F-16.net

Printed from: F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference [http://www.f-16.net]
Document title: MiG-29 vs F-16 - F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference
Original URL: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-683-start-150-sid-4718d871eaec04759826f4e8529f615d.html
Printed on: 11 October 2008

Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

MiG-29 vs F-16



Search Search  Register Register  Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
guidelines Forum Guidelines
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
Cad
PostPosted: Jun 15, 2007 - 08:48 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
Location: romania
falcon_sgd wrote:
SWEET PAVEL,
one should `nt be so much boastful...coz the reality is far different than theory...
if u r a russian warrior u will be well aware of it .
HOW MANY RUSSIAN WERE LOST DURING AFGHAN WAR,BETWEEN THE ENGAGEMENTS OF PAKISTAN AIR FORCE AND RUSSIANS?
THE ANSWER IS 9:1
PAKISTANI F-16S MADE 9 CONFIRMED KILLS AND EVEN ONE KILL WITH A 20MM CANNON.
ONE F-16 WAS LOST AND THAT WAS AN OWN GOAL,HIT BY ANOTHER F-16`S SIDEWINDER...
ARE THOSE RUSSIANS WERE NOT TRAINED WELL WHO WERE SENT INTO ANOTHER COUNTRY`S AIRSPACE...

Packistan was not the URSS enemy in Afganistan and russian aircraft did not engage pak fighters on purpose ,usualy they avoided them since the 2 were not at war.
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
 
Sponsor
New postPosted: Oct 11, 2008 - 8:04 AM Back to top
F-16.net Sponsor






This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.
   
 
falcon_sgd
PostPosted: Jun 16, 2007 - 10:25 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Jun 09, 2007
Posts: 25

Status: Offline
THEN WHAT WERE THEY DOING IN IN THE AIR SPACE OF ANOTHER COUNTRY,CERTAINLY THEY WERE NOT INVITED THERE.WHEN U GET INTO AN OPPONENT`S SPACE U R PREPARED FOR FIGHT,WHAT EVER THE MISSION OR GOAL IS.....
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Cad
PostPosted: Jun 16, 2007 - 07:55 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
Location: romania
URSS pilots were not alowed to fire against pak fighters.

_________________
"You win again, gravity!"
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
 
falcon_sgd
PostPosted: Jun 30, 2007 - 05:34 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Jun 09, 2007
Posts: 25

Status: Offline
HMMM!
they were sent there to get shot down....do not fire and just become victims...very cool
ANY MODERN SUICIDAL TACTIC?
ISN`T IT?
CAD PLZ TELL WHY WERE THEY SENT THERE?
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Cad
PostPosted: Jun 30, 2007 - 06:59 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
Location: romania
afgan forces were using pakistan to equip, train and seek refuge from soviet bombing
URSS aircraft bombed targets in pakistan also but avoided confruntation with pak fighters
read this:
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_337.shtml

_________________
"You win again, gravity!"
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
 
falcon_sgd
PostPosted: Jul 02, 2007 - 06:27 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Jun 09, 2007
Posts: 25

Status: Offline
DEAR CAD,
I AM A PAKISTANI,I LIVE IN A CITY WHICH IS NEAR TO AFGHAN BORDER AND I KNOW VERY WELL WHATS GOING ON HERE AND WHAT HAPPENED HERE IN THE PAST.
THE ARTICLES LIKE THAT DONOT TELL THE EXACT STORY.
I CAN JUST ASK U VISIT ME HERE TO GET THE REALITY.... Smile
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Cad
PostPosted: Jul 03, 2007 - 12:53 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
Location: romania
visiting pakistan is not my top priority right now Cheers
i was 9 years old when the soviests pull out ,so your guess is probaly better than mine ...
romania was a warsaw pact pact country during the cold war so the information about the conflict in afganistan came from russian sources back then.
anyway TOM COOPER has studyied the conflict prety well and his opinions are not as onesided as the russians...
if u have any aditional information about the conflict i would be glad to hear it .

_________________
"You win again, gravity!"
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
 
yugoslovan
PostPosted: Jan 14, 2008 - 09:54 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jan 14, 2008
Posts: 1

Status: Offline
No mather what. Bouth countries are big, have heavy equipment for fighting. I think nuclear weapon need be off from all, or from nobody. Nevermind, its gorgeous america thinkin Russia is pore in technology. Its best fackt at all. If war could be, things can show all. Definitly i will not be on side of americans, my roots are here and my soul is europa. No mather what, in this moment no mather who wins, war will be ugly. I think even f 16 war wriors dont wish to seen this fight at all. If they are smart of course hahaha.Other case, if all are full of themself, need try it. Shocked Any way bouth planes are on top of all.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
007india
PostPosted: Jun 08, 2008 - 08:41 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 07, 2008
Posts: 8

Status: Offline
KarimAbdoun wrote:
The F-16 has proven itself to be one of the most remarkable piece of equipment flying in the sky, but what about its Soviet chief rival Mig-29?

