What is the range of a MiG-21 or MiG-29 flying at Mach 2?

Far enough.

The war would have had numerous key focal points – one of which would be the Fulda gap. It wouldn’t have been a war fought over just one large thousand km front. As always, there would have been numerous key regions where forces concentrated – one to break a line, the other to maintain a line.

The idea that fighters would seldom have been in contact in a hot war in the late 80s, probably read from a book, demonstrates knowledge, but also demonstrates a complete lack of wisdom. If you don’t understand the reasons behind historical lack of fighter-to-fighter combat, then you have no basis for arguing that it will always be the case.

Fighters would have been quick enough to react to opponent ingress* and long ranged enough to cover significant points along the various battlefronts.

*with radar, ground or airborne able to provide enough guidance for intercepts.

Most of them MiG-21s and su-22s…

With speeds of…? 🙂

You have no idea about the former Soviet doctrine. Till the end of the Cold War and even today it is impossible to operate SAMs or ground-based sytems with fighters at the same time.

Over your own airspace.

You realise if an army wants to advance, it has to exert a measure of control the other guys airspace?

If the Soviets intended to rely only on SAMs – they would not have bothered building fighters at all! :rolleyes:

If you can deny the OpFor air cover and airborne warning – reducing the threat to your own CAS/A2G aircraft to (primarily) only their SAMs – you are well on the way to winning.

June 1982 gave an idea about that when Syria sacrified its fighters to prevent the extinction of the much more important ground-systems or tried to fill that gap afterwards.

You are thinking of a defensive war. By pretty much every (western) expectation, the Soviets would have been fighting an offensive war across Germany and France.

What is the future balance between different types of weapon bays

Simple really.

Internal bays on the fuselage while having the capability of conformal carriage on the door/fuse exterior.

Plus the obvious flexibility that being able to install (or remove) wing mounted pylons provide.

So you’ve 3 options for carriage depending on your emphasis of drag, VLO and persistence for any given mission.

Talking about the MiG-29 and its alleged potential in central Europe in the late 1980s always sounded to me a bit like how you might talk about Hitler’s “wunderwaffe”: V-2, Me-262, etc in 1945…:rolleyes:

Not really.

People diss the MiG-29 from 15-20 years later, without thinking of how it would have been used when designed.

Aerodynamic wise the MiG-29 has an advantage over the F-16, but not so as a weapon-system

Did the original Fulcrum come with the HMCS?

I firmly believe a force of Fulcrums with the HMCS/Archer combination would have been much more effective than a force of F-16s over Germany if things had turned hot in the late 80s.

Indeed, I think it probably would have dominated the skies. Good low speed pointability to reduce the missile’s need to hard turn off the rail and the ability to cue it well off bore. A lethal combination IMO.

Yes, the NATO fighters had a longer reach with their better radar and radar guided missiles* – but in my opinion, in practice those missiles and as a result that entire doctrine would have been shown to be woefully ineffective.

Now, well… MiG-35 vs. F-16 blk 60? The F-16 would have better long range systems, while the MiG might** retain an advantage close in.

*and were more flexible with their more powerful avionics. But the ability to hit ground targets wouldn’t help them avoid the Archer in a furball.

**anyone figures for weight growth for both Fulcrum and Viper over the years?

How many years have the Typhoon club had to get their act together and yet they still haven’t got anything operational to show for it! Leaving the BS about that’s because they didn’t need and AESA aside, because it’s BS what make you think that when it does eventually enter service it will have all the operational modes? Because the Typhoon club say so? Yeah, they’ve been a reliable bunch so far haven’t they :rolleyes:

And besides the chance of it being better than the F-35 AESA are slim to non* anyway, why not just purchase something off the shelf?

* http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/490203-typhoon-get-aesa-radar.html

Let me understand this right…

You are lambasting the Eurofighter failing to deliver on upgrades that were promised…

Then in the same breath recommending they buy a part of the F-35 instead… based on performance and availability that is promised.

You couldn’t make this **** up! 😀