Why risk your life in an L29 or L39 in the US (although my guess is that flying in an L29 at some remote DOSAAF/ROSTO airfield back in Russia isn’t any safer…), if you can do just that in a MiG-23?
http://www.warbirdsofdelaware.com/html/mig-23.html
Or better yet, one of two former Kyrgyz MiG-29s registered to the FAA?
http://www.air-usa.com/AboutUs.htm
I think the latter two should be for sale as well.

Now you might find it improbable, but if those civilian hacks can do it, why doubt that the US military wouldn’t be able to do it? All that defense spending must account for something… 😀

You seem not to distinguish between simple words like own and fly, do you?? 😀 😀 What the heck I bother with you spotters and journalists. If you even can not backup your words with pictures, I wont argue with you anymore. Yeahhh, with that US defense spending, they surely have flying saucers at Groom lake. 😀 😀

P.S.
http://www.robbreportcollection.com/Articles/Aviation/Collection-Gift-Guide-The-Red-Menace.asp
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.10/kirlin.html?tw=wn_tophead_5

Dumb USAF/CIA, they bought rusty Fulcrums from Moldava and this private owner got them almost new. They should hire him.:D I wonder if he ever start the engines, but it seems he has not flown them yet.

It costs too much. There’s no gain to be had. It is too complicated. America could simply never be bothered. That’s right! After 30 years of secretly flying and exploiting Sukhois and MiGs, America has given up because there’s nothing it for them anymore and the Flanker and Fulcrum are too challenging to maintain …………Can yo imagine it, obsessing about something that might give you an edge in combat?! Hillarious. Oh, and the US did not espionage Soviet IFF systems, and whatever people say, COMBAT TREE is like the moon landings and is a complete fabrication.

To Steve,

Judging by your reaction, you finally understood, that there is no gain to have them flightworthy. If you have not noticed yet, the cold war ended almost twenty years ago. I never said Americans weren;t competent to maintain, I said there wasnt an urgent reason for that compared to cold war.
Heh, I bet you still do not have a bit of technical knowledge how the old russian iFF gear worked, not to mention the present one, you were told claims, stories you unreasonably believe. Anyway, I would like to know what edge in combat the Combat tree offered, how many Migs it helped to shot down? No, better do not tell me any exaggerated stories, I will not believe you.

Oh, and you are correct, EID is a waste of time, it doesn’t work, the massive fan of the R29 in the MiG-23 can only be seen when viewed directly head on, and there must be a better way! How stupid we have all been, and particularly the Americans!

Yes, they surely are stupid if you say so, EID-ing aircrafts by compressor fan blades:D 😀 . The R29 has a BIIIG MASSIVE fan, what about Floggers with R-27 or R-35, did their methods worked well then?? Anyway, I did say easier way, not better.

If you want to know where the rest are, why don’t you start looking for them? I have found around 6 of the Indonesian Fishbeds, and three of the Floggers.

Yeahh, keeping fingers crossed for your and your constant peg forum, but it is said that all documents regarding Constant Peg were destroyed during that set up implosion of WTC7.

It’s interesting that so many people doubt that the US DoD would either have the inclination to exploit the MiG-29 and Su-27, or the technical wherewithal to make them flyable and keep them that way. Those individuals who argue this point clearly have no understanding of the foreign military exploitation process, or the scale of America’s ongoing FME activities.

I have no doubt the US DOD had/has inclination to evaluate the Flanker, Fulcrum or any other foreign flying hardware. The point we are arguing here is to maintain foreign military aircrafts in flightworthy state. Those claims that USAF is currently operating meaning flying small numbers or should I say fleet?? of Su-27 and Mig-29 are not much different from claims the USAF operates UFO`s at AREA51, not to mention other science finctions like hypersonic Auroras, ..etc. 🙂
Individuals claiming Flankers/Fulcrums being flown or still flying in USAF with such a confidence and certainty never worked near a military aircraft, thus have less or zero knowledge distinguishing among Mig-15, Mig-17, Mig-21, Mig-23 and the Mig-29/Su-27, especially when talking of maintaining, repairing, rebuilding, refurbishing, modifying and fabricating spares for totaly different generations of aircrafts, engines, airframes, electronics…etc. Moreover what is even more interesting is that those individuals are missing any kind of evidence or their claims are based on talks with other individuals, whose credibility can not be verified.

I have no doubt that the USAF is operating a small number of Su-27s and MiG-29s at Groom Lake. I have interviewed one of the pilots who has flown them, and I am aware of the names of two other pilots who have flown them during very recent tours with various units at Nellis.

Individuals working outside the military industry or airforce, especially in journalism often tend to exaggerate when they hear words like “operating or evaluating” which doesnt exactly mean the same as the word flying. All I said in my previous input was, that Fulcrums bought in Moldova were examined, tested, evaluated, operated, destroyed or dismantled to a single bolt, again and again analyzed, but on the ground. A few Fulcrums went to museums. They still could be examined by scientists in some Black MESA hangars or wherever. Their weapon systems were analyzed and soon provided proper countermeasures against these threats. For example, during Yugoslavia war they already knew how to put Fulcrum radars out of order. Some may remember of Serbian pilots complaining about functionality of the N-019 radar during air2air mission against allied forces.
Also, I have no doubt that USAF had highly experienced Fulcrum pilots. They all had flown Fulcrums in German airforce, which often participated at military excercises around the world, not to mention the RAT FLAG in the USA. USAF had numerous opportunities to fly against German to be sure, that there is nothing they should be afraid of.

there is no substitute for owning examples and exploiting them over a period of a number years. It is a fact that the USAF conducted a technical exploitation programme of the MiG-21 that ran almost continuously for more than 20 years. Why some people think that there would be any less effort put into exploiting the Flanker and Fulcrum is beyond me.

