FloggerNot quite. You can stuff your Fulcrum with things that are even more advanced than those Typhoon uses (don’t necessarily have to be purely of Russian origin) but you will never be able to achieve RCS values Typhoon has. Especially with frontal aspect RCS your Fulcrum’s values will always be 8-10 times higher than those of the EF, so you will always have a big drawback in the BVR arena.
BTW, there is nothing like MiG-29OVT version. OVT is purely a demonstrator for TVC and as such does not even carry a functioning weapons control system.
Well what you say is partially true, but undoutedly, the Eurofighter is not a fighter that is far far away from the MiG-29, in terms of agility the MiG-29 is in some parts of th envelope better and in some worst, the MiG-29OVT is the prototype of the MiG-35, the MiG-35 could end up being the new fighter that India buys, is it better in avionics? well i think the Eurfighter might be better, is it better in radar technology? i think Russia has excellent radars, in engines? well Russia has first class engines if few word the only real advantage i see in the Eurofighter is super cruise and some degree of better avionics, besides that the MiG-29 is almost as good as the Eurofigher, and the MiG-29OVT a better dogfighter.
Of course if you compare the MiG-29A the Luftwaffe flew and the Eurofighter of course it seems a little bit better aircraft but the Fulcrum C, M, K or OVT by no means are less capable.
If you watch this video the Sukhoi company consider already the Su-35BM will handle so well the Eurofighter they made a video to show it
http://WWW.sukhoi.org Su-35MB Video
FloggerSu-15 and MiG-15
FloggerGerman MiG-29s did not operate under Soviet tackics…but rather the pilots were allowed to come up with their own tacticks…more along the lines of NATO practices. Plus the F-16s/F-15s were not allowed to engage with BVR missiles…the engagements were only WVR…where yes the MiG-29 has an advantage…but in reality those birds would have been splashed long distance away with AMRAAMs. So no…German MiG-29s showed what they could do under the most ideal conditions for them…excellent pilots, no strickct ground contrlo, and WVR engagement only. In real life…that would never happen.
The MiG-29s operated by Germany are old and less capable, technologically speaking the MiG-29 has been upgraded to the degree it can be even as good as an Eurofighter in version such as the MiG-29OVT and i think the Su-35BM will be even better than the Eurofighter.
Depending in the MiG-29 variant you have different capabilities.
FloggerSu-9 and Su-15
FloggerI’m still not sure why Flogger thinks some ex Mikoyan designer talking on a Russian TV program about how he heard maybe that the F-117 was shot down by a MiG-29 constitutes anything more than hearsay. Yes, that was one theory, but its completely discredited and has been for years.
Mikoyan are not exactly going to be a neutral source on MiG-29 performance are they?
Aerospacetech
The same i would like to ask you why i have to believe the West never lies? i mean what we are hearing is a war of words where national pride, political prestige and aircraft sales are at stake, i do not give total credibility to Russian writers but i neither give too much to western writers too, they in one way or other write supporting their respective national aircraft industries.
See for example these two versions for the Bekka Valley
Russian Version Bekka Valley
FloggerEvery radar can detect a stealth aircraft, when close enough. So it is more intresting to learn the distances for every system. No defender can hope really that a stealth aircraft will pass over his SAM-site in the exspected time and direction always. As long as the Russians do not have something similar they have to bolster confidence in the own systems as long as possible for keeping up moral. Nothing more and nothing less.
Still missing the sources about your pics!
The Syrian MiG-23 shot down were posted previously here in this forum, i think on “the Syrian MiG-23” thread, the Kfir is from a webpage in Russian i do not remember the web address.
What i do not think is belittleing the Russian SAMs is the best defence, i am sure Lockheed is not thinking was a fluke but a real technical feat achieved with good training Sens 😉
FloggerSome Su-15s
FloggerYeah, as far as he is able to get them, he does [well, that’s what he says he does :rolleyes: ), see the ACIG-forum discussions concerning conflicts and aircraft in the middle east.
He is sometimes quit fair i addmit it, indeed i like his reports, not all but definitively i think among the Western writers he is one of the less bias.
Some of his articles are excellent, in fact http://www.testpilots.ru has even some articles written by him.
FloggerHardly more reliable than Venik really 🙂
Out of some 450 heavy SAMs the Serbs launched…2 hit. Impressive…no?? F-117s were operating heavily in places like Belgrade where the majority of the Serbian SAMs were concentrated. Out of hundreds if not thousands of missions flown by these stalth aircraft…99% of cases they were never even detected.
You’r forgeting SOC…they did 🙂
First of all…NATO admits that one other F-117 was indeed hit and damaged. There was no third one however…it actually seems to me the RuAF Chief has been reading Venik’s webiste. Venik and then all the rest of the like-minded propagandists kept repeating the story of a third F-117 beasue the damage of a third one was reported in some US aviation magazine. And if one does a BIT of research…as people have told you HERE…that particular aircraft was a test aircraft operating in the US…so the acciednt happened in the US. But only becasue it happened at the same time as the war…Venik automatically assumed it was in Serbia.
The more you keep repeating it…the more ridiculous it makes you look.
You say claims are not enough…nd yet you keep quoting Krasnaya Zvezda or brazd…which only provide clams…and no details to go with them. So your logic makes very little sense.
