Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

Person, I hear what you're saying and I can see your point. That paragraph was in response to another post here on the board boasting about Soviet technical achievemants. There were just different design philosophies at work in each country.

Quote:

The projection of conventional military force globaly to enforce a de facto pax americana never seemed to be the mirrored by the soviets military model.

I'm not so sure about that. They had some pretty long range bombers and a whole bunch of fighters and ground troops. They also controlled many other satellite countries and had a pretty big navy. The biggest thing that I can see different between the US and Soviet naval forces is the lack of a Soviet carrier fleet. That's the best way to rapidly deploy a force that I know of. I know it's fiction, but a book I really liked was Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising."

I may be way off base here, too, but I really wanted to explain the motivation for that particular paragraph.

JR, what's up with that control actuator on the bottom of the wing? It looks like something I'd do on one of my R/C gliders! That antenna on the tail looks like someone needed a peice of metal, so they raided the equipment from their fireplace! Is it just me, or does that antenna bear a rather striking resemblance to a fireplace poker??? Last, but not least, what's up with those flat pieces of metal on the sides of the pitot tube? I'm not talking down about them, I've just never seen anything quite like them that I can recall. Does the pitot tube really need that much support?

F-16.net Sponsor

cru wrote:

WWII isn't really my forte when it comes to Air Combat History

Well that explains why do you believe that the VVS and theUSAF (actually USAAF during WWII) were comparable...

The USAAF was largely a strategic force, while the VVS was almost completely tactical at that point. They didn't have a good strategic bomber until they completely copied the B-29 and redesignated it Tu-4. They even left the Boeing insignia on the Rudder Pedals. So Honestly, they were both good at what they did, but at that point the USAAF would roll right over the VVS. Korea, on the other hand was primarily a tactical airwar, I think, IIRC, only 1.4% of UN Sorties were B-29 sorties, which the MiG-15s could easily take down.

I never said the USAAF was comparable to the VVS. I simply said that the La-9 kicked a$$. Which, it did.

Last edited by dionis on Aug 22, 2005 - 09:54 PM; edited 1 time in total

I think the Mig-29 is a better platform than the F-16 by quite a shot.

Now take the latest Fulcrums.. Mig-29SMT (standard Mig-29S/Fulcrum C upgrade) with 2 new hardpoints and extra fuel or the Mig-29M/M2.. which is a whole new airframe (much more fuel, even more than the SMT) and compare those.

With new ECM (can be podded), new radar (Zhuk-M or Bars-29) easily equal to if not better than the latest APG-68V(9) or APG 80, LCD cockpit:

and then a full new weapons layout (increase payload for both the SMT and M2,) with Kh-25,29 all version ground attack missiles, KAB guided bombs KAB-500 (laser, TV, GLONASS/GPS versions [KAB-500SE], Kh-31A, Kh-35E, SS-N-27 Alfa antiship missiles, the Kh-31P, Kh-58 antiradar missiles), then the AA-10 Alamo versions (ER,ET) and AA-12 (soon to be a ramjet version), and the R-73M.

The Kh-25/29 series are easily better than the AGM-65 Maverick (one is longer ranged, one has a 3x to 6x bigger warhead)

The KAB bombs are easily comparable to the GBUs that the Americans make.

The antishipping weapons can't even be compared, the AGM-84 Harpoon is a joke. The Mig-29SMT/M2 gets the medim long range supersonic Kh-31A, the subsonic long range Kh-35E, or the insanely powerful SS-N-27 Alfa.. of which it can carry 3. (350Kg warhead, 350Km range, subsonic to supersonic flight profile -- hi lo)

The Kh-31P is also about 3x the range of the AGM-88 HARM, with a larger warhead.

It might even be able to carry the Kh-59M/MEh which is a 120KM/285KM long range TV guided missile, with a 280Kg warhead..

So don't post rubbish about AWACs-less Mig-29As that were shot down of Mig-21s that were lost to F-15s or F-16s...