I agree, there is no substitute. The difference there is that by exploiting a totaly different aircraft e.g. Fulcrum/Flanker for a substantial period of time, it costs a lot of money and is highly industry consuming as well. I have no doubt that US DOD have/had the money for it but how it comes that they cut money to Raptor fleet, Commanche and other “black nd white” airforce programs ..etc but still they finance a fleet of old Fulcrums a Flankers, the soviet aircraft technology of seventies. Please come back to earth, bcs I will doubt your reputation.

I agree, there is no substitute. The difference there is that by exploiting a totaly different aircraft e.g. Fulcrum/Flanker for a substantial period of time, it costs a lot of money and is highly industry consuming as well. I have no doubt that US DOD have/had the money for it but how it comes that they cut money to Raptor fleet, Commanche and other “black nd white” airforce programs ..etc but still they finance a fleet of old Fulcrums a Flankers, the soviet aircraft technology of seventies. Please come back to earth, or I will doubt your reputation.

Huuh, I wonder if there is not an easier way to differentiate friend/foe aircraft. What about to try the F-15 IFF interrogator gear? Why the hell they need to distinguish between the Flogger and a DC-10 engine? Such an EID-ing should be always dependant on angle of incidence, engine settings, …etc, in other word to be unreliable. Anyway, are flogger compressor blades visible head on? Also I wonder if those fairytales about triggering soviet IFF gears in various war conflicts were based on truth when they tried to find another ways to ID enemies….Something tells me that you were obsessed with that.

The notion that America destroyed the Maldovan Fulcrums is laughable. Why? Because as late as December last year, the majority were still in storage and very much not buried in the desert

With the word destroyed I meant particularly, all inner aggregates taken out, leaving outer shells, wrecks on the airfield, also in other words crippled. If you still do not know what I meant, I can post pictures how Fulcrum look like when destroyed/crippled. Geezz, just cant find the right term in my english translation vocabulary. 😮

Especially as the early MiG-29 and Su-27 were not easy to maintain. Likewise the USSR would have had a hard time keeping an F-111 or F-14 flyable. After evaluating the radar and fire control system, as well as the radar cross section there isn’t much more to evaluate, is there? The flight performance can quite accurately be simulated by F-15 and F-16.

In case of MiG-17 and MiG-21 I could imagine that some spares are produced by specialized US companies, with complex engines and systems like the later MiGs and Suchois I doubt it. There was also no reason: Latest F-15C and F-16C models were superior to the early models of MiG-29 and Su-27 (and available in much larger numbers), some technologies though like the IR sensor of the MiG surely gave some reason for thinking.

More or less, I agree with you.

I saw the MiG-29 at Dayton in 1990 (the airshow, not the museum) as well, and have saw a static jet at Goodfellow AFB in 1999. But it has been a good long time since I’ve seen anything Russian in the skies that wasn’t an airlifter.

That`s funny, I saw the fulcrum first time in the same year as well at my hometown airshow. I remember that as if it happened yesterday. Anyone driving the route in front of my house, stopped, got out from car and watched the aircraft performing tail slides on the sky.:rolleyes:

Anyway, I suppose you had to be pretty shocked about the communist air power in your country as a twelve year old teenager with a cotton candy in hands.:D 😀 😀

The Mig-29M was all lightweight structure and the skin of the aircraft was sealed so any empty cavity inside the structure could be used as a fuel tank, while other Migs had seperate fuel tanks, which adds weight without increasing fuel capacity or structural strength… it is cheaper and less prone to fatigue so would be cheaper in the long run.

What you meant under the “separate fuel tanks”? All Migs-29 have basicaly the same layout of the integral fuselage/wing fuel tanks, namely No.1, No.2, No.3, No.3A, both wing tanks,( plus new added……) and even the oldest izd9.12 has most of fuselage fuel tanks skin spot welded. The difference there was that the old Mig-29K(9.31) had inner structure of integral fuel tanks welded, while other Migs have it riveted/bolted and sealed.
The integral wing tanks are bolted/sealed purely, I doubt on the old izd.9.31 were otherwise.

regards
M

That’s why I postulated that perhaps the R-40RD1 (the radar missile has been seen on FOXHOUND before IIRC) or R-40TD1 was fitted with a datalink and mated with the FOXHOUND via a podded system. That’s about all I can think of to back up Gordon’s claims.

Have you ever seen a picture showing that mysterious “control pod” or is it just Mr. Gordon claiming the APP-46TD to be the control system pod for R-40TD in his Mig-25/31 Aerofax series? Interesting, how other web sites screwed up his words. Now the APP-46TD is used to illuminate the target or it guides the IR missile in its initial stages of flight.:rolleyes:

To launch an IR missile like the R-40T/TD, Migs-25/31 had been equipped with TP-26/8TP IRST sensors where the missile launch distance is provided by the onboard radar itself. Exact this way it worked in years 70`s with R-23T which was a LOBL missile at distances beyond 30km. I wonder how it comes that ten years later the R-40TD is not?

a few pictures showing Migs-31 loaded with R-40TD from Montchegors AFB.
http://gviap.narod.ru/albums/planes.html

http://gviap.narod.ru/albums/tarasov.html

http://gviap.narod.ru/albums/pavlukov.html