No mention so far,that Typhoon is stealthy,no matter how many weapons are carried under the belly.In this field F-18E/F is close relative.

Any thoughts what was the missile used by the MiG?

It is interesting, isn’t it? Russian liquid-propellant SLBMs don’t appear to need one either, infact they are launched from flooded tubes IIRC, so them coming into contact with water is infact part of the plan.

Well in my russian book is said that R-39 is launched from “dry” tube.At the end of the rocket,in the nozzle of first stage is the rocket booster.He drive the rocket out of the tube.The flaming nose cap is described as ARSS,which stand for rocket start system with amortization.ARSS act also as seal,and even enable the submarine to be submerged with open hatches on considerable depths.On the tip of ARSS are gas generators,which generates the gas buble.

Thing is if the SS-N-20 is intended for deep launch (say 1000 feet)

SS-N-20 can be lauched from 55m depth,no matter what are the weather conditions on surface.

About FLAT TWIN:
“…In these moves, the Soviets demonstrated a capability to transport and redeploy the radar in a matter of weeks or months…”
Mobile….
“The two Flat Twin radars, as currently constructed and tested, cannot be said to be truly mobile, but neither can they be considered to be immobile.”
And..
“The only permitted functions for a large, phased-array radar (LPAR) with a location and orientation such as that of the Krasnoyarsk radar would be space-tracking and national technical means (NTM) of verification. Based on conclusive evidence, however, we judge that this radar is primarily designed for ballistic missile detection and tracking, not for space-tracking and NTM as the Soviets claim. “
But in this letter* there is no mention of any of these conclusive evidences.

*Letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate Transmitting a Report on Soviet Noncompliance With Arms Control Agreements December 2, 1987

It is a very capable airplane that is able to do impressive airshow maneuvers but, look at how many have been lost at airshows.

So how many are lost in airshow accidents?

BDF i changed the quote,becouse i was thinking that i might offend you.Yet still i did.I used your sentence as a example of similar thought posted before.Again sorry that i used it out of the context.

Meat you are joking right?

Open a history book sometime. When Desert Storm began, Iraq had one of the most comprehensive, modern integrated air defenses in the world. The only place in the world more heavily defended from air attack than Baghdad might have been Moscow. Overnight, the entire system was utterly and completely destroyed.

This is not the first time you said such thing.Can you tell me a single system in the class of S-300/Patriot,S-200 or even Buk-1 in the inventory of Iraq?Any modern radar?Or for you P-35M is modern one?Is Sa-2 and Sa-3 modern and very capable weapons in 1991?Just look at Iraq’s air-defence forces in 1991.Short to medium range old systems and many AA-artillery.Is this in any category close to Moscow.What a joke.Iraq’s defence was much closer to that in Bulgaria,only greater in numbers…but atleast Bulgaria in 1991 had S-200 and S-300PS complex.And here is some interesting sentences from various articles:
“The V-75/SA-2 Guideline is not known to have scored any kills in the Gulf. Iraq had twenty batteries, with a total of 120 single rail launchers, mostly the old SA-2B variant”
“The P-15 Flat Face and P-15M Squat Eye were the best of the Soviet supplied acquisition radars used by Iraq.”
“Rather than using radar, the Iraqis appear to have relied on ground observers who reported on cellular phones and low-power radios. Finally, flickering the city lights warned the shooters to be prepared to engage. Rather than relying on easily targetable missile or gun systems, the Iraqis’ main weapon systems were the small arms widely distributed among the general population.”

I know that this is not my case but,ATFS_Crash i found your post very rude and offensive.For me your post contain insult that is against the Aviation forum Code of Conduct and not appropriate for this forum.This is not the first time i see this kind of posts from you.Also i think that martinez is well respected in the forum(also by me) and his post are not childish or meaningless to deserve such treatment.And the question of the thread is not “what fighter have the best colision survival story”,but more is “are MiG-29 and Su-27 the most effective/advanced”.In this context the above picture is just plain stupid.