What will be the consequences of these 2 planes meeting head-to-head?

Also who is better? Faster? and had a better history than the other?

What are your opinions?


MIG-29 against F-16

Both are different in their purpose, MiG-29 is for air superiority, F-16 is for low level combat. you start your F-16 with after burner and start the MiG after 2 minutes. No doubt the MIG-29 will catch F-16 quickly. Better you compare MIG-21 with F-16
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
viper1234
PostPosted: Jun 08, 2008 - 09:16 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Dec 12, 2006
Posts: 56

Status: Offline
Quote:

MIG-29 against F-16

Both are different in their purpose, MiG-29 is for air superiority, F-16 is for low level combat. you start your F-16 with after burner and start the MiG after 2 minutes. No doubt the MIG-29 will catch F-16 quickly. Better you compare MIG-21 with F-16


The MiG-29 is not an air superiority fighter (the SU-27 is). It is a point defense fighter that can barely succeed if in the right hands in this limited role if (and that's a VERY big if) it can get to the merge. Once at the merge it's probably looking at breaking even at best (mutual kill). Let's face it, the MiG-29 is a cold war relic that probably should have gone away back in 89 (amongst many other cold war relics).

It is great for shooting down unarmed UAV's.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
007india
PostPosted: Jun 09, 2008 - 05:54 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Jun 07, 2008
Posts: 8

Status: Offline
haven't you read the IAF exercise with USAF, the Russian made IAF fighters just outperformed all USAF fighters. US fighters are good at electronics. But Russian jets are robust and very agile, what is necessary for a fighter.

F-16 is very naive in many aspect. especially the stall in low altitude with a sharp bank. Also the older F-16 are poor when worked with BVR systems.
I tried the simulator and i induced flat spin but not able to recover. F-16 is good for Hollywood films like Airforce1.

on the other hand in MIG-29 i recovered it successfully. Also MIG-29 has dual intake system.

h**p://vayu-sena.tripod.com/comparison-f16-mig29-1.html
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
 
Des
PostPosted: Jun 09, 2008 - 09:30 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Nov 09, 2005
Posts: 31

Status: Offline
007india wrote:
haven't you read the IAF exercise with USAF, the Russian made IAF fighters just outperformed all USAF fighters. US fighters are good at electronics. But Russian jets are robust and very agile, what is necessary for a fighter.

F-16 is very naive in many aspect. especially the stall in low altitude with a sharp bank. Also the older F-16 are poor when worked with BVR systems.
I tried the simulator and i induced flat spin but not able to recover. F-16 is good for Hollywood films like Airforce1.

on the other hand in MIG-29 i recovered it successfully. Also MIG-29 has dual intake system.

h**p://vayu-sena.tripod.com/comparison-f16-mig29-1.html
Quote:


you don't mean air ex Cope India do you?
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
F16guy
PostPosted: Jun 10, 2008 - 08:18 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 143

To those that try to compare actual aircraft with what they have flown on desk top simulators... don't. One cannot even try to speculate about how real aircraft fly based upon sims. Sims don't compare to actual flight. Trying to pass off simulation vs actual aircraft flying will cost the poster incredible amounts of credibility with actual pilots.
F-16 having flat spin problems after banking sharply???...you've been watching too much of the top gun movie.
F-16's were not shown in Air Force 1.
F-16's and MiG 29's were not utilized in the first Cope India exercise.
The MiG 29 does not have a dual intake system...It has two engines.
The MiG 29 would run out of gas if it tried to catch an F-16 with a two minute head start. The MiG 29 will run out of gas very quickly period.

Good articles to read about the F-16 vs the MiG 29 (real pilots flying actual aircraft) are located at: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1995/articles/jul_95/july2a_95.html
and :http://www.codeonemagazine.com/cgi-bin/swish-bin/code1.pl





Why am I even posting this????? I'm usually alright with people posting nonsense. Must be in a bad mood. Evil or Very Mad
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Aks_20
PostPosted: Jun 28, 2008 - 10:45 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: May 11, 2006
Posts: 25

Status: Offline
falcon_sgd wrote:
HMMM!
they were sent there to get shot down....do not fire and just become victims...very cool
ANY MODERN SUICIDAL TACTIC?
ISN`T IT?
CAD PLZ TELL WHY WERE THEY SENT THERE?


They were attacking Afghan camps located on the Pak Afghan border, and ROE were such that they werent supposed to engage PAF fighters. But lets be clear, if it ever came down to an actual conflict between the Russians ie then Soviets and the PAF, then the Soviets would have wiped the PAF off the face of the planet. You are talking about an AF which was intended to go to toe to toe with NATO and the PAF is nowhere in that category, by far. So ditch your jingoism and be rational. Good that the PAF defended its airspace @ the time, but even they knew what would happen if the Bear went ballistic. And the Bear didnt attack, because of the ramifications of the US entering the conflict & the potential for issues with the Muslim world (already strained thanks to Afghanistan war).
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Copyright © 2008 Lieven Dewitte and Stefaan Vanhastel