

JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 5] | Page 123

I have read the reports and I suspect you are quoting wekepedia which has no reference. The reports I have read was that those missiles were fired out of range. We have plenty of evidence of the R-73 hitting its target on the first attempt, such incident include the Georgian UAV that filmed an R-73 destroying it. We have demonstration videos of R-73s hitting drones or other aerial targets on first attempts, ect. Even old R-60s have destroyed many aircraft.

A missile hitting it's target depends on the following:

--Range

--Vector

--Clouds

--Evasive maneuvers

--Counter measures



When the R-73 is within range, it hits it's target with a high degree of accuracy which we have video proof of.

Lmao... in Eritrean - Ethniopian conflict the missile was put to test... jets flown by Russian mercs remember? your video lmao..










Okay let's do that.

As much as your source which you quoted from a forum tries to slam the old Mig-29 and even goes as far as claiming that the F-16 is a more maneuverable platform the Mig-29 wiped the floor with the F-16. The Germans as well as the Israelis debunked much of the claims in the article. Moreover, even if we take those claims at face value, all of the issues he complained about were fixed long ago, such as pilots interface, mechanical flight controls, ect. At the end of the day, the article was a chest thumping peice written by America strong!!!

Yeah F-16.net ... the guy has 2000 hours on F-16 and 500 on mig-29... Has a Master's Degree in aerospace engineering ...

As for fixing stuff ... dude... he compared your migs to older block of F-16s not Block 52..

And the guy is a GERMAN not a MARTIAN...

As for Israeli stamp of approval... yeah ... they shot Syrian mig-29s with their F-16s aswell...

Apart from tht they also gave their "stamp of approval" to Arjun mbt... ... And we know how tht worked out don't we? with more t-90s... coupled with western imagery systems and no Shotra-1s etc...

ANOTHER NEUTRAL SOURCE:



Schlemming with the Fulcrums,
F-16/MiG-29 Training in Italy
Article by Eric Hehs

Four Cyrillic letters adorn a toggle switch in the MiG-29 cockpit. The letters spell a word that sounds like schlemm. The switch activates a helmet-mounted sight system used to designate targets for one of the most formidable air-to-air missiles any USAF fighter pilot may ever face, and actually ever face-the AA-11 Archer.

The system allows pilots the MiG-29 to shoot the thrust-vectored Archer where their planes are not pointing. With a turn of the head, they can target opposing aircraft up to forty-five degrees off the nose of the MiG. When MiG-29 pilots of Germany's Jagdgeschwader 73 (Fighter Wing 73) use the helmet-mounted sight system in simulated engagements, they call it a schlemm shot . (Not surprising, schlemm means grand slam in German.)

Only a handful of USAF fighter pilots have ever been schlemmed. Those who have, though, consider themselves lucky. They have experienced what others have only read about or encountered in simulations. With experience comes credibility. And as of last May 1995, the most credible squadron when it comes to fighting the MiG-29 is the 510th Fighter Squadron from Aviano Air Base in northern Italy.

Most people associate Aviano with Deny Flight Operations over Bosnia. Many pilots of the 510th and its sister F-16 squadron, the 555th, have been flying over Bosnia from Aviano for most three years without much attention. Until recently, that is. These days, the squadrons fly these missions for two-month shifts every six months. The units spend two of the remaining four months training at Aviano and two months deployed. On one such deployment last year to Decimomannu Air Base on the southern tip of Sardinia, Capt. Will Sparrow of the 510th learned about an upcoming German MiG-29 visit to the island. The Fulcrums, he heard, were looking for aerial adversaries. "We were on the phone about thirty seconds later getting our name on the books to come back down here," Sparrow recalled.

A few months after that call, the 510th headed back to Sardinia with ten F-16s and an able support team for a four-week MiG-29 Fest. The JG 73 sent ten Fulcrums and fifteen air-to-air German F-4Fs. The pilots flew a variety of setups, from simple one F-16 flying basic fighter maneuvers against one MiG-29, to more complex encounters of four F-16s teamed against four MiG-29s. Two F-16s also flew against two MiG-29s and two F-4Fs. 'We called that two v two plus two," explained Sparrow. "The MiGs practice a lot of tactics with the F-4s to make use of the F-4's radar."

The more complex engagements were simultaneously monitored by ground controllers who used the air combat maneuvering instrumentation facilities at Decimomannu to guide the aerial combatants. The ACMI facilities were also used by the aircrews to review the engagements. "Decimomannu is a fantastic place to train," said Sparrow, who was in charge of the deployment for the 510th. "The base has an ACMI that can't be beat for debriefing. And they have a bombing range nearby at Cappa Frasca.

"I hope this deployment receives a lot of attention because it deserves a lot," Sparrow continued. "Not because we're here, but because we're learning about aircraft very similar to the German MiGs, aircraft that could cause us a lot of problems. As for what we expected before coming down here, we would get ten different answers from ten different pilots. We've heard a lot of things about the MiG-29. We all read the same stuff and get the same information. But we never really know what to believe. We now know they are a great adversary. They were everything I expected and more. Nothing can substitute for training like this. We go out and fight ourselves a lot and we try to make those encounters as realistic as possible. But this is the real thing. And these MiG pilots are really well trained."

Germany's MiG-29 unit is based at Laage Air Base near Rostock on the Baltic coast. Before German reunification in 1990, the aircraft flew for the former East Germany and the Warsaw Pact. After reunification, the Fulcrums became a test wing for the German Air Force. In 1993, the unit became an operational wing. Its twenty-four Fulcrums and twenty-eight pilots officially became a combined wing with an F-4 unit from Pferdsfeld Air Base in 1994. The unit formally maintains an alert role and polices the air over the five republics that comprise the former East Germany. Many of Germany's MiG-29 pilots are former F-4 pilots who were trained in the United States. These pilots volunteered to convert to the Fulcrum, which currently represents the most advanced fighter in the German Luftwaffe.

The JG-73 has also retained a number of former East German MiG-29 pilots who have had to tailor their knowledge of the airplane to fit western style tactics. Most of the Fulcrum pilots have fewer than 300 hours in the aircraft. Only a few have over 400 hours. No one in the unit, including former East German pilots, has over 500 hours in the MiG-29.

This was not the JG 73's first encounter with advanced western aircraft. The wing flew against Dutch F-16s at Decimomannu last year and against Spanish F-18s for two weeks in 1993. The Germans deploy to Sardinia because the ACMI facilities are there and because air-to-air combat training is restricted over the former East Germany, which covers Laage Air Base. The restriction, however, may be dropped later this year.

"The highlight of this deployment for me has been the BFM (basic fighter maneuvering, i.e., modern dogfighting) against a clean F-16C," explained Capt. Oliver Prunk, the operations officer for JG 73. "The F-16C performs significantly better in terms of power when compared with the F-16A. I was also pleased with the proficiency of the American pilots. They take their jobs very seriously. We try to be the best adversary we can. I think they were surprised with the performance of the MiG-29 and with what we can do with it."

The most impressive aspect of the Fulcrum's performance for the American pilots was its low-speed maneuverability. "In a low-speed fight, fighting the Fulcrum is similar to fighting an F-18 Hornet," explained Capt. Mike McCoy of the 510th. "But the Fulcrum has a thrust advantage over the Hornet. An F-18 can really crank its nose around if you get into a slow-speed fight, but it has to lose altitude to regain the energy, which allows us to get on top of them. The MiG has about the same nose authority at slow speeds, but it can regain energy much faster. Plus the MiG pilots have that forty-five-degree cone in front of them into which they can fire an Archer and eat you up."

The off-boresight missile, as described in the opening scenario, proved to be a formidable threat, though not an insurmountable one. "Some of their capabilities were more wicked than we originally thought," said McCoy. "We had to respect the helmet-mounted sight, which made our decisions to anchor more difficult. In other words, when I got close in, I had to consider that helmet-mounted sight. Every time I got near a Fulcrum's nose, I was releasing flares to defeat an Archer coming off his rail."

"Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG's helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight," explained Lt. Col. Gary West, commander of the 510th. "We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected.

We encountered some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots' ideas on how they should approach a MiG-29 in a neutral fight. Below 200 knots, the MiG-29 has incredible nose-pointing capability down to below 100 knots. The F-16, however, enjoys an advantage in the 200 knot-plus regime. At higher speeds, we can power above them to go to the vertical. And our turn rate is significantly better. By being patient and by keeping airspeed up around 325 knots, an F-16 can bring the MiG-29 to its nose. But the pilot must still be careful of the across-the-circle shot with that helmet-mounted sight.

"We have done very well on neutral BFM engagements," continued West. "We have tried single and two-circle fights, depending on how much lead turn we had at the merge. Without exception, we have been able to use finesse or power to an advantage after at least a couple of turns. I don't think any F-16 pilot has gotten defensive and stayed there. As always, and this applies to any airplane, success depends on who is flying."

Three pilots from the 510th received backseat rides in one of the JG-73's two-seat MiG-29 trainers. Capt. Sparrow was one of them. "The MiG is harder to fly than the F-16," said Sparrow. "The Soviet airframe is great, but the avionics are not user friendly. After flying in the backseat of the Fulcrum, I got a feel for how spoiled we are in the F-16. I always felt good about the F-16, but I wouldn't trade flying the F-16 for any other aircraft, foreign or domestic.

"The Fulcrum doesn't have the crisp movements of an F-16," Sparrow continued. "You need to be an octopus in the MiG-29 to work the avionics. Those German pilots have it tough. Just to get a simple lock on and fire a missile may take a half dozen hands-off switches or so. We can do the same with a flick of the thumb while we are looking at the HUD. F-16 pilots also have a significant sight advantage. A couple of hundred feet advantage can make a difference in air-to-air combat; the actual difference is more significant than that. MiG-29 pilots have a tough time checking their six o'clock. Their canopy rail is higher. They can lose sight of us even when flying BFM."

"Their visibility is not that good," agreed McCoy, one of the other two pilots who enjoyed a spin in the Fulcrum. "Their disadvantage is a real advantage for us. F-16 pilots sit high in the cockpit. All the MiG-29 pilots who sat in our cockpit wanted to look around with the canopy closed. They were impressed that they could turn around and look at the tail and even see the engine can."

"Besides visibility, I expected better turning performance," McCoy continued. "The MiG-29 is not a continuous nine-g machine like the F-16. I tried to do some things I normally do in an F-16. For example, I tried a high-AOA guns jink. I got the Fulcrum down to about 180 knots and pulled ninety degrees of bank and started pulling heavy g's. I then went to idle and added a little rudder to get the jet to roll with ailerons. The pilot took control away from me in the middle of these maneuvers because the airplane was about to snap. I use the F-16's quick roll rate like this all the time with no problem.

"I also tried to do a 250-knot loop," McCoy recalled. "I went to mil power and stabilized. As I went nose high, I asked for afterburner. I had to hamfist the airplane a little as I approached the top of the loop. I was still in afterburner at about 15,000 feet and the jet lost control. The nose started slicing left and right. I let go of the stick and the airplane righted itself and went down. It couldn't finish the loop. In the F-16, we can complete an entire loop at 250 knots."

Like Sparrow, McCoy climbed out of the MiG-29 cockpit feeling better about the F-16, especially its automation. "The biggest instrument in the MiG-29 cockpit is the clock," McCoy said. "It took me a while to understand this. But a large clock is needed to keep track of the time after launching a missile. When they launch a missile, they have to consider their shot range and the type of missile they are shooting and estimate how long it will take to impact before firing. When they take a five-mile Alamo shot, for example, they have to calculate mentally the time required for the missile to reach its target so their radar can illuminate it for the duration. They fire and watch until they know when they can turn away. That procedure is a real disadvantage if they're flying against someone who shot a missile at them at about the same time.

"F-16 pilots don't have to think about these things," McCoy continued. "We have great automation. When we launch a missile, the airplane performs all the calculations and displays a countdown on the head-up display for us. When we're within ten miles, we want our eyes out of the cockpit looking for flashes or smoke from an adversary. That's why our head-up display is focused to infinity. We can view information without refocusing our eyes to scan the horizon. Inside of ten miles, Fulcrum pilots are moving their hands around flipping about six switches, some they have to look at. I am moving one, maybe two switches, without taking my hands off the throttle and stick."

German Fulcrum pilots realize the limitations, and advantages, of their aircraft. "If you define an F-16 as a third-generation fighter, it is not fair to speak of the MiG-29 as a third-generation aircraft because of its avionics," said Lt. Col. Manfred Skeries, the deputy commander of the JG-73. "Aerodynamics, now, are something different." Skeries is the former commander of all East German fighter forces and the first German pilot to fly the MiG-29. His comments came after he received his first flight in the F-16.

"The MiG-29's avionics are a shortcoming," admitted Capt. Michael Raubbach, a Fulcrum pilot of the JG 73. "Its radar-warning and navigational equipment are not up to Western standards. The Russian idea of hands-on throttle and stick is not the same as it is in the West. It is true that we have to look in the cockpit a lot to flip switches. And the way information is provided and the accuracy with which it is provided-in the navigational equipment in particular-doesn't allow full employment in the Western concept.

"Our visibility is not as good as an F-16 or even an F-15," Raubbach continued. "We can't see directly behind us. We have to look out the side slightly to see behind us, which doesn't allow us to maintain a visual contact and an optimum lift vector at the same time. This shortcoming can be a real problem, especially when flying against an aircraft as small as the F-16. But as a German, I can't complain about the MiG's visibility. The aircraft offers the greatest visibility in our air force."

