lrrpf52 wrote:
At least you could produce MiG-23 in numbers and export it. The MiG-29's 2 engines prevented it from realizing the typical success of the Soviet design bureaus, and therefore marked a major 180 from how they did things with previous lightweight fighters. The MiG-21 was so proliferate, that it served with tons of different air forces, with over 11,000 built.
Quoting a former Russian AF officer, he said that the goal for the new 4th gen fighters, the Su-27 and Mig-29 was to finally achieve a 1:1 ratio against NATO.
They were very aware of the fact that their fighters had no chance against their western counterparts on a one v one scenario, which is why their tactics revolved on a 1v 8 scenario, basically send 8 Mig-21s for each F-4.
With the Mig-23 and 25, he said this was reduced to 4:1. It wasn't until the Su-27 and Mig-29 that they can make a case for a 1:1 ratio.
Some of us might argue, but in the 1980s, 2 Mig-29s for every single F-16 doesn't look like a scenario I'd like to be in, Or 2 Su-27 for every F-15 for that matter.
But the problem with that is, they could not manage to out spend the west in quantity. They did manage to get as close as possible to their 1:1 ratio but now they are the numerically inferior side.
With the F-22 and F-35 the ratio is back up again in favor of the West, with simulations putting the F-22 on 30:1 kill/loss ratio against the most advanced Flanker variants. The Su-57 is their attempt to close the ratio gap again.