From: wilderbj@ss1.sews.wpafb.af.mil (Bruce J. Wilder)
Subject: Re: : How good is the Mig-29 VS the F16/F18 ?
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 01:14:27 GMT


From wilderbj@ss1.sews.wpafb.af.mil (Bruce J. Wilder)


Differences between the Mig 29 & F-16/F-18 or not so cut and dry as you
seem to imply below.

ooi@latcs1.lat.oz.au (Jeffrey K Ooi) writes:

>From ooi@latcs1.lat.oz.au (Jeffrey K Ooi)

>Since the German reunification The formally west german luftwaffe got
>it's hands on a 24-plane squadron of mig-29s and here is what they said:

>1) it flies as slowly as 160km/r(99mph) - the speed of a cloth covered Piper cub
>2) It's maximum speed is Mach 2.5 ( the f-16 : Mach 2 )  
>3) It can withstand turning forces of 10-11g (american jets can on average take
>    only 9g before they lose engines )

I'll make a few comments about this.  First off most combat aircraft
(F-14,15,16,18, etcs) of the US are designed to take as much as 15g's of
loading.  The 9g limitation is wired into the flight controls of at
least the F-16 for two reasons (there maybe more).  The most obvious is
a pilot limitation; beyond 9g's the ability of the pilot to remain
conscious is questionable (I know it's possible, as a matter-a-fact I
know a female Lt. here at Wright-Pat that takes 9+ routinely).  The
second reason for the 9g limit is to extend airframe life.  The F-16 for
instance could easily pull more than 9g's if the fly-by-wire system is
reprogrammed and a few pilots could probably handle it; but you will pay
a substantial cost in airframe life.


>4) The Mig-29 can 'flip-up' in combat for a brief period, an angle of 80 degrees   to sight a target well above it's target window.

What is 'flip-up?'  If you mean pop up or a similar manoeuvre, aircraft
have been doing this since...since maybe WWI.  80 degrees is
particularly impressive; it's how long you can maintain it.

>5) The western planes have long range superiority but at dogfight level the
>  the planes are about equal
>6) The aircraft weighs about 14,515kg and needs only 305m of runway for takeoff
>   ( the f16 needs 366m )
>7) about cost? The American fire control computers are very expensive compared
>   to their russian counterparts...The Mig-29 uses a $50 device with a pair
>   of infra-red emitters that simply clamps onto a normal helmet.
>   The infra-red beams are reflected of mirrors mounted in the cockpit to           measure the pilot's head angle with surprisingly accurate precision - 
>   the pilot can slue his fire-control system 60 degrees just by looking at the    target.

F-15 pilots I've talked to didn't seem vary impressed with this current
system.  From what they said it is very easy to cause it to dissengage
from a target if your aspect is changing quickly relative to the Mig.

>8) If the mig goes out of control, or the pilot becomes disoriented, all the 
>pilot has to do is hit a panic button   and the computer brings prompt, 
>automatic recovery.

This doesn't help one bit if you are truly disoriented are out of
control such that you can't reach the button (pilots have often died
with their A/C just because they couldn't reach the ejection handles)

>9) there are problems, however, The engines eat up so much fuel that the plane
>   can only remain on station less than 2 hours -without i/f refuelling - but
>   still a short time compared to western fighters.

And if the Mig 29 engines are made anything like the Mig 21 engines as
far as quality goes, they probably go through those about as quickly as
they go through fuel.

>The Germans, however, are happy enough with the plane to buy a further 200
>of the planes and at about $25millon each plus spare parts and tech support
>is a great deal better that western planes. 

$25 million?  That about as much as a F-16 (actually I believe that is
more than what an F-16 costs).  And on western planes spares and
maintainance is far cheaper.

Bruce J. Wilder
wilderbj@fse2.enf.wpafb

Newsgroups: sci.military