Raubbach is one of many Western-trained pilots who volunteered for the first five MiG-29 slots that became available after Germany made the JG 73 an operational wing. He is now an instructor pilot for the unit. "The helmet-mounted sight is a real advantage when it comes to engagements requiring a visual identification," Raubbach said. "It offers no advantage in a BVR engagement, however, unless you enter a short-range fight, which is not very likely against an AMRAAM-equipped opponent like we are facing here."

The Westernization of an Eastern aircraft has presented its own problems. The MiG-29's powerful Isotov RD-33 engines, designed as disposable commodities for a mass force, were intended to run about 400 hours before they had to be replaced. (By comparison, F-16 engines can run about 4,000 hours between overhauls.) The Germans have managed almost to double the RD-33's lifespan by detuning the engines by ten percent. Besides lowering thrust, the cost-saving fix has reduced range and dirtied the exhaust at lower altitudes. The move from JP-4 to NATO's standard fuel JP-8 has also hurt engine performance.

"The engines have been extremely reliable," commented Raubbach. "It goes from afterburner to military power, without problems, at various speeds and under varying g conditions. I can feel the difference detuning makes only at higher speeds. We have many spare engines. We had a shortage at one time, but we now have a big supply. Engines do not represent a shortcoming for us."

Though aerodynamically adept, the MiG-29's performance is constrained by avionics conforming to Soviet tactical doctrine. The aircraft was designed to rely heavily on a centralized system of ground controllers, which could take control of the aircraft's radar. The system could also land the plane if necessary. "Warsaw Pact pilots were not taught to evaluate a situation as it occurs in the air," Prunk explained. "Pilots were used to a system that made many decisions for them. The aircraft's guidance system had room for only six preprogrammed steerpoints, including three targets. The radio had twenty preselected channels at frequencies unknown to the pilot.

"The aircraft was not built for close-in dogfighting, though it is aerodynamically capable of it," Prunk continued. "The East Germans flew it as a point-defense interceptor, like a MiG-21. They were not allowed to max perform the airplane, to explore its capabilities or their own abilities. Sorties lasted about thirty minutes. The airplane was designed to scramble, jettison the tank, go supersonic, shoot its missiles, and go home." This relatively strict operational scenario presents its own limitations. Many of these involve the aircraft's centerline fuel tank. The MiG-29 cannot fly supersonic with the tank attached. Nor can pilots fire the aircraft's 30mm cannon (the tank blocks the shell discharge route) or use its speed brakes. The aircraft is limited to four g's when the tank has fuel remaining. The tank creates some drag and is also difficult to attach and remove. The MiG-29 can carry wing tanks that alleviate many of these shortcomings, but the Luftwaffe has no plans to purchase them from Russia.

Even given its drawbacks, the MiG-29 remains a formidable foe. "This deployment answered so many questions I had in my mind about the MiG-29," said McCoy, who flew in eight sorties against the Fulcrum and in one with it. "The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29's ability to turn and to fight in the phonebooth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime. The awe, though, fades away after that first turn in. The biggest adrenaline rush was getting to that point. After that, I started evaluating it as a weapon. The German MiG-29 pilots represent a worst-case threat for us because their skills are so good."

"When Western pilots merge with a MiG for the first time, they tend to stare at it in awe," said West, who flew in three sorties against the Fulcrum. "Instead of flying their jets and fighting, they are enamored by this Soviet-built aircraft that they have spent their lives learning about. Pilots lose this sense of wonder after a first encounter. It is no longer a potential distraction. They are going to know what type of fight to fight and exactly where they may be in trouble. No one can learn these things by reading reports. Air-to-air fighting is a perishable skill. But the lessons we learned here won't be forgotten. These pilots will know at the merge exactly what they are up against. They will have more confidence. And they know they are flying an aircraft that is superior in maneuverability, power, and avionics.

"When our pilots first arrived here, they almost tripped over themselves because their eyes were glued to the ramp and those MiG-29s," West continued. "After a few days, though, those MiGs became just like any other aircraft. And that's the way it should be."

This is comical, you are bagging on the Mig-29 claiming that it has no sales thus it must be junk. Yet no one has bought any JF-17s or J-10s. The J-10 is also not that new, nor is that a big factor considering the F-35 is still in development but has many countries lined up to buy it. It should also be noted that Mig-29s have recently seen sales to Syria, India, and Russia, go back a number of years earlier and the sales list includes more customers. So how are the JF-17 and J-10 sales working out again?

Sure mig-29s have sale for "sanctioned" countries,poor countries like Syria,Myanmar and N.Korea (yeah they operate a few dnt they) ... and the older operater .. Warsaw countries... while others like Algeria,Malaysia etc want to replace them...

P.S: Even germans replaced their jets with after 20 years of service to Poland for 1 euro... while countries are still buying old F-16s and getting them MLUd..

As for J-10 it was inducted in 2006+ ... and not for sale at tht time... another hurdle is/was the Russian powerplant... another thing.. PAF has orderered quiet a few...

Also... its basic variant is still more expensive than a mig-29 ... starting from 45+ million $ a pop... heck they are now testing the C version..

As for JF-17 again a new jet... several countries showing interest... and if Alan Warnes and other sources are to be believed a deal with SL for 6 has already been signed .. while (according to "The Diplomat" .. )Indonesians have signed some agreement aswell....

First you made the claim that the RD-33 is fuel thirsty, when I proved you wrong you change the subject. How many times have you done so already? Too many to remember by now. The RD-33 has also seen many variants and improvements. The WS-10 which is so highly praised and still under development is said to have a life cycle of 2,200 hours while operational RD-33s are lasting 4,000 hours.

Lmao.. read my post again dude. yes mig-29 with rd-33 is a fuel guzzling boy..

Also WS-13 (not WS-10 and variant) is still under development and im not much familiar with its capabilities.. but here it goes:


China has an indigenous WS-13 engine to replace the RD-33 for the JF-17. Global Security states that the Chinese WS-13 engine has "a major repair interval of roughly 810 hrs, service life span 2200 hrs, both far exceed the RD-33 engine."



"The WS13 engine is 4.14 meters long, 1.02 meters in diameter, weighing 1,135 kg. The engine will have a major repair interval of roughly 810 hrs, service life span 2200 hrs, both far exceed the RD-33 engine. Most western jets have easily double the amount of time interval between overhauls and double the engine life when compared to Chinese and/or Russian engines. The difference lies in material sciences. The alloys and materials used can double the life of the engine thus greatly reducing service costs.

The engine uses a three-string wide solid titanium axial core. The former fans are computer-controlled variable steering guide vanes. The 8-stage axial pressure compressor (for the former three adjustable guide vane) used hollow-cooled single-stage low-pressure turbine rotor blade. The single crystal turbine blades for the high-pressure turbine blade and a guide, annular combustor. a tip clearance control air heat exchanger and integrated digital control system for the whole."

WS13 / RD-33 / RD-93 engine



Want to talk abt WS-10 series now?

Moron post. The Mig-29 has one of the highest thrust to weight ratios of any aircraft to ever fly. I'm also not sure how a jet engine can "suck the power outta [a] mig-29" Care to elaborate, never mind don't waste my time, it's obvious you don't know what you are talking about. Its also about time you live in the present, you keep quoting or making reference to old Mig-29 variants, if you did some research you would know that fuel capacity has been increased on Mig-29s.

I might as well start claiming that F-16s have no BVR capability because the earlier variants did not, then again I would never stoop to the levels of using outdated information to further my agenda if I was losing an argument like you are. Notice the pattern, you are ignoring the capabilities of modern Mig-29s and instead bring up ancient Mig-29s.

Nonsense debunked ... try again..

This is rich, the Pakistanis sure did not have a problem using Russian Mig-21s to shoot down Israelis when the Arabs were taking heavy losses using the same aircraft. It just shows how better training makes all the difference. I also fail to see how Mig-29s using older Missiles, having no AWACs, no IFF, inferior pilots, malfunctioning avionics, ect is a nonsense excuse.

So now your hiding behind pilot training and tactics?

Yes you did, And in the process you proved my point that you were wrong because those numbers were far from the claim of 38 that you made.

Thanks...

Right, because you say so? Countries that have had problems with Mig-29 were because of age and the cost of upgrading those aircraft and not because they "hate it". The Polish aquired more Mig-29s from the Germans and upgraded them, they plan to keep those Mig-29s operational for a very long time, why because they have the money.

Lmao.. Pole got them for a symbolic price of 1 euro.. in 2003 beat tht price..and upgraded them for 30+ million $

Also Poles are operating F-16s (older blocks)...

Although the Romanians jet bought old F-16 block-15 jets recently...

No I did not pay for those F-16s US tax dollars did.

Cool story bruh:


http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...=1LKvb3Ph-Ti7WFD1QH9mxw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGE

 

[DV RULES]

@DESERT FIGHTER
a perfect example of a Pakistani "Ek ghareeb upron baatmeez"

Mikoyan MiG-29 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
CAC/PAC JF-17 Thunder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This thread should be placed into funny section as there is no comparison of twin engine and single engine aircraft.

If we made a milestone developing own fighter then we should show open mind thanking to all countries making it reality as do hats off to Russian for their RD-93 engines.

Typical third graded attitude from our Pakistani members while saying we are better ignoring fact that out classical enemy helps us to be better. They have new perspectives now and we still 7 decades behind of them.

 

[acid rain]

JF17 vs MIG29's? thats a no brainer. If russians start worrying about jf17 and j10 they will stop supplying engines.

 

[ptldM3]

Like what? Avionics?JHMS?engine?radar? Pod?EW suite?

Like weapons systems such as the AIM-9X. Nothing specific could be dug up about the F-16 but i found something for the F-15.


F-15 Eagle - Military Aircraft

Arabia has purchased a total of 62 F-15C and D aircraft and later procured the F-15S, which is a two-seater aircraft based on the F-15E airframe, with downgraded avionics, downgraded LANTIRN pods, and a simplified Hughes APG-70 radar without computerised radar mapping.

LOL.... seriously thts your excuse? take a look at Saddams Airforce... he could have bought anything in the world...and was anti America , Or ...even the Yugos-serbs during the time... your excuse in invalid!

No he could not buy anything he wanted, even the Migs that Saddam purchased had some major downgrades.

for avionics in indian migs... no other country including USA,EU guys are cool with foreign buyers modifying or replacing systems in their product... There is a reason for it..

Bull, the Israelis use their own radars, jammers, missiles, HUDs, navigation, ect in their F-15s and F-16. Japan also uses it own avionics in their license built F-15s and F-16s. Even taking a look at many European aircraft that are used by NATO would show that avionics differ depending on what countries operate them.

So the point is simple, your claim that Russian avionics are not very good because the Indians replaced certain systems is ignorant. I can also argue that US avionic are no good because the Israelis and Japanese replaced them but that would be short cited on my part.

what abt the faulty missiles,krasnopol,bursting T-72s... faullty smirchs etc..etc?

Missiles have a certain life span just like everything, even radars on aircraft need major overhauls after so many hours of operation. even the climate effects the reliability of electronic components. French computers have been know to fail if it was too cold or too hot, for example. Russian systems are not immune to defects either, no system is. Age and storage will effect reliability greatly. Then again people like you would know that.

also had AWACs... etc... anyways...

And they did not use them. Nice try....

Yugo mig-29s were shot down in Bosnian territory... Serb pilots navi systems were experiencing troubles not radar....

Really? Once again, stop making claims up, i already debunked your made up fairytales.

Check here:



Yugoslav & Serbian MiG-29s - ACIG.org

, on the afternoon of 25 March, two MiG-29s, flown by Maj. Peric and Capt. 1st Class Radosavljevic, were scrambled from Batajnica AB to intercept a high-flying NATO aircraft – probably a Mirage IV on a reconnaissance mission over north-western Serbia. While pursuing their target their aircraft again suffered several malfunctions: their radars failed, and then also the SPO-15 on Peric’s aircraft. The GCI first directed them north, then turned them towards south-west, and eventually both MiGs ended inside the Bosnian airspace. Once there, the GCI advised them that both were detected by the NATO aircraft, but would not indicate the kind of a threat. This was a tragic mistake: Maj. Peric led his wingman into a climb, and straight into three AIM-120 missiles fired by two USAF F-15Cs that were on a patrol over Tuzla. Two missiles hit home, destroying both MiGs: after evading one AIM-120, Maj. Peric’s aircraft was hit and he ejected safely, but Capt. Radosavljevic was killed.

Again nice try but i'm not stupid, i check everything with sources, you dont.

the Dutch F-16 shot him... without Sentry cover :

You are the biggest liar i have come across during all of my years on this forum. Then again i'm an infidel, you have every right to lie to me if it advances your agenda.


Once again to prove you are a liar:



Operation ALLIED FORCE - Free Republic

F-16 from the Royal Netherlands Air Force locked onto a Yugoslav MiG-29, fired an AIM-120 AMRAAM, and downed the Fulcrum in the opening scenes of the NATO Operation Allied Force in March. The shoot down occurred when a four ship of F-16s were escorting a strike package of Tornadoes, F-15E Strike Eagles, and additional F-16s to Serbia from northern Kosovo. During the flight, these allied forces were notified by AWACS that three MiG-29 Fulcrums had taken off from an airbase near Belgrade. And one of the MiGs was heading in their direction

Iraqis and Serbs had BVRs... and were shot down with AIM,AMRAAMs..

And neither had AWACs to alert them. Iraqi aircraft were also largely equiped with short range R-60s.

abt the African wars? same result... apart from shooting prop planes and shitty old mig-21s what did they achieve?

Well for starters Indian Migs decimated the Pakistani Air Force also forgetting Vietnam? Probably should have kept quiet.

from tht... compare the basic mig-29s to older block F-16s... in mock combat ex ... still failures?

Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience - positives and negatives

when all that is said and done, the MiG-29 is a superb fighter for close-in combat, even compared with aircraft like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. This is due to the aircraft’s superb aerodynamics and helmet mounted sight. Inside ten nautical miles I’m hard to defeat, and with the IRST, helmet sight and ‘Archer’ I can’t be beaten. Period. Even against the latest Block 50 F-16s the MiG-29 is virtually invulnerable in the close-in scenario. On one occasion I remember the F-16s did score some kills eventually, but only after taking 18 ‘Archers’. We didn’t operate kill removal (forcing ‘killed’ aircraft to leave the fight) since they’d have got no training value, we killed them too quickly. (Just as we might seldom have got close-in if they used their AMRAAMs BVR!) They couldn’t believe it at the debrief, they got up and left the room!

"They might not like it, but with a 28deg/sec instantaneous turn rate (compared to the Block 50 F-16's 26deg) we can out-turn them. Our stable, manually controlled airplane can out-turn their FBW aircraft. But the real edge we have is the ‘Archer’ which can reliably lock on to targets 45degoff-boresight.

"I should stress that I’m talking about our Luftwaffe MiG-29s, which are early aircraft. They also removed the Laszlo data link and the SRO IFF before the aircraft were handed over to us, so in some respects we’re less capable than other contemporary MiG-29s. From what we hear the latest variants are almost a different aircraft. I’d like to see our aircraft get some of the updates being offered by MiG-MAPO. The more powerful engines, better radar, a new navigation system, a data link and an inflight refuelling probe. If we got the new ‘Alamo-C’ that would also be an improvement - even a two nautical mile boost in range is still ten more seconds to shoot someone else! We won’t get many of those improvements, though we are getting a new IFF manually selectable radio channels, and improvements to the navigation system, including the integration of GPS. Most of our aircraft will be able to carry two underwing fuel tanks, which will also help."

You can post articles all you want about how the Mig-29 is 'no good', how it has poor visibility, how it's less maneuverable but reality is reality. Mig-29s that have been labeled as bad aircraft with all those above mentioned problems put a whooping on F-16s.

Yes, the F-16 has slightly better turning performance above 0.85 Mach, but the Mig-29 has a helmet mounted sight as well as high bore missiles which negate that advantage. The F -16 that have faced Mig-29s did so while being targeted by the older archer with 40 degree of bore sit capability, the new archers have 60 degree off bore sit capability, the Mig-29 also has a much higher angle of attack. All of the gripes that were made about the Mig-29 have been fixed a long time ago, so I do not understand why you keep mentioning those things as if they are relevant today, like I said earlier it would be like me citing F-16 block 15 performance when arguing about the F-16.

If you want to argue Mi-29 vs F-16 at least have the curtsy of citing the performance of modern Mig-29s. Not too many Mig-29 out there with anolog cockpits or mechanical flight controls.

NATO aircraft staying outside Iraqi-29s radar range lmao.. they shot 5 Iraqi migs.. in 91.. remember?

For the 10th time 5 Mig-29s were never shot down. To shoot another aircraft down one either has to fire a missile or hit it with cannon fire. Iraqi pilots miss judging their altitude and crashing into the ground is not a kill. Sorry their is a difference.

Lmao.. which French jets system was replaced by Indians? heck they are looting Indians with the ugrade of ther mirages ...(which cost as much as the jet)... remember? just like you guys who doubled the price of their AC ?

Where did i ever make that claim? Quote me on that. But if you want a shocker Indian based Samtel will replace the LCDs on SU-30s if it has not already happened.

... in Eritrean - Ethniopian conflict the missile was put to test... jets flown by Russian mercs remember? your video lmao..

Learn to read and retain information. Those missiles were fired out of range. Furthermore, as i explained before, everything from clouds to evasive maneuvers and countermeasures can cause a missile to miss.

There was even a chart showing the percentage of American A2A missiles hitting their marks and it was pretty bad.

F-16.net ... the guy has 2000 hours on F-16 and 500 on mig-29... Has a Master's Degree in aerospace engineering ...

I can also claim many things over the internet, i didnt know that some random guy on a forum is considered a reliable source. Like i said his post was rubbish, all the things he complained about such as mechanical flight controls, poor visibility, poor pilot interface (which is now all fixed) were all present on the Mig-29s that handedly beat F-16s.

So if a Mig-29 with analog cockpit, mechanical flight controls, ect can beat an F-16 what can a modern Mig-29 with digital cockpit and flyby wire do?

for Israeli stamp of approval... yeah ... they shot Syrian mig-29s with their F-16s aswell...

This is funny, you give the stamp of approval to some random forum post but an article published in Israeli Air Force Magazine which directly names and quotes the pilot that evaluated the Mig-29 is not reliable? The Israelis claimed the Mig-29 can match the F-16 and F-15 and even surpass them in some regards and the Germans said the same. Lets see, who am i going to believe on this one, a forum post or credible sources from Israel and Germany.......

.. read my post again dude. yes mig-29 with rd-33 is a fuel guzzling boy..

Do some research before spouting nonesense. The Mig-29, the older ones, had major issues with range due to very small fuel tanks and two engines, despite what some people claim it was not the engine but the fuel capacity.

Its as easy as doing some reference checks:

RD-33: Specific fuel consumption: 75 kg/(kN·h) (0.77 lb/(lbf·h)) dry, 188 kg/(kN·h) (1.85 lb/(lbf·h))

F-404: Specific fuel consumption: Military thrust: (0.81 lb/(lbf·h) (82.6 kg/(kN·h))

Also WS-13 (not WS-10 and variant) is still under development and im not much familiar with its capabilities.. but here it goes:


China has an indigenous WS-13 engine to replace the RD-33 for the JF-17. Global Security states that the Chinese WS-13 engine has "a major repair interval of roughly 810 hrs, service life span 2200 hrs, both far exceed the RD-33 engine."

"The WS13 engine is 4.14 meters long, 1.02 meters in diameter, weighing 1,135 kg. The engine will have a major repair interval of roughly 810 hrs, service life span 2200 hrs, both far exceed the RD-33 engine. Most western jets have easily double the amount of time interval between overhauls and double the engine life when compared to Chinese and/or Russian engines. The difference lies in material sciences. The alloys and materials used can double the life of the engine thus greatly reducing service costs.

The engine uses a three-string wide solid titanium axial core. The former fans are computer-controlled variable steering guide vanes. The 8-stage axial pressure compressor (for the former three adjustable guide vane) used hollow-cooled single-stage low-pressure turbine rotor blade. The single crystal turbine blades for the high-pressure turbine blade and a guide, annular combustor. a tip clearance control air heat exchanger and integrated digital control system for the whole."

WS13 / RD-33 / RD-93 engine



Want to talk abt WS-10 series now?

You really got me there The RD-33 has a life cycle of 4,000 hours compared to the 2,200 for the WS-13, the WS-10 i even worse. This is pretty sad considering that the RD-33MK is 13 years old and the WS-13 is still in development. But please do continue to call Russia technology crap based on information from the 1970s and 1980s.



JSC "Klimov" - RD-33MK

• Unassisted takeoff of the MiG-29K fighter from the aircraft carrier deck is possible owing to the increased horsepower of the engine;
• The engine contains systems that reduce its infrared and optical visibility;
• The service life of the engine is a long 4,000 hours;
• Installed on MiG-29K, MiG-29KUB and MiG-35 jet fighters;
• Developed in 2001.

nonesence debunked ... try again..

And what part have you debunked again? Nothing, saying you debunked something without proving it does not make it so. So now what part have you debnked again? The part about the Mig-29 having increased fuel capacity or the part about the Mig-29 have one of the highest thrust to weight radios today?


Lets see you debunk this:


Fomin A, Feb-2009. MiG-35 Favourite of MMRCA Tender, Take-Off ...

Increased internal fuel tanks
of approx. 1.5 times higher fuel capacity if compared with production MiG-29 fighters

Now show the readers where you "debunked" the fact that modern Mig-29s carry more fuel. Kind of hard to debunk the fact that modern Mig-29 carry more fuel when even Mig Corp confirms this. As for your claim of the RD-33s "sucking power from the Mig' Please do explain it, how does that even make sense? Like I stated earlier the Mig-29 has one of the highest thrust to weight radios of any aircraft, again kind of hard to debunk this when countless sources confirm it, even harder to debunk when you look at the power generated by the Mig-29 and it's weight....just saying.

So now your hiding behind pilot training and tactics?

No, pilot training and tactics mean nothing at all. Im sure even you can jump into a fighter aircraft and just blast everyone out of the sky. All those hours pilots spend training is just for fun...i'm being sarcastic here.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Like weapons systems such as the AIM-9X. Nothing specific could be dug up about the F-16 but i found something for the F-15.


F-15 Eagle - Military Aircraft

Thank you ... for the obsolete info... Saudis recently bought 84 F-15SA variants for over 30 billion $ and upgrade kits for older F-15s.


Details:

Apart from tht they already produce Democles n now SNIPERs..

No he could not buy anything he wanted, even the Migs that Saddam purchased had some major downgrades.

Lmao.. everybody had downgraded migs,Africans,Syrians,Iraqis,serbs etc..

Well screw them tell us more abt Ethio-Eritrean war.. both sides had R-73s etc... and were piloted by merc pilots.. again SU-27 shot down migs! and the infamous failures of R series BVR...

Bull, the Israelis use their own radars, jammers, missiles, HUDs, navigation, ect in their F-15s and F-16

Bull >? lol..

First Israel-US relations.. as for Radars it uses a AN/APG-68(V)9 etc etc... and are produced at USA...and LM &Elbeit are partners.. JHMCS itself believe has some Israeli output!

And missiles? seriously!!

. Japan also uses it own avionics in their license built F-15s and F-16s.

Yeah when 60% of the jet is made in USA... and LM & Mitsu have a partnership.. cool story... learn a thing or two abt F-2 which is different than a standard F-16..

Even taking a look at many European aircraft that are used by NATO would show that avionics differ depending on what countries operate them.

Which ones? Gripen?Euro fighter?Rafael?

So the point is simple, your claim that Russian avionics are not very good because the Indians replaced certain systems is ignorant. I can also argue that US avionic are no good because the Israelis and Japanese replaced them but that would be short cited on my part.

lol.. yes their companies have partnerships .. joint development of technology and come with ToT .. with Israeli 16s produced by LM.

Missiles have a certain life span just like everything, even radars on aircraft need major overhauls after so many hours of operation. even the climate effects the reliability of electronic components. French computers have been know to fail if it was too cold or too hot, for example. Russian systems are not immune to defects either, no system is. Age and storage will effect reliability greatly. Then again people like you would know that.

True.. but new ones not failing? or new products having issues? tank guns exploding,smerch?krasnople failure during war time?... or just google Russian arms quality worries india?

And they did not use them. Nice try....

Yet your fast enough to claim a tornado being damaged by a mig-29? although it was hit by a SA7? And the kills happened between the detection range of the migs!

Really? Once again, stop making claims up, i already debunked your made up fairytales.

Check here:



Yugoslav & Serbian MiG-29s - ACIG.org



Again nice try but i'm not stupid, i check everything with sources, you don't.

I also quoted tht blog:

After a pause of almost a month, on 4 May finally Lt.Col. Milenko Pavlovic scrambled on MiG-29 to intercept a NATO strike in the area of Valjevo, his home-town, which the previous night was first hit by an earthquake and then by a heavy NATO-strike. Appearing too late on the scene and experiencing one malfunction of the weapons and navigation systems on his aircraft after the other, Lt.Col. Pavlovic was eventually intercepted by two USAF F-16Cs. Both US fighters were flying on the end of the NATO-formation, and had to be turned around by the E-3 Sentry AWACS aircraft in order to engage – while simultaneously also attacked by the Serbian air defence units. Lt.Col. Pavlovic was shot down within a short period of time, and killed

You are the biggest liar i have come across during all of my years on this forum. Then again i'm an infidel, you have every right to lie to me if it advances your agenda.


Once again to prove you are a liar:



Operation ALLIED FORCE - Free Republic

No you are just pathetic..

Read the first source you posted.. his navi n weapon systems were showin
g issues... yet he engaged .. supported by serb AD units on ground!

And neither had AWACs to alert them. Iraqi aircraft were also largely equiped with short range R-60s.

Iraqis did have R-27s!

Ever heard of their claim of damaging a B-52 with a R-27R?

Well for starters Indian Migs decimated the Pakistani Air Force also forgetting Vietnam? Probably should have kept quiet.

Lmao and when did tht happen?

We even shot down your Mig-21s with our Sabers...

PAF is the biggest mig part distributor in this region if not the world... you should have kept quiet..

Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience - positives and negatives








You can post articles all you want about how the Mig-29 is 'no good', how it has poor visibility, how it's less maneuverable but reality is reality. Mig-29s that have been labeled as bad aircraft with all those above mentioned problems put a whooping on F-16s.

Yes, the F-16 has slightly better turning performance above 0.85 Mach, but the Mig-29 has a helmet mounted sight as well as high bore missiles which negate that advantage. The F -16 that have faced Mig-29s did so while being targeted by the older archer with 40 degree of bore sit capability, the new archers have 60 degree off bore sit capability, the Mig-29 also has a much higher angle of attack. All of the gripes that were made about the Mig-29 have been fixed a long time ago, so I do not understand why you keep mentioning those things as if they are relevant today, like I said earlier it would be like me citing F-16 block 15 performance when arguing about the F-16.

If you want to argue Mi-29 vs F-16 at least have the curtsy of citing the performance of modern Mig-29s. Not too many Mig-29 out there with anolog cockpits or mechanical flight controls.