Compare things relatively..

Oh... and I almost forgot, the Mig-29SMT/M2 is also CHEAPER than the F-16C/E. So you'll get more of them on your runways ($30-32 mil vs $42/50 mil)

Na... Mig pilots still suck... Call me, we'll fight

Cylon

Ohhhhhhhh...

Can I watch?

BTW, why don't we start a 'pilot versus pilot' forum? Obviously many of these posts are going off track, and somehow end up being pilot vs pilot threads. This is a jet vs jet forum, so let's keep it that way, it's more informative...

Shev

Cylon, I promise I'll be really quiet if you let me ride Very Happy

! We can take the station wagon Smile

! I'd LOVE to see this first hand!!!

I have successfully brought the internet (and the fighter community) to a new low...pilot vs pilot forum??? sh*t, let's do BFM with UAV's while we're at it... I am ashamed of myself.

Cylon

Cylon, you need not worry Very Happy

! I think everyone here is starting to realize that any aircraft can win against any other depending on which pilot is in which plane!

I can guarantee you that if you put me, my girlfriend, and my parents in Vipers and Cylon, STBYGAIN, and Gums in F-5s, you'll have some great gun camera footage of Vipers in the crosshairs Laughing

!!!

Quote:

Cylon, I promise I'll be really quiet if you let me ride Very Happy

! We can take the station wagon Smile

! I'd LOVE to see this first hand!!!

Just for clarification, I was talking about Cylons post:

Quote:

Na... Mig pilots still suck... Call me, we'll fight

Cylon

I can tell you as a former AT-38C driver that I have some good footage of F-15's/16's and 18's in the HUD. ANYONE can get rolled in on un-observed, regardless of your sensors... Hell, one of the guys in our squadron had a bit of F-22 tape.

"Your jet can be bad-a$$... you can be average.... guess what. you are probably below average in the jet...."

Cylon

Dionis, you made some good points about the MiG-29 SMT but how many countries have this? Russia and that's about it. Most countries are flying "A" models with a few flying "C" models. So if you're going to do in depth contrast of jets, you need to get specific with which model your talking about or the conversation will never end.

This conversation wasn't about countries but about Mig-29 vs F-16... aircraft families basically.

So people back there started to compares Mig-29As to F-16Cs and I wanted to level things out.

And even if most countries are operating the old models, there's always the Mig-29SMT upgrade or you can purchase the Mig-29M/M2 models..

But that's irrelevant.

Comparison between the two beasts in terms of raw performance is not that much really. Parrothead is right, it depends on who rode it. I've seen some really, sometimes the Viper won, sometimes the MiG won but my bet is still with the Viper!

Forum Veteran Joined: Nov 07, 2003 - 09:12 PM Posts: 901

kacman, I guess keeping the comparions within the technical/specification ground is the best the discussion can be conducted. If we were to bring in the intangible conditions such as pilot & maintenance qualities, training opportunities, etc. and the availability of support platforms (AWACS), it is really a Air Force vs Air Force thread.

cheers,

Yes, you are right pumpkin but the comparison I mentioned was on the aircraft peformance, 1 v 1 to be exact.

Both are 9G fighters. but the Viper (C-50/52) is so sleek and fast. after the 1st break turn, their speed is pretty much the same, but the viper regains its speed much faster. Fulcrum has 2° alpha advantage than the Viper but that doesn't mean much. As it is (lets stick in 1v1 scenario) Fulcrum is having some edge with its schlemm archer, but the jhmd+9x is already around (in small numbers, but growing), a new BFM spectrum needs to be written again..

Perhaps DIRCM may solve the problem when being shot by an AIM-9X I dunno...

Hey guys, I found a really interesting article on just this subject from Code One magazine.

Here's the link:

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1995/articles/jul_95/july2a_95.html

A couple of excerpts:

Quote:

"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."

Quote:

"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."

Quote:

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.

Quote:

"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."

Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

MiG-29 vs F-16