Here is what you misquoted:

Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience

Following the re-unification of Germany, Luftwaffe inherited a number of East Germany's MiG-29 fighters. It was decided to incorporated these fighters into the Luftwaffe and make them as much "NATO-compatible" as possible. These aircraft were later used for a number of training exercises, including simulated air combats against American F-16 fighters. Many weaknesses and advantages of the MiG-29 were discovered. The wild interest in the West toward MiG-29 was caused by the results of these exercises in which MiG-29 proved to be a far superior fighter in close combat than any Western type. Many people continue to argue about advantages and flaws of MiG-29 and, of course, I can add a few dozen kilobytes of my own thoughts to that argument. However, fortunately for you, I am not feeling particularly patriotic this night and so I decided to quote Luftwaffe's Oberstleutenant Johann Koeck, who for many years was an F-4 pilot and who has first-hand experience flying MiG-29 as the commander of Luftwaffe's MiG-29 squadron. If anyone is qualified to compare MiG-29 to Western fighter aircraft it would be Johann Koeck. I organized his evaluations of the aircraft's performance - everything from dogfighting to maintainability - into two categories: flaws and advantages. It is rather important to keep in mind that Germany operates some of the earliest models of MiG-29 - not even the baseline Fulcrum-A but downgraded versions of the MiG-29s employed by Soviet air forces. The MiG-29 was upgraded at least six times during the past decade, as you might have noticed from the title page, and today's MiG-29s are far superior to the ones operated by Luftwaffe. I should also mention that Mikoyan OKB designers concentrated their work on all of the problems established by NATO's evaluation of MiG-29. Strange as it may sound, NATO proved to be of invaluable assistance to MiG in designing such latest variants of Fulcrum as MiG-29SMT.
"The East German JG3 took delivery of its first MiG-29 in 1988, and by 4 October 1990 had 24 on strength, equipping two squadrons. A follow-on batch were on order, but were never delivered. With the re-unification JG3 became Evaluation Wing 29 on 1 April 1991. On 25 July 1991 the decision was taken to keep the aircraft and integrate them into the NATO air defence structure. JG73 was activated in June 1993, and the MiG-29s assumed a National (Day Only) QRA(l) commitment over the former East Germany. The MiG-29s moved to Laage in December 1993 and on 1 February 1994 the unit gained a NATO QRA(l) commitment. The two aircraft on QRA were assigned to NATO, while the rest were assigned to national tasking. All will be NATO assigned when the F-4s move to Laage to complete the wing."

Negatives

"The employment of the MiG-29 suffers from severe inherent constraints. The most obvious limitation is the aircraft’s limited internal fuel capacity of 3500-kg (4400 kg with a centreline tank). We have no air-to-air refuelling capability, and our external tank is both speed and manoeuvre limited. We also have only a limited number of tanks.

"But if we start a mission with 4400-kg of fuel, start-up, taxy and take off takes 400-kg, we need to allow 1000-kg for diversion to an alternate airfield 50-nm away, and 500-kg for the engagement, including one minute in afterburner. That leaves 2500-kg. If we need 15 minutes on station at 420 kts that requires another 1000-kg, leaving 1500-kg for transit. At FL200 (20,000 ft) that gives us a radius of 150-nm, and at FL100 (10,000 ft) we have a radius of only 100-nm.

"Our navigation system is unreliable without TACAN updates and is not very accurate (I’d prefer to call it an estimation system). It relies on triangulation from three TACAN stations, and if you lose one, you effectively lose the system. We can only enter three fixed waypoints, which is inadequate. We also can’t display our ‘Bullseye’ (known navigation datum, selected randomly for security). For communications we have only one VHF/UHF radio.

"The radar is at least a generation behind the AN/APG-65, and is not line-repairable. If we have a radar problem, the aircraft goes back into the hangar. The radar has a poor display, giving poor situational awareness, and this is compounded by the cockpit ergonomics. The radar has reliability problems and lookdown/shootdown problems. There is poor discrimination between targets flying in formation, and we can’t lock onto the target in trail, only onto the lead. We have only the most limited autonomous operating capability.

"We don’t have the range to conduct HVAA attack missions - and we’re effectively limited from crossing the FLOT (Front Line of Own Troops). Our limited station time and lack of air-to-air refuelling capability effectively rules us out of meaningful air defence missions. Nor are we suited to the sweep escort role. We have a very limited range, especially at high speed and low altitudes, and are limited to 540-kt with external fuel. We have navigation problems, Bullseye control is very difficult and we have only one radio. So if I talk, I ‘trash’ the package’s radios!

"The only possible missions for NATO’s MiG-29s are as adversary threat aircraft for air combat training, for point defence, and as wing (not lead!) in Mixed Fighter Force Operations. But even then I would still consider the onboard systems too limited, especially the radar, the radar warning receiver, and the navigation system as well as the lack of fuel. These drive the problems we face in tactical scenarios. We suffer from poor presentation of the radar information (which leads to poor situational awareness and identification problems), short BVR weapons range, a bad navigation system and short on- station times."

Compared with the same gen F-16.

PAF older F-16s beat Typhoon in dog fight... God damn Block 15-40s? are superior to Typhoons.. :

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&ved=0CHEQFjAI&url=http://www.asian-defence.net/2011/06/pakistani-f-16s-shoot-down-raf.html&ei=XvLFUt2vOIXB0gXzrYBQ&usg=AFQjCNFZdFMbFXT319M7YWBvt7uKdO1dLQ


P.S: Why didnt you highlight ur post:


For more follow this:

Article - F-16 versus MiG-29 Fulcrum - F-16 versus XYZ

. (Just as we might seldom have got close-in if they used their AMRAAMs BVR!)

Also may I ask abt the credibility of this report?

For the 10th time 5 Mig-29s were never shot down. To shoot another aircraft down one either has to fire a missile or hit it with cannon fire. Iraqi pilots miss judging their altitude and crashing into the ground is not a kill. Sorry their is a difference.

I posted the source in previous pages... only 1 mig-29 was lost during air combat due to maneuver kill (forced by a F-15):

Air-to-Air Kills in Desert Storm

DATE A/C SRVC UNIT DOWNED KILL WEAPON

1/17 F-15C USAF 1st TFW Mirage F.1 Tate AIM-7
1/17 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW Mirage F.1 Graeter AIM-7
1/17 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG 29 McGill AIM-7
1/17 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG 29 Draeger AIM-7
1/17 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-29 Kelk AIM-7
1/17 F/A-18CUSN VFA-81 MIG-21 Fox AIM-9
1/17 F/A-18CUSN VFA-81 MIG-21 Mongillo AIM-9
1/19 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-25 Pitts AIM-7
1/19 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-25 Tollini AIM-7
1/19 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-29 Rodriguez
1/19 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-29 Underhill AIM-7
1/19 F-15C USAF 36th TFW Mirage F.1 Sveden AIM-7
1/19 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW Mirage F.1 Prather AIM-7
1/24 F-15C RSAF 13 Sqdn. Mirage F.1 Al-Shamrani AIM-9
1/26 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-23 Schiavi AIM-7
1/26 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-23 Draeger AIM-7
1/26 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-23 Rodriguez AIM-7
1/27 F-15C USAF 4th TFW MIG-23 (2) Denney AIM-9
1/27 F-15C USAF 4th TFW MIG-23? AIM-7
1/29 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW MIG-23 Rose AIM-7
1/29 F-15C USAF 32nd TFG MIG-23 Watrous AIM-7
2/6 F-14A USN VF-1 Mi-8 McElraft AIM-9
2/6 F-15C USAF 4th TFW MIG-21 (2) Dietz AIM-9
2/6 F-15C USAF 4th TFW Su-25 (2) Henemann AIM-9
2/6 A-10A USAF 926th TFG Bo 105 Swain GAU-8
2/7 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW Su-7/17 (2) Murphy AIM-7
2/7 F-15C USAF 33rd TFW Su-7/17 (2) Parsons AIM-7
2/7 F-15C USAF 36th TFW ? May AIM-7
2/11 F-15C USAF 36th TFW ? Dengy AIM-7
2/11 F-15C USAF 36th TFW Helo McKinney AIM-7
2/15 A-10A USAF 926th TFG Mi-8 Sheeny GAU-8
2/20 F-15C USAF 36th TFW Su-22 ? AIM-9
2/22 F-15C USAF 36th TFW Su-22 ? AIM-9

Learn to read and retain information. Those missiles were fired out of range. Furthermore, as i explained before, everything from clouds to evasive maneuvers and countermeasures can cause a missile to miss.

There was even a chart showing the percentage of American A2A missiles hitting their marks and it was pretty bad.

Read above..

I can also claim many things over the internet, i didnt know that some random guy on a forum is considered a reliable source. Like i said his post was rubbish, all the things he complained about such as mechanical flight controls, poor visibility, poor pilot interface (which is now all fixed) were all present on the Mig-29s that handedly beat F-16s.

So if a Mig-29 with analog cockpit, mechanical flight controls, ect can beat an F-16 what can a modern Mig-29 with digital cockpit and flyby wire do?

Lmao cool story...

Where did i ever make that claim? Quote me on that. But if you want a shocker Indian based Samtel will replace the LCDs on SU-30s if it has not already happened.

Read your previous post where you said French let others replace their systems... As for indian Samtel ... why SU-30s Russian avionics not good enough?

This is funny, you give the stamp of approval to some random forum post but an article published in Israeli Air Force Magazine which directly names and quotes the pilot that evaluated the Mig-29 is not reliable? The Israelis claimed the Mig-29 can match the F-16 and F-15 and even surpass them in some regards and the Germans said the same. Lets see, who am i going to believe on this one, a forum post or credible sources from Israel and Germany.......

Unfortunately... several people disagree including Germans themselves... as for "it can match" yes sure.. Although every single time in combat a mig-29 met a teen series it was shot down... not much to boast abt I guess...

Also read what the Israeli said ..

Lieut. Col. G. Concludes:The jets had very few malfunctions, and like other Russian products the MIG-29 is trustworthy, strong, and massive. The F-15 and F-16 are much more delicate, compared".

And no wonder they would praise it.. considering the were upgrading indian mig-29s.. remember?

Do some research before spouting nonesense. The Mig-29, the older ones, had major issues with range due to very small fuel tanks and two engines, despite what some people claim it was not the engine but the fuel capacity.

Again read my post don't misquote me...

Its as easy as doing some reference checks:

LOL.. keeps getting better and better comparing a modified rd-33 to some old F-404 ? used on LCA etc BUT NOT ON F-16!!

F-16 uses the F100 series..

PAF F-16s are powered by F100-PW-229 EEP...

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...gYH4Dg&usg=AFQjCNHD_1Yx3u7_MYEl14N7PmKkFwHlHg

You really got me there The RD-33 has a life cycle of 4,000 hours compared to the 2,200 for the WS-13, the WS-10 i even worse. This is pretty sad considering that the RD-33MK is 13 years old and the WS-13 is still in development. But please do continue to call Russia technology crap based on information from the 1970s and 1980s.



JSC "Klimov" - RD-33MK

ENGINES:
Chinese Russian Percentage
WS13 RD-93 Difference
Length (m): 4.15 4.25 -2.35%
Diameter (m): 1.02 1.04 -1.92%
Weight (kg): 1135 1055 +7.58%
Thrust (afterburning, kN): 86.37 81.3 +6.24%
Thrust (dry, kN): 56.75 50 +13.50%
Bypass ratio: 0.57 0.49 +16.33%

Source Global security.. As exact specs of WS-13 aren't available.. or I couldn't find them..

(got it from wiki.. :| )


Again you are quoting MK (naval version) ?

And what part have you debunked again? Nothing, saying you debunked something without proving it does not make it so. So now what part have you debnked again? The part about the Mig-29 having increased fuel capacity or the part about the Mig-29 have one of the highest thrust to weight radios today?


Lets see you debunk this:


Fomin A, Feb-2009. MiG-35 Favourite of MMRCA Tender, Take-Off ...






Now show the readers where you "debunked" the fact that modern Mig-29s carry more fuel. Kind of hard to debunk the fact that modern Mig-29 carry more fuel when even Mig Corp confirms this. As for your claim of the RD-33s "sucking power from the Mig' Please do explain it, how does that even make sense? Like I stated earlier the Mig-29 has one of the highest thrust to weight radios of any aircraft, again kind of hard to debunk this when countless sources confirm it, even harder to debunk when you look at the power generated by the Mig-29 and it's weight....just saying.

Awesome now MIG-35 with its increased fuel capacity somehow becomes a MIG-29... Or is it comprehension issues?

No, pilot training and tactics mean nothing at all. Im sure even you can jump into a fighter aircraft and just blast everyone out of the sky. All those hours pilots spend training is just for fun...i'm being sarcastic here.

..

 

[ptldM3]

Thank you ... for the obsolete info... Saudis recently bought 84 F-15SA variants for over 30 billion $ and upgrade kits for older F-15s.

And how do newer Saudi F-15s make you any less wrong? What makes you think that the new F-15SAs are not downgraded as well? Once again, i have proven you wrong and once again you refuse to except it. The US does export downgraded aircraft, i have proven it.

Apart from tht they already produce Democles n now SNIPERs..

That is completely irrelevant to the topic. Producing targeting pods for an F-15 does not equate to having a US spec F-15s, nor does it mean that those license built pods are to original spec either.



Notice a trend, i can debunk every one of your arguments, while you haven't proven me wrong with anything, instead you detract from the topic more and more; much like this post about downgraded US aircraft. You challenged me to prove that the US does not downgrade aircraft for export and i proved they do. You lost the argument, but instead of conceding defeat you bring up how the Saudis got shiny new F-15SAs--which proves nothing at all.

Lmao.. everybody had downgraded migs,Africans,Syrians,Iraqis,serbs etc..

So it took you that long to finally figure that out?

Well screw them tell us more abt Ethio-Eritrean war.. both sides had R-73s etc... and were piloted by merc pilots.. again SU-27 shot down migs! and the infamous failures of R series BVR...

Again do a little research before throwing out wild claims. The AIM-7 only has a 30% success rate, so your argument falls apart.


Su-27 vs Mig-29 - GeoCities

The Sparrow has had a success rate of only 30% or so against MiG-21/23s flown by poorly trained pilots who usually did't even know they're being fired upon...

Wow, isn't that amazing an AIM-7 only having 30% success rate, the myth of US made missiles being super duper accurate is only a delusion that you apparently suffer. As has been said before, there are many factors that effect the probability of a missile hitting its target. Even the most advanced missiles can miss their target and it may not have anything to do with the missiles guidance system. Range and vector are some of the most important things to consider when fireing a missile, even if an aircraft is in a 'kill zone' it can still cause the missile to fall short of its target by power out of the kill zone or simply pulling hard G maneuvers to cause an overshoot, or it can do all of these things and use countermeasures.

Bull >? lol..

First Israel-US relations.. as for Radars it uses a AN/APG-68(V)9 etc etc... and are produced at USA...and LM &Elbeit are partners.. JHMCS itself believe has some Israeli output!

Now that you have realized your mistake you now are trying to wiggle your way out of it. The partnership between Elbit and LM is not much more then LM allowing Elbit to integrate their own systems, and BTW, Yakalev was also a partner with LM.



F-16I / F16I - Israeli Weapons

Helmet Mounted Cueing System - An Israeli development. On top of the goggles which F-16I pilots and navigators wear is displayed various aircraft information such as height, speed and weapon systems data. This data be linked to the system, enabling the weapons to be launched on an enemy target using sight only. In addition, a camera mounted in the helmet records that which the pilot views allowing examining what the pilot saw in flight during debriefing.

Dorsal spine Avionics Compartment - An integral part of the advanced systems installed in the plane was developed precisely to the IAF's specifications by the country's defense industries. According to the IAF's traditions, The F-16I is equipped with advanced electronic warfare systems developed in Israel. These systems are improved models based on those installed in the F-15I. The aircraft features advanced Israeli communication systems as well.

600-gallon wing tanks - Improving the aircraft's range and persistence. The tanks are mounted on unejectable supports.

Satellite communication - The F-16I features two new communication devices manufactured by Elta and Rafael, including a UHF radio with new encoding methods and long distance relay capabilities.

The Israelis also integrated their ELM-2032 radars into F-16s....


ELM-2032-Airborne-Fire-Control-Radar-installed-on-Fighter.jpg

And missiles? seriously!!

Yes really, the Israelis integrated their own weapons on their F-16s and F-15s which require software integration. But what is really important here is that it debunks your claim and proves that just because the Indians replaced some systems in their Russian fighters does not equate to having poor avionics as the Israelis are a testament to that. Or you can stick to your original theory but that wold mean that Pakistani F-16s are equipped with bad avionics that the Israelis discarded.

Here is a list of Israeli weapons.


Python 1
Python 2
Python 3
Python 4
Python 5
Derby
Delilah
Popeye
Spice

Yeah when 60% of the jet is made in USA... and LM & Mitsu have a partnership.. cool story... learn a thing or two abt F-2 which is different than a standard F-16..

View attachment 12878

The F-2 is a Japanese license built F-16 with modified wings and Japanese avionics. Key here is that it is a F-16 variant, even 60% is manufactured in the USA.

Lets review Japanese F-16 with Japanese avionics.

800px-Hyakuri_F-2_02.JPG

lol.. yes their companies have partnerships .. joint development of technology and come with ToT .. with Israeli 16s produced by LM.

That is completely irrelevant we are talking about F-16s being equipped with foreign avionics and not about where the airframe is produce. Learn to focus on the topic for once.

True.. but new ones not failing? or new products having issues? tank guns exploding,smerch?krasnople failure during war time?... or just google Russian arms quality worries india?

Russian technology is not magic and not immune to problems especially when reliability is dependent on maintenance and storage. Take a look at F-22s, have they not been crashing, or having oxogen problems or problems with canopies getting stuck? Even one of the Americans on this board described a lot of equipment breaking down and malfunctioning when he was deployed. Indian SU-30s had problems when they were left to bake in the desert sun, the problem was fixed when the IAF started storing SU-30s in hangers.

You also should know that India manufactures a lot of Russian weapons under license and one report i read stated that T-90 engines that were manufactured in India had something like half the life of the same engine manufactured in Russia. Tank barrels can explode with something as simple as too much dirt or sand in the barrel, or defective ammunition.




image.php[img/]

No you are just pathetic..

Read the first source you posted.. his navi n weapon systems were showin
g issues... yet he engaged .. supported by serb AD units on ground!

No you read what i posted.




Yugoslav & Serbian MiG-29s - ACIG.org

on the afternoon of 25 March, two MiG-29s, flown by Maj. Peric and Capt. 1st Class Radosavljevic, were scrambled from Batajnica AB to intercept a high-flying NATO aircraft – probably a Mirage IV on a reconnaissance mission over north-western Serbia. While pursuing their target their aircraft again suffered several malfunctions: their radars failed, and then also the SPO-15 on Peric’s aircraft. The GCI first directed them north, then turned them towards south-west, and eventually both MiGs ended inside the Bosnian airspace. Once there, the GCI advised them that both were detected by the NATO aircraft, but would not indicate the kind of a threat. This was a tragic mistake: Maj. Peric led his wingman into a climb, and straight into three AIM-120 missiles fired by two USAF F-15Cs that were on a patrol over Tuzla. Two missiles hit home, destroying both MiGs: after evading one AIM-120, Maj. Peric’s aircraft was hit and he ejected safely, but Capt. Radosavljevic was killed.

Now where in that quote does it say that that his avionics/weapons systems were "showing". It states the apposite, it very clearly states that the avionics failed. You clearly have a reading impairment.

Iraqis did have R-27s!

Ever heard of their claim of damaging a B-52 with a R-27R?

Did i ever say they did not? You accuse me of saying things i never said and then you refuse to show proof because you cant quote me. What i said is that they did not have R-73s, and that much of their aircraft were equipped with short range R-60s.

Lmao and when did tht happen?

We even shot down your Mig-21s with our Sabers...

PAF is the biggest mig part distributor in this region if not the world... you should have kept quiet..

The Pakistani Air Force lost dozens of aircraft to India but i do enjoy how you are delusional. Pakistan was losing aircraft in A2A, to AAA, and to A2G, so much so that East Pakistan broke away, and thousands of Pakistanis became POWs. Obviously the Pakistani Air Force was not what you make it out to be.

Here is what you misquoted:

Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience

​

I didnt miss quote anything. I quoted one German stating that he could not be beaten by F-16s and that one F-16 ate 18 Archers. It not a miss quote its your inability to grasp reality.

PAF older F-16s beat Typhoon in dog fight... God damn Block 15-40s? are superior to Typhoons.. :

No one said that an F-16 cant beat a typhoon in a dogfight, after all much of a dogfight involves skills and exploiting weaknesses in mistakes and in aircraft. You were the one that started quoting forum posts about how the F-16 is superior to the Mig-29 and how it can easily outmaneuver the Mig-29 is not the case.

Lmao cool story...

Exactly the response i expected from someone that has no comeback.

Read your previous post where you said French let others replace their systems... As for indian Samtel ... why SU-30s Russian avionics not good enough?

Firstly i never said anything remotely close to that, and secondly i have asked you to quote me saying that which you so far have refused to do because i said nothing of the sort.



But here, let me do it for you. The below post is where you originally quoted me with that accusation.

The Indians replace certain systems because Russia allows it, France and Isreal also allow it. If Russia said no then it wouldn't happen. It makes me wonder, do other countries allow that kind of freedom with their aircraft? Do other countries have the privilege of purchasing from France and Israel? In Pakistan's case it tried to purchase French avionics for the Rafale but was denied.

Now point out to the readers where in that quote do i say that the Indians replaced French systems.

Unfortunately... several people disagree including Germans themselves... as for "it can match" yes sure.. Although every single time in combat a mig-29 met a teen series it was shot down... not much to boast abt I guess...

Yes and every time it was a fair match? I dont recall Mig-29s having AWACs, or IFF or even properly functioning avionics let alone equal pilot training. But please continue believing it was an even match.

LOL.. keeps getting better and better comparing a modified rd-33 to some old F-404 ? used on LCA etc BUT NOT ON F-16!!


F-16 uses the F100 series..

PAF F-16s are powered by F100-PW-229 EEP...

The F-100 is a heavy class engine while the RD-33 and F-404 are a light class engine of the same era... thus why i compared them when you claimed that the RD-33 is a gas guzzler.

You though you got me, but instead you just made yourself look like a fool.

Awesome now MIG-35 with its increased fuel capacity somehow becomes a MIG-29... Or is it comprehension issues?

The Mig-29M, Mig-29K, Mig-35 ect all have increased internal fuel capacity. Now show me how you debunked that claim. Apparently, according to you, the people at Mig must be liars and you can somehow "debunk" them.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

And how do newer Saudi F-15s make you any less wrong? What makes you think that the new F-15SAs are not downgraded as well? Once again, i have proven you wrong and once again you refuse to except it. The US does export downgraded aircraft, i have proven it.

You quoted FAS.. Show us a credible report... KSA is one of the world biggest arms buyer... And "no" .. none of those were downgraded!!

And you have proven me wrong lmao!! I posted a source abt their new def deal and upgrade for old F-15S...

Here are a few details:

WASHINGTON, October 20, 2010 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress today of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Saudi Arabia of:

84 F-15SA Aircraft
170 APG-63(v)3 Active Electronically Scanned Array Radar (AESA) radar sets
193 F-110-GE-129 Improved Performance Engines
100 M61 Vulcan Cannons
100 Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System/Low Volume Terminal (MIDS/LVT) and spares
193 LANTIRN Navigation Pods (3rd Generation-Tiger Eye)
338 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS)
462 AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles (NVGS)
300 AIM-9X SIDEWINDER Missiles
25 Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM-9X)
25 Special Air Training Missiles (NATM-9X)
500 AIM-120C/7 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM)
25 AIM-120 CATMs
1,000 Dual Mode Laser/Global Positioning System (GPS) Guided Munitions (500 lb)
1,000 Dual Mode Laser/GPS Guided Munitions (2000 lb)
1,100 GBU-24 PAVEWAY III Laser Guided Bombs (2000 lb)
1,000 GBU-31B V3 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) (2000 lb)
1,300 CBU-105D/B Sensor Fuzed Weapons (SFW)/Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD)
50 CBU-105 Inert
1,000 MK-82 500lb General Purpose Bombs
6,000 MK-82 500lb Inert Training Bombs
2,000 MK-84 2000lb General Purpose Bombs
2,000 MK-84 2000lb Inert Training Bombs
200,000 20mm Cartridges
400,000 20mm Target Practice Cartridges
400 AGM-84 Block II HARPOON Missiles
600 AGM-88B HARM Missiles
169 Digital Electronic Warfare Systems (DEWS)
158 AN/AAQ-33 Sniper Targeting Systems
169 AN/AAS-42 Infrared Search and Track (IRST) Systems
10 DB-110 Reconnaissance Pods
462 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System Helmets
40 Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receivers (ROVER)
80 Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation Pods

Also included are the upgrade of the existing Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) fleet of seventy (70) F-15S multi-role fighters to the F-15SA configuration, the provision for CONUS-based fighter training operations for a twelve (12) F-15SA contingent, construction, refurbishments, and infrastructure improvements of several support facilities for the F-15SA in-Kingdom and/or CONUS operations, RR-188 Chaff, MJU-7/10 Flares, training munitions, Cartridge Actuated Devices/Propellant Actuated Devices, communication security, site surveys, trainers, simulators, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistical support services, and other related elements of logistical and program support.
The estimated cost is $29.432 billion.

The US sold them the "E" version in the 92... with were slightly downgraded because the "F" version was the latest version the most potent strike jet in US inventory at tht time..:

F-15E.info: Strike Eagle reference and resources - F-15E.info - F-15S Development

That is completely irrelevant to the topic. Producing targeting pods for an F-15 does not equate to having a US spec F-15s, nor does it mean that those license built pods are to original spec either.

Read above and democles are French!!for their Typhoons:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAB&url=http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/bahrain-2012-rsaf-driving-typhoon-forward.html&ei=H0PHUr-7G-2q0AW2goH4AQ&usg=AFQjCNG7nfciTHgv5t87FZBkpFJzuj_Y1A&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGE

Notice a trend, i can debunk every one of your arguments, while you haven't proven me wrong with anything, instead you detract from the topic more and more; much like this post about downgraded US aircraft. You challenged me to prove that the US does not downgrade aircraft for export and i proved they do. You lost the argument, but instead of conceding defeat you bring up how the Saudis got shiny new F-15SAs--which proves nothing at all.

Yeah they just sold them the latest F-15s for 30 billion $.

So it took you that long to finally figure that out?

Yup .. once again tell us if the Iraqis didn't have good radars and nor R-27s etc!

Again do a little research before throwing out wild claims. The AIM-7 only has a 30% success rate, so your argument falls apart.


Su-27 vs Mig-29 - GeoCities


Wow, isn't that amazing an AIM-7 only having 30% success rate, the myth of US made missiles being super duper accurate is only a delusion that you apparently suffer. As has been said before, there are many factors that effect the probability of a missile hitting its target. Even the most advanced missiles can miss their target and it may not have anything to do with the missiles guidance system. Range and vector are some of the most important things to consider when fireing a missile, even if an aircraft is in a 'kill zone' it can still cause the missile to fall short of its target by power out of the kill zone or simply pulling hard G maneuvers to cause an overshoot, or it can do all of these things and use countermeasures.

Never spit at the sky... from your own source.. yeah the "forum" you quoted:

Interesting to note that all MiG-29s were shot down in close-quarters turning dogfights. All kills were by means of the R-73. R-27s fired by both MiGs and Su-s on various occassions failed to find their mark.
One uneventful incident occured when two Su-27s were intercepted over Eritrean airspace by four MiGs. The lead Su-27 was targeted by the MiGs which fired three R-27s head-on. The Lead evaded the missiles and then proceeded to engage all four MiGs by firing four R-27s in quick succession. The missiles missed and the MiGs left in a hurry.
---
AS it is five MiG were lost ..

As far as I know there are no significant differences between early and new or domestic and export R-27 variants. (Excluding the active radar homing R-27AE which was cancelled in favour of R-77, and the R-27EM which is only used with the Su-33, AFAIK.)
As for why the R-27s might have missed, it's not terribly suprising IMHO. The Sparrow has had a success rate of only 30% or so against MiG-21/23s flown by poorly trained pilots who usually did't even know they're being fired upon...

Also depends which AIM-7 version you are talking abt... AIM-7 kills are recorded aren't they .. ?

Now that you have realized your mistake you now are trying to wiggle your way out of it. The partnership between Elbit and LM is not much more then LM allowing Elbit to integrate their own systems, and BTW, Yakalev was also a partner with LM.



F-16I / F16I - Israeli Weapons

Another example of "misquoting and cherry picking from a "unreliable blog" .... but still here is the who article from the "blog":

The F-16I nicknamed "Sufa" (Storm) is manufactured by "Lockheed Martin" and equipped with a "Pratt & Whitney" engine as well as advanced systems developed in Israel according to the IAF's specifications by the country's defense industries.
Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFT) - These tanks are manufactured by the "Israel Aircraft Industries" and increase the aircraft's amount of internal fuel by 50%. Their purpose is to significantly prolong the aircraft's flight range and ability to remain in the air. The tanks are installed the plane's back and conform to it's figure.

AGP-68(V)X Radar - Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) enabling the tracking of ground targets day or night, at any type of weather. The radar improves target-tracking performance and allows for automatic targeting instead of manual, thus saving valuable time. The radar also features improvements in the field of aerial targets including aquistion range and tracking quality.

Helmet Mounted Cueing System- An Israeli development.(BULLSHIT) On top of the goggles which F-16I pilots and navigators wear is displayed various aircraft information such as height, speed and weapon systems data. This data be linked to the system, enabling the weapons to be launched on an enemy target using sight only. In addition, a camera mounted in the helmet records that which the pilot views allowing examining what the pilot saw in flight during debriefing.

Dorsal spine Avionics Compartment -(BULLSHIT) An integral part of the advanced systems installed in the plane was developed precisely to the IAF's specifications by the country's defense industries. According to the IAF's traditions, The F-16I is equipped with advanced electronic warfare systems developed in Israel. These systems are improved models based on those installed in the F-15I. The aircraft features advanced Israeli communication systems as well.

600-gallon wing tanks - Improving the aircraft's range and persistence. The tanks are mounted on unejectable supports.

Satellite communication - The F-16I features two new communication devices manufactured by Elta and Rafael, including a UHF radio with new encoding methods and long distance relay capabilities.

F16I Airplanes Resume Active flying


The F16I (Sufa) airplanes are returning today to active flying after it was proved that risk to the air crew members is extremely low. This act was approved by the Air Force Commander, Major General Eliezer Skedi.

The technical and medical information regarding the spreading of the dangerous material to the cockpit was presented to Sufa air crew members and technical workers in a conference yesterday evening, April 27th, 2008. In light of the findings, it was stated that Sufa airplanes will return to be operational after they were grounded on March 20th, 2008, following air crew complaints regarding side effects caused by oxygen system and by the formaldehyde level that was above the international environmental standard.

During this period, special working teams which consisted of experts, Air Force reservists and regular soldiers, were looking into a few issues and series of experiments were conducted in cooperation with the producing company, Lockard Martin, in order to define the source of the problem and examine possible solutions.

A thorough check that included all Sufa airplanes has discovered that only in seven planes the level of formaldehyde was higher than the international standard. In these planes there will be no future flights. In addition, a sample of all kinds of airplanes was checked and no similar problem was discovered.

Regarding the exposure of Sufa members to the formaldehyde material, it was discovered that risk is extremely low. In part of the airplanes special filters were installed for inspection.

The working teams will continue their work to prompt the findings of the phenomenon causes and search for a long term solution.

A few BS debunking time:


The JHMCS is a product of Vision Systems International, LLC (VSI), a joint venture with Rockwell Collins(USA) ..

Source Elbits website:

http://www.elbitsystems.com/elbitmain/area-in2.asp?parent=24&num=287&num2=287

Dorsal Spine:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQtwIwAg&url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgJTGSuOfQE&ei=jkvHUrHqJY7whQeThYCICQ&usg=AFQjCNFapJgFB_eCUV097Uvh2VqqcLPwKw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGQ

A Youtube video from LM..

PAF F-16 Block 52+ with Dorsal Spine:

The Israelis also integrated their ELM-2032 radars into F-16s....


ELM-2032-Airborne-Fire-Control-Radar-installed-on-Fighter.jpg

Im sorry but the US didn't allow it.... its a "no no" even to their BFF!! ... their latest F-16s came with APG-68(V)9s... which by the way are more expensive than ELM-2032 ...

Yes really, the Israelis integrated their own weapons on their F-16s and F-15s which require software integration. But what is really important here is that it debunks your claim and proves that just because the Indians replaced some systems in their Russian fighters does not equate to having poor avionics as the Israelis are a testament to that. Or you can stick to your original theory but that wold mean that Pakistani F-16s are equipped with bad avionics that the Israelis discarded.

Here is a list of Israeli weapons.


Python 1
Python 2
Python 3
Python 4
Python 5
Derby
Delilah
Popeye
Spice

I was being sarcastic!!!

The F-2 is a Japanese license built F-16 with modified wings and Japanese avionics. Key here is that it is a F-16 variant, even 60% is manufactured in the USA.

Lets review Japanese F-16 with Japanese avionics.

800px-Hyakuri_F-2_02.JPG

Good tht you "noticed" coz again its a JV !!!

Lockheed Martin official website:

The F-2 Support Fighter is a multirole, single-engine fighter aircraft produced for the Japan Air Self Defense Force (JASDF). It was jointly developed and is now being jointly produced by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI, Japan’s prime contractor), Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company (principal U.S. subcontractor to MHI), and other Japanese and U.S. industries.

Based on the design of the Lockheed Martin F-16C/D Fighting Falcon, the F-2 was designed to meet the unique requirements of the JASDF. Although capable of both air-to-air and air-to-surface roles, the F-2 emphasizes the air-to-surface role because its primary mission is protection of Japan’s sea lanes.

The F-2 has a wing area that is enlarged approximately 25 percent over the F-16 wing area. The larger wing allows more internal fuel storage and two more weapon store stations than the F-16. Japan elected to fabricate the wing substructure using graphite epoxy and by applying state-of-the-art co-cured composite technology to maximize the strength while minimizing the weight. In addition to the larger wing area, the F-2 fuselage is approximately 17 inches longer than that of the F-16. The horizontal tails are also larger.

Significant hallmarks of the program are the technology transfer and workshare between Japan and the United States. Japan is responsible for producing approximately 60 percent of the aircraft, and the United States is responsible for producing approximately 40 percent.

F-2 · Lockheed Martin

That is completely irrelevant we are talking about F-16s being equipped with foreign avionics and not about where the airframe is produce. Learn to focus on the topic for once.

lol sure...

Russian technology is not magic and not immune to problems especially when reliability is dependent on maintenance and storage. Take a look at F-22s, have they not been crashing, or having oxogen problems or problems with canopies getting stuck? Even one of the Americans on this board described a lot of equipment breaking down and malfunctioning when he was deployed.

Cool story.. comparing apples to oranges..

F-22 Raptor:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f22raptor.htm&ei=T0_HUsjIL8i40QXWu4CoBA&usg=AFQjCNHbwX_Xz9SkIYLXSsrefr62BttRFw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGE

Indian SU-30s had problems when they were left to bake in the desert sun, the problem was fixed when the IAF started storing SU-30s in hangers.

Really? though indian airforce was a professional airforce .. them leaving their SUs to bake under the sun.. thts ironic...

You also should know that India manufactures a lot of Russian weapons under license and one report i read stated that T-90 engines that were manufactured in India had something like half the life of the same engine manufactured in Russia. Tank barrels can explode with something as simple as too much dirt or sand in the barrel, or defective ammunition

Oh please man... they didn't just replace the engines but the FCS,avionics etc..aswell...

As for tank barrels exploding .. yeah tht happened to upgraded tanks.. as for the ammo... do you know where that came from ?

India's T-72 tanks are facing problems with its ammunition as it sometimes bursts in the barrel and 200 such cases have been reported making the Army wonder whether its troops will be "afraid" to fire even after seeing the enemy.

"It (the T-72 ammunition) used to burst in the barrel. If it bursts in the barrel, then the firer is afraid to fire his own gun, which is not a correct thing. If he is afraid to fire his own gun, then even if he sees the enemy he will not fire," the Army has told a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.

The Army informed the Government and the Parliamentary Committee that over a period of time, there have been 200 such accidents involving the ammunition and "it brings down the confidence of the firer, especially, with regard to tank ammunition."

In terms of the numbers, the T-72 tanks are the backbone of the Indian armoured fleet and have undergone several upgrades since their induction to be able to fight effectively in the battlefield

India’s T-72 tanks are facing problems with its ammunition as it sometimes bursts in the barrel and 200 such cases have been reported making the Army wonder whether its troops will be “afraid” to fire even after seeing the enemy.

“It (the T-72 ammunition) used to burst in the barrel. If it bursts in the barrel, then the firer is afraid to fire his own gun, which is not a correct thing. If he is afraid to fire his own gun, then even if he sees the enemy he will not fire,” the Army has told a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.
The Army informed the Government and the Parliamentary Committee that over a period of time, there have been 200 such accidents involving the ammunition and “it brings down the confidence of the firer, especially, with regard to tank ammunition.”

In terms of the numbers, the T-72 tanks are the backbone of the Indian armoured fleet and have undergone several upgrades since their induction to be able to fight effectively in the battlefield.
The Army is also “concerned” over the ammunition used by its artillery called Krashnapov, which has been imported from Russia, and has failed to hit targets in high altitude ranges such as Kargil.
“They were supposed to meet certain height and temperature requirement, and they said that it is not meant for such high altitude areas. Now, this ammunition has been shifted in the plain areas because it was not working there satisfactorily,” it said.

The Army said several meetings have been held with the vendors to resolve the issue but progress in this direction has been relatively slow.

Last year, former Army Chief Gen V K Singh had written a letter to the Prime Minister explaining to him the shortages of tank ammunition being faced by the force.

Smerch:

Indian Army's Russian Smerch rocket launchers facing hitches
New Delhi, Nov 2, (PTI) :
Army has detected problems in its Russian-origin Smerch multi-barrel rocket launchers (MBRL)and complained to Moscow about it.

There are problems in the barrels of some of these rocket launchers and we have told the Russians about the issues related to firing of the system, senior Army sources told PTI here.

The Smerch rocket launchers are the latest inductions of the Indian Army after a deal was signed for their procurement in December 2005 for more than Rs 2,600 crore.

The sources said the Russians will be visiting India to look into the issue and try to rectify the problems in the system.

The issue is understood to have come up for discussion during the Indo-Russian Inter-Governmental Commission on Military-Technical Cooperation meeting between the Defence Ministers of the two countries earlier this month.

The system has had several defects in its launch vehicles, outlaying fire controls and data transmission, which led to delays in its operationalisation in the service, the sources said.

The Smerch long range rocket systems have a range of over 60 kms, almost three times the distance of the present Indian artillery rocket systems.

India had signed two deals in December 2005, and March 2007, with Russian firm Rosoboronexport for importing 42 of the MBRL systems along with launcher, transloader and command and control systems.

Smerch MBRL along with the Russian-origin Grad 122 mm rocket systems and indigenous Pinaka form the important part of the Indian Army's firepower.

Quality of Russian arms worries India

NEW DELHI: Despite Israel snapping on its heels now, Russia still remains the largest defence supplier to India. But all is not as hunky dory as it seems.

India has complained to Russia about the unreliability of some of its weapon systems as well as tardy product support in execution of several projects. Top-level sources say it has been made very clear to Russia that apart from "quality control" of the military equipment being bought from it, India wants assurances on maintenance of delivery schedules of contracted weapon systems, uninterrupted supply of spares and life-term product support.
"Russia is our long-standing strategic partner but there are some areas of worry in the huge bilateral military-technical cooperation. Defence minister A K Antony, in fact, raised these issues with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Ivanov, during Russian president Vladimir Putin's visit here last month," said a source.
The defence ministry is particularly worried about the reliability of certain Russian-origin weapon systems and equipment like the Appassionata navigation systems for the 10 Kilo or Sindhugosh-class 877EKM submarines as well as the large number of Uran subsonic anti-ship cruise missiles in the Indian inventory.

The IAF, on its part, is upset with the "distortions" on the canopies of the Sukhoi-30MKI Phase-3 fighter jets. This comes at a time when India is on the verge of signing a $1.6-billion deal with Russia to acquire another 40 Sukhoi-30MKIs, in addition to the 190 such jets already contracted through two big deals in 1996 and 2000.

Though IAF simply loves the "air dominance" Sukhoi-30MKIs, which are the most potent fighters in its combat fleet, their induction programme has been dogged by several delays.

Incidentally, a recent comptroller and auditor-general report has also raised several questions about the 2000 contract for the licensed production of 140 Sukhoi-30MKIs by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd at Nasik. It even held that the average cost of a HAL-manufactured Sukhoi-30MKI is likely to be Rs 28.60 crore more than that of the same fighter imported from Russia.

"There are also concerns about the unserviceability of a number of air-launched missiles, apart from delays in implementation of supply, repair and overhaul schedules for ongoing or past acquisitions," said the source.

Huge multi-million contracts signed with Russia in recent years like the ones for the Suk-hoi-30MKI fighters, the T-90S main battle tanks and the Talwar-class stealth frigates have all been dogged by several delays.

More mi amigo?

Now where in that quote does it say that that his avionics/weapons systems were "showing". It states the apposite, it very clearly states that the avionics failed. You clearly have a reading impairment.

? In tht war 6 mig-29 (according to your source) were destroyed in air combat... 1 badly damaged and 2 destroyed on ground!

Your are talking about 1 engagement while im talking about lt col Pavlovic!!

Brain dead?

Did i ever say they did not? You accuse me of saying things i never said and then you refuse to show proof because you cant quote me. What i said is that they did not have R-73s, and that much of their aircraft were equipped with short range R-60s.

Read your posts smarty... what impression are you trying to give?

The Pakistani Air Force lost dozens of aircraft to India but i do enjoy how you are delusional. Pakistan was losing aircraft in A2A, to AAA, and to A2G, so much so that East Pakistan broke away, and thousands of Pakistanis became POWs. Obviously the Pakistani Air Force was not what you make it out to be.

Really kiddo? (including the jets PAF destroyed itself on ground in East Pakistan)...30-102.... three-to-one kill ratio!!! Against both qualitively and numbericaly superior IAF... (under sanctions from USA)... nice ratio... you were supporting Indians remember?

**** F-86 even shot your mighty *** mig-21!



Here :

Air Aces Homepage


Air Aces Homepage

For more :


Who Won the Air War in 1971? | Page 5

Want to count 65 now sunny?

I didnt miss quote anything. I quoted one German stating that he could not be beaten by F-16s and that one F-16 ate 18 Archers. It not a miss quote its your inability to grasp reality.

LOL.. SELECTIVE READING KIDDO??>>>??? THE ONY ADVANTAGE MIG-29 HAD WAS A HMS... LMAO @ U.

Exactly the response i expected from someone that has no comeback.

Yeah sure.

Firstly i never said anything remotely close to that, and secondly i have asked you to quote me saying that which you so far have refused to do because i said nothing of the sort.



But here, let me do it for you. The below post is where you originally quoted me with that accusation.



Now point out to the readers where in that quote do i say that the Indians replaced French systems

.
Nope.. you said French,USA etc let their customers replace their avionics! I simply asked what did their customers (and yes india operates mirajes) replace in their jets?

Yes and every time it was a fair match? I dont recall Mig-29s having AWACs, or IFF or even properly functioning avionics let alone equal pilot training. But please continue believing it was an even match.

Yet almost the kills happen to be either during dog fights or under the detection range of mig-29s radar armed with BVRs like R-27R,R-73s!!!!!!

The F-100 is a heavy class engine while the RD-33 and F-404 are a light class engine of the same era... thus why i compared them when you claimed that the RD-33 is a gas guzzler.

You though you got me, but instead you just made yourself look like a fool.

Come on are you that retarded? we talk about F-16s and you show me F-404? when the F-100 series powers F-16s????

Also you quote RD-33MK almost another or should I say a new jet developed in 2003?

Let more more abt it!!!

The Mig-29M, Mig-29K, Mig-35 ect all have increased internal fuel capacity. Now show me how you debunked that claim. Apparently, according to you, the people at Mig must be liars and you can somehow "debunk" them.

YOU SHOWED ME SOME PAPER ABOUT MIG-35!!!

 

[500]

If u compare JF-17 with baseline MiG-29, then:

1) Mig is much more agile and fast. It has helmet cueing and IRST. So in dogfight Mig will smash it.
2) In BVR JF-17 has an edge tnx to SD-10.
3) Air to ground JF-17 also has an advantage, can be used in CAS.
4) Both have a small range, base defence fighters.
5) Both are cheap, but JF-17 much cheaper for maintenance.

If compare JF-17 with MiG-29SMT, then:

1) Mig smashes JFT both in dogfight and BVR.
2) MiG better in long range strikes.
3) CAS about equal, but MIG is more survivable tnx to 2 engines.
4) MiG is more expensive both for procurement and maintenance.

In short JF-17 can compete well with baseline MiG-29, but MiG-29SMT is simply another league.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

If u compare JF-17 with baseline MiG-29, then:

1) Mig is much more agile and fast. It has helmet cueing and IRST. So in dogfight Mig will smash it.

2) In BVR JF-17 has an edge tnx to SD-10.
3) Air to ground JF-17 also has an advantage, can be used in CAS.
4) Both have a small range, base defence fighters.
5) Both are cheap, but JF-17 much cheaper for maintenance.

If compare JF-17 with MiG-29SMT, then:

1) Mig smashes JFT both in dogfight and BVR.
2) MiG better in long range strikes.
3) CAS about equal, but MIG is more survivable tnx to 2 engines.
4) MiG is more expensive both for procurement and maintenance.

In short JF-17 can compete well with baseline MiG-29, but MiG-29SMT is simply another league.

Both belong to different classes...

BUT..


JF-17 Block I is considered to be as agile as the F-16..

JF-17 Block Is radar has a range of 130km ... Guided by an AWACs... the advantage disappears... not to forget the massive RCS of a mig-29.

JF-17 Block I is not a long range strike aircraft... its a light weight multirole fighter.... but it does have IFR capability!

JF-17 Block I hardly cost 25-30 million $.

IRST ... Externally mounted is there.

HMS is also going to be inducted,

Again AESA,New engine... WS-13..along with other weapon systems... even new BVRs like the T-Darter .. (there is/was also a medium ranged BVR prog initiated by NDC) apart from other stuff...

 

[MastanKhan]

Well i am looking for a neutral answer and not from some fan boy) A twin engined MIG-29 is in which aspect less superior than a JF-17 thunder which is single engine fighter jet?How can JF-17 become a threat to MIG-29?

Hi,

Most of you are missing the point----to most of the rogue nations---which could not or could not afford to buy from the west---the mig29 was the only option.

Those nations did not have the choice of a single engine or a twin engine twin tail aircraft---there was only one aircraft available and that was the mig29.

So---many a nation---who don't want a twin tail twin engine aircraft---they can go for this single engine aircraft.

Thank you.

i love everything in my country, if they said that the Jf Thunder was propelled by a motorcycle engine even then i would consider it to be the best in the world.

Sir,

Then you have no loyalty to the nation----you are its worst enemy. Untill and unless you are ruthless in asserting the truth regarding your weapons system---you cannot come to a fight expecting to sustain .

 

[Jf Thunder]

Sir,
Then you have no loyalty to the nation----you are its worst enemy. Untill and unless you are ruthless in asserting the truth regarding your weapons system---you cannot come to a fight expecting to sustain .

Sir
then i am ok with that lol

 

[Ra'ad]

Sir
then i am ok with that lol

You got me! im ur weapons system. Don't forget to brag about that in the future. U are a capable air-being.

 

[ptldM3]

You quoted FAS.. Show us a credible report... KSA is one of the world biggest arms buyer... And "no" .. none of those were downgraded!!

And you have proven me wrong lmao!! I posted a source abt their new def deal and upgrade for old F-15S...

The last one that should be bickering about credible sources is you, considering you used forum posts as sources.

I will provide another source to confirm what everyone already knows but its funny how none of my sources are good enough for you and all the while you demand extra sources while you keep refusing to provide sources for your claims.



Saudi Arabian F-15 Peace Sun - GlobalSecurity.org

F-15 production was extended into 1999 by the orders for 72 F-15S aircraft for Saudi Arabia. Peace Sun IX is an F-15 Foreign Military Sales production program, with development, to deliver 72 F-15S aircraft including support equipment, spares, and training to the Royal Saudi government. Saudi Arabia has purchased a total of 62 F-15C and D aircraft and later procured the F-15S, which is a two-seater aircraft based on the F-15E airframe, with downgraded avionics, downgraded LANTIRN pods, and a simplified Hughes APG-70 radar without computerised radar mapping.

So once again, i have proved that the US does indeed export downgraded aircraft and that is what the argument is about.

Read above and democles are French!!for their Typhoons:

Jee, ya think? Producing licensed products does not mean that those licensed pods are to exact specs as the original. In other words you have no argument.

Yup .. once again tell us if the Iraqis didn't have good radars and nor R-27s etc!

Yes i wil tell you once again since you obviously cant retain information very well. The Iraqi Mig-29s had downgraded radars and targeting suits. I provided a link confirming that. I also never denied that Iraq had R-27s, if you want to make a point prove that Iraqi aircraft were all ways armed with them or at least provide proof that they were widely used the During the Gulf War on not depleted by the Iran Iraq war.

Never spit and the sky... from your own source.. yeah the "forum" you quoted:Y

You better back that statement if you are going to accuse me of using a forum. My source was not a forum, it was from Geocities.com and the original article was written by Washington post/Reuters. Funny, too considering you have used forum posts yourself.


In any case, it's just further proof that you are a dishonest.

A few BS debunking time:


The JHMCS is a product of Vision Systems International, LLC (VSI), a joint venture with Rockwell Collins(USA) ..

Source Elbits website:

http://www.elbitsystems.com/elbitmain/area-in2.asp?parent=24&num=287&num2=287

Read the entire thing, This is what your source states:

They are supplied as part of upgrade programs as well as on a stand-alone basis. Elbit Systems fixed wing HMS technology is the basis for the U.S. Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) program.

What it states is that the US is the beneficiary of the joint venture. Its like France and India having joint ventures except its the French helping the Indians, and not the other way around.

Dorsal Spine:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQtwIwAg&url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgJTGSuOfQE&ei=jkvHUrHqJY7whQeThYCICQ&usg=AFQjCNFapJgFB_eCUV097Uvh2VqqcLPwKw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGQ

A Youtube video from LM..

PAF F-16 Block 52+ with Dorsal Spine:
View attachment 12939

I watched the entire video and it did not mention anything about the dorsal spine, once again you have no sources and are just randomly spewing garbage posts in order to detract from the topic.

The source that i provided stated that the dorsal spine in Israeli F-16s is equipped with Israeli avionics. Showing me a picture of an inferior Pakistan F-16 with a dorsal spine just proves you cant comprehend what you read. To make it clear, my source is talking about the avionics in the dorsal spine. Got it?

Im sorry but the US didn't allow it.... its a "no no" even to their BFF!!

You don't have to be sorry. I clearly provided a photo of an F-16 with an Israeli radar which was clearly marked with the Elbit logo. You also are apparently unaware of the Israeli modifications to their future F-35s which was approved by the US.

Good tht you "noticed" coz again its a JV !!!

Lockheed Martin official website:

Yes it is good. It's also a good proof to show you that not everyone chooses US avionics.

Cool story.. comparing apples to oranges..

F-22 Raptor:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f22raptor.htm&ei=T0_HUsjIL8i40QXWu4CoBA&usg=AFQjCNHbwX_Xz9SkIYLXSsrefr62BttRFw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.bGE

Right, so if Russian weapons have malfunctions it funny and okay to call those weapons crap but when US weapons have malfunctions, it's "comparing apples to oranges"

As for tank barrels exploding .. yeah tht happened to upgraded tanks.. as for the ammo... do you know where that came from ?

Secondly, as usual you try to be smirky but it always backfires on you. So, do you know where the ammo came from? Obviously not.






Chapter III - Comptroller and Auditor General of India

On account of defects in manufacture of an ammunition for tanks, as many as 1.35 lakh shells valued at Rs 607.43 crore were held in segregated conditions by the five Army Commands pending their rectification/ replacement by the Ordnance Factory concerned, rendering the investment on their manufacture unproductive.

The Ordnance Factory, Khamaria, had been manufacturing and supplying a particular type of ammunition used in one of the tanks of the Army.

In October 2000, an accident occurred to a tank using this ammunition at Babina following its failure, in which the driver of the tank was killed and the tank commander and gunner survived after being critically injured. Following trials conducted on the ammunition, it was found to be of poor quality and unsatisfactory in performance on account of (i) poor quality of the projectile and charger; (ii) the projectile getting detached from its casing on many occasions; (iii) the tendency of the outer casing to leave a burning residue in the gun tube/charger posing a fire hazard. Besides, the performance of the ammunition was also found to be inconsistent and unsatisfactory during zeroing check and in respect of its accuracy, penetration and stowage. A ban was therefore imposed on issue of the ammunition to the units in the five Commands and the Factory was also instructed to suspend its production.

Subsequent investigation by the Directorate General of Quality Assurance revealed that certain lots of the ammunition were of a hybrid version and the remaining lots were of an indigenous version. In January 2002, the Army Headquarters decided all ammunition of the hybrid version would be declared unserviceable and back loaded to the Ordnance Factory Board, while the rejected lots of its indigenous version would be replaced free of cost.

Based on this decision, the Master General of Ordnance branch of the Army Headquarters informed the Army Commands in June 2002 that the ammunition would be rectified/replaced by the Ordnance Factory Board in a phased manner. The latter was also requested to carry out the rectification on fast track basis.

Pending backloading of the ammunition to the Ordnance Factory in a phased manner, the five Army Commands were holding 1,34,986 shells valued at Rs 607.43 crore under segregated conditions. In respect of 1,23,794 of these shells valued at Rs 557.06 crore, 40 per cent of the shelf life of 10 years had expired while the shelf life of another 11,192 shells valued at Rs 50.36 crore had already been halved.

The defective ammunition not yet having been rectified, the investment of Rs 607.43 crore on its manufacture had been rendered idle and unproductive, apart from the additional investments that will be necessary for their rectification/replacement.

The matter was referred to the Ministry in May 2002; their reply was awaited as of January 2003.




More mi amigo?

Yes, i got more. Do some more research before you embarrass yourself like you just did with the above post and many other posts before that.

Your are talking about 1 engagement while im talking about lt col Pavlovic!!

Brain dead?

Read the source again. Not only were you making claims up when you said that the Mig-29s had working avionics but now you are making claims up that it was isolated to "1 engagement".








Yugoslav & Serbian MiG-29s - ACIG.org

When the NATO attack finally came, on the evening hours of 24 March 1999, the MiGs went into action, being scrambled one after the other. The two fighters that took off from Nis and were vectored to intercept targets over southern Serbia and Kosovo, were swiftly dealth with by NATO fighters: the MiG-29 flown by Maj. Dragan Ilic was damaged - either by an AIM-120 fired from a Dutch F-16AM fighters, or by a Serbian SA-6 SAM, in a case of fratricide fire. The second MiG that scrambled from the same airfield was flown by Maj. Ilijo Arizanov, was shot down by an USAF F-15C. The pair from Batajnica experienced only a slightly better fate: first to launch was Maj. Nebojsa Nikolic, who was shot down shortly after take off. Maj. Ljubisa Kulacin evaded several missiles fired at him while fighting to bring his malfunctioning systems back in working order. Eventually realizing that he could not do anything, and with Batajnica AB under a severe attack, he diverted to Belgrade IAP, and landed safely. Kulacin's experience was not much different to that of his three other colleagues, all of which experienced immense problems with weapons and navigational systems on their aircraft: on the 18112, flown by Maj. Arizanov, both the radio and SPO-15 malfunctioned; on 18104, flown by Maj. Ilic, the radar failed; on 18111, flown by Maj. Nikolic, both the radar and the SN-29 missile guidance systems were inoperative, and apparently the SPO-15 also did not function properly.

The fifth and last MiG-29 to get airborne on that night was 18106, flown by Maj. Predrag Milutinovic. Immediately after take-off his radar failed and even the electrical generator malfunctioned. Shortly after, he was warned by SPO-15 of being acquired, but he evaded the opponent by several evasive manoeuvres. Attempting to evade further encounters and searching for an airfield where a landing was possible, he finally ended over Ribarska Banja, when his RWR warned him of acquisition by a ground-based radar. Seconds afterward the aircraft was hit and Milutinovic forced to eject.

All 5 Mig-29s had malfunctioning systems.

Really kiddo? (including the jets PAF destroyed itself on ground in East Pakistan)...30-102.... three-to-one kill ratio!!! Against both qualitively and numbericaly superior IAF... (under sanctions from USA)... nice ratio... you were supporting Indians remember?

**** F-86 even shot your mighty *** mig-21!



Here :

Air Aces Homepage


Air Aces Homepage

For more :


Who Won the Air War in 1971? | Page 5

Want to count 65 now sunny?

From your own source, it claims Pakistan shot down 3 Mig-21 while losing 12 F-86s, so much for your claim about the PAF being the worlds largest distributer of Mig parts

Some other things to note, the Indians mostly lost Hawker Hunters. Moreover, both sides dispute the other sides claims with even neutral source contradicting one another. Also of the 3 Mig-21 Pakistan claims to have shot down, India only claims 1 of those was lost in A2A combat.

LOL.. SELECTIVE READING KIDDO??>>>??? THE ONY ADVANTAGE MIG-29 HAD WAS A HMS... LMAO @ U.

Only advantage? Even your own source (supposed US pilot flying Mig-29) stated that the Mig-29s Archer was "superior" to the Aim-7. He also conceded that both aircrafts radars would spot one another at about the same time.

So lets review:


Archer missile
Better rate of climb
Higher angle of attack
Higher instantaneous turn rate
Higher thrust-to-weight
Superior combat radius
Faster at higher altitudes
HMC



Looks like thats a lot more then just one advantage.

.
Nope.. you said French,USA etc let their customers replace their avionics! I simply asked what did their customers (and yes india operates mirajes) replace in their jets?

I said that Russia allows foreign avionics to be fitted to their aircraft, the French and Israelis allow their avionics to be installed in Russian aircraft, so its a mutual agreement. And yes, there has been Mirages with foreign avionics such as Italian EW suits.

Yet almost the kills happen to be either during dog fights or under the detection range of mig-29s radar armed with BVRs like R-27R,R-73s!!!!!!

Post a source stating that most of the Mig-29s were armed with R-73s or even R-27s at the time they were shot down. Your other claims is also false, there was a few Mig-29s that got into the merge but certainly not most as you claim. Furthermore, if an aircraft is close enough to detect other aircraft it does not mean that it will. A radar is limited by its field of view, this is why AWACs is important, AWACs alerts other aircraft well in advanced and it vectors those aircraft to fly around radar coverage.

Come on are you that retarded? we talk about F-16s and you show me F-404? when the F-100 series powers F-16s????

Also you quote RD-33MK almost another or should I say a new jet developed in 2003?

Let more more abt it!!!

Listen carefully, we were talking the RD-33 and its fuel consumption, i compared it to the F-404 since its the same class and same era. It was you that mentioned the F-100 series which has nothing to do with either the RD-33 or F-404 since its a heavy class engine. Think about what you just did, you brought up something that had nothing to do with what i was talking about and then you accused me of comparing what you brought up.

YOU SHOWED ME SOME PAPER ABOUT MIG-35!!!

Its called a source Here is another source, this time Mig itself.



- MiG-29M/M2

increased internal fuel capacity and in-flight refueling possibility;

Now tell the readers how you debunked Migs claims that the Mig-29 holds more internal fuel.

 

[Last Samuri]

As far as i know and can see the Russians are selling Flankers mostly.

The MIG29 is no longer a long term serious export product for Russia. They tried with MIG35 towards indian MMRCA and it failed this was the last big chance for MIG29.

Russia next big export success will be this wonderful fighter from 2018 onwards

I think JF17 price range of $20m each will be a big pull in your budget air forces and i cant see any other fighter avialable elsewhere in this bracket other than,

Used F16s
Used Mirage 2000

J10 china other fighter may also be a competitor

Some how i think the Russians are looking at FAR BIGGER markets GLOBALLY WITH BIG CASH

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The last one that should be bickering about credible sources is you, considering you used forum posts as sources.

I will provide another source to confirm what everyone already knows but its funny how none of my sources are good enough for you and all the while you demand extra sources while you keep refusing to provide sources for your claims.

Saudi Arabian F-15 Peace Sun - GlobalSecurity.org

lmao... yes tht was 92... and US didn't give them the latest version... which was slightly downgraded as it was the most lethal strike version in their arsenal... read what I posted kiddo... and yeah it didn't have crappy avionics tht plague your machinery.

So once again, i have proved that the US does indeed export downgraded aircraft and that is what the argument is about.

Tht was never the argument... the argument was the failure of mig-29 in combat ... which i already proved you wrong... it has failed in every air to air engagement..... which is a fact....
And even those downgraded jets shot down jets like F1 etc... something migs couldn't do... except old mig-21s or beech crafts...

Jee, ya think? Producing licensed products does not mean that those licensed pods are to exact specs as the original. In other words you have no argument.

It does ... its not the 80s... @al-Hasani ... they Saudi aren't paying billions for typhoons or the production of downgraded pods..

Yes i wil tell you once again since you obviously cant retain information very well. The Iraqi Mig-29s had downgraded radars and targeting suits. I provided a link confirming that. I also never denied that Iraq had R-27s, if you want to make a point prove that Iraqi aircraft were all ways armed with them or at least provide proof that they were widely used the During the Gulf War on not depleted by the Iran Iraq war.

Im sorry but.. can you prove they weren't? you don't send a jet in the air without weapons you already have in your inventory...

And all the kills happened from the mig-29s radar range unless Iraqis were playing super Mario in their migs or even the eritreans or the serbs... or is it tht all of them had crappy radars?

You better back that statement if you are going to accuse me of using a forum. My source was not a forum, it was from Geocities.com and the original article was written by Washington post/Reuters. Funny, too considering you have used forum posts yourself.

In any case, it's just further proof that you are a dishonest.

Lmao.. dishonest? your own source proved how 5 migs were lost in dog fights and how crappy Russian bvr was!!

Read the entire thing, This is what your source states:

What it states is that the US is the beneficiary of the joint venture. Its like France and India having joint ventures except its the French helping the Indians, and not the other way around.

Very gullible... or is it dishonesty?

I watched the entire video and it did not mention anything about the dorsal spine, once again you have no sources and are just randomly spewing garbage posts in order to detract from the topic

Cool story kiddo.. although I prove you wrong..

The source that i provided stated that the dorsal spine in Israeli F-16s is equipped with Israeli avionics. Showing me a picture of an inferior Pakistan F-16 with a dorsal spine just proves you cant comprehend what you read. To make it clear, my source is talking about the avionics in the dorsal spine. Got it?

Yeah kid.. the jets built in USA... With Elbeit n LM having a partnership.. and the so called avionics are what? warning systems.. lol

No ELM radar,the JHMCS = JV ... let us more!

You don't have to be sorry. I clearly provided a photo of an F-16 with an Israeli radar which was clearly marked with the Elbit logo. You also are apparently unaware of the Israeli modifications to their future F-35s which was approved by the US.

And you are probably unaware of the real world.. would you prefer a Janes report? or the fact tht their last 52s came with the APG series?

Yes it is good. It's also a good proof to show you that not everyone chooses US avionics.

lol wtf... series dude? your a genius.

Right, so if Russian weapons have malfunctions it funny and okay to call those weapons crap but when US weapons have malfunctions, it's "comparing apples to oranges"

lmao... tell somebody tht F-22 is crap and they will laugh at your butt... you are still developing a 5th gen fighter they did tht decades ago...

Secondly, as usual you try to be smirky but it always backfires on you. So, do you know where the ammo came from? Obviously not.


Chapter III - Comptroller and Auditor General of India

... again kiddo ... you are talking about another case... ding ding.... I posted enough sources already to burst your nonsense...

Yes, i got more. Do some more research before you embarrass yourself like you just did with the above post and many other posts before that.

You got more.. lol ask other members..

Read the source again. Not only were you making claims up when you said that the Mig-29s had working avionics but now you are making claims up that it was isolated to "1 engagement".

Yugoslav & Serbian MiG-29s - ACIG.org

All 5 Mig-29s had malfunctioning systems.

Over 20 lost migs... bet ALL OF THEM HAD MALFUNCTIONING SYSTEMS...

From your own source, it claims Pakistan shot down 3 Mig-21 while losing 12 F-86s, so much for your claim about the PAF being the worlds largest distributer of Mig parts

Some other things to note, the Indians mostly lost Hawker Hunters. Moreover, both sides dispute the other sides claims with even neutral source contradicting one another. Also of the 3 Mig-21 Pakistan claims to have shot down, India only claims 1 of those was lost in A2A combat.

You are literally too dumb..

I can count 8 in just 1 post in tht thread with the names of the shot down pilots.. and countless other migs n SUs...

Shot down by obsolete second hand f-86Es..under sanctions

Indians sure did win all air wars...

Their top guns:

Tell us more abt Indians defeating PAF in airwars..

Only advantage? Even your own source (supposed US pilot flying Mig-29) stated that the Mig-29s Archer was "superior" to the Aim-7. He also conceded that both aircrafts radars would spot one another at about the same time

So lets review:


Archer missile
Better rate of climb
Higher angle of attack
Higher instantaneous turn rate
Higher thrust-to-weight
Superior combat radius
Faster at higher altitudes
HMC



Looks like thats a lot more then just one advantage..

Wow its getting dumber and dumber by the minute..

You should try to read the posts... and not cherry pic.. like you did even in tht article...

I said that Russia allows foreign avionics to be fitted to their aircraft, the French and Israelis allow their avionics to be installed in Russian aircraft, so its a mutual agreement. And yes, there has been Mirages with foreign avionics such as Italian EW suits.

Lol.. yeah coz its beneficial for them to sell their avionics not to forget the publicity of their stuff... what abt Russians? "comrade we sold our latest jets... and they replaced the avionics" ..

Post a source stating that most of the Mig-29s were armed with R-73s or even R-27s at the time they were shot down. Your other claims is also false, there was a few Mig-29s that got into the merge but certainly not most as you claim. Furthermore, if an aircraft is close enough to detect other aircraft it does not mean that it will. A radar is limited by its field of view, this is why AWACs is important, AWACs alerts other aircraft well in advanced and it vectors those aircraft to fly around radar coverage.

?What ? seriously... go on blindly advocating your crap nobody cares I posted the sources... the kill ratios everything.

Listen carefully, we were talking the RD-33 and its fuel consumption, i compared it to the F-404 since its the same class and same era. It was you that mentioned the F-100 series which has nothing to do with either the RD-33 or F-404 since its a heavy class engine. Think about what you just did, you brought up something that had nothing to do with what i was talking about and then you accused me of comparing what you brought up.

You compared MIG-20 VS F-16s.. F-16 SAME ERA (INFACT WAS PRODUCED BEFORE MIG-29) .. LMAO ... another Failure..

Not to forget quoting an engine developed in 2003 for naval use n for mig-35...

Its called a source Here is another source, this time Mig itself.



- MiG-29M/M2

Lol.. the tech demonstrator for mig-35..

Now tell the readers how you debunked Migs claims that the Mig-29 holds more internal fuel.

Your posts speak for themselves...