———-
As I said earlier…why don’t you REALLY ask Syrians about what THEY claim for losses. Don’t throw BS around from Krasnaya Zvezda or things said 25 years ago. As I already told you…OTHER Syrian sources exist…people have written books on this in Syria as well…and as I said MOST of Israel’s claims about Syrian losses…are actually ADMITTED by Syria. You keep ignoring this aspect!! If you add up all the Syrian losses…from what they ADMITT to losing in air-combat…to what they ADMITT to losing to SAMs…to what they ADMITT to losing to fracticide…plus helicopters…and you DO end up with a number that is probably higher than 80 aircraft.
As for as Syrian claims for Israeli aircraft shot down…as I already said…its about 17 REAL claims…despite what you keep saying BS from Krasnaya Zvezda and so forth. Syrians don’t claim any such thing…they claim about 17…of which only about 3-4 can be confirmed in any way.
And don’t accuse others of bias…I certainly have no pro-Israeli bias…I assure you that…I do however have an anti-ignorance bias.
hehehehehehehe kapedani hehehehehehehehe
Kapedani you are not proving anything, first i have told you where you can watch from the comfort of an F-16`s cockpit how a AIM-9 is launched from wingtip rail and flies to hit a Syrian jet, yes DeAgostini`s video, that i call it hard evidence.
Of course there is lots of books claiming lots of things but one thing is prove a kill rather than claim it.
http://www.brazd.ru as annoying it is to you also has books that agree with it and that say the same.
I have seen pictures of Israeli aircraft shot down as of Syrian aircraft shot down, but few pictures do not prove a max of 140 aircraft both sides claimed in 1982 or even a minimun of 110 kills both sides claim.
FloggerThat’d be true if you assumed that it was the original, unmodified radars which acquired, tracked, locked onto, and shot at the F-117. The Serb who manned the SAM unit wouldn’t agree with that.
If he was right, then B-2s would have been downed as well. But ok. The Serbians got one aircraft which was using 30-year old stealth technology. Given that this has been the only stealth combat loss ever the technology would still seem to be viable.
Hehehehe
SOC
Check that under certain flight modes an old P-40 radars can detect the F-117, check that a Russian named Ufimtsev developed the priciples of stealth and an old russian SAM shot down the F-117, you are defending your claims thinking the Russians are unaware of the stealth principles.
This time is not Venik but the Russian Air Force Chief comander.
FloggerSerbians must not make good archaeologists then…
But they were very good to hit a F-117 with old radars 😀 In fact just recently the Russian Air force commander in chief Vladimir Mikhaylov Just claimed in 2006 that with old radars the F-117 was shot down proving that the idea of Stealth just for the sake of stealth has proven wrong, in fact he claimed at least 2 more F-117 were damaged yes he claims the same thing that Venik 😀 why he says that is because Russia is designing an aircraft as capable as the F-22
FloggerStart to get serious, Flogger. In the ACIG-list all claims are considered, the white ones are without prove or any supporting source. There are the 5 F-16 claimed during Jun ’82 and the F-15 claimed by MiG-25 in ’81. All “white”, means not proved.
If you stop your very annoying bias and generally doubt every kind of source which doesn’t fit your opinion we could really make some progress. It is your job to change the story. So if the current picture is 80:few, than you have to prove the opposite. Not the other way around.
You can’t change the history by some BS-considerations about pictures and hence deduct from it the missing validity. Sometimes people do not publish everything on the net.
Here a recommendation for good:
Give us all books, articles and TV-shows you got your information from. I mean, tell us country of origin, author (if known) and date of publishing. Most authors copy from each other. Yefim Gordon picks sources he likes, sometimes even states contradicting things. Just try to find out from whom he copied.It’s your turn!
Schorsch
I have given all the data you have asked, at no moment i am not more bias tha everybody is here, you say this claim in white it means no proved but other is proved even if you have no picture? 😉 :confused: who is authorized to confirm a kill? ACGI is not the only claiming the kills in fact http://www.brazd.ru claims the same, what is the difference, you call a Westen supported claim as confirmed and a Russian supported claimed unproven :rolleyes: 😉 even if you have no picture for such kill.
You are telling Western kills confirmed even without showing pictures but Russian claims in the same conditions unproven. :rolleyes:
Check http://www.brazd.ru articles about the MiG-21, MiG-23 and MiG-25 you can even translate to english the article, see what the Russians claim.
I have told you already what i have seen as a tangible proof, pictures i have seen, Videos i have watched, and many have even different and contradictory statements.
here many claim Syria has admitted the Israeli account and if it does not fit well they claim Syria claims propaganda and Israel tells the true, as a Historian that is as bias as any of the so called Russian or Syrian lies.
Prove pictures is the best way to settle a score, it is the closest thing to archaeology.
FloggerThat’s why we rely on air combat historians like Tom Cooper and friends to sort it out for us. Moreover, we prefer to neglect writers whose main objective is to write a hymn of praise of a certain aircraft or country because of some ideological motive. Hence, we dump writers such as Richard A. Gabriel and Yefim Gordon.
So far, ACIG has a list for Syrian kills and a list with Israeli kills. These lists suggest the Israeli claim of zero losses is nonesense and that the AA-tally is heavily skewed towards Israel despite the nice propaganda of a dictatorship trying to hide its failures from the population.
I partly agree but i wonder these are Western sources, the question is get pictures and Official press relaese of both sides, by that i mean if you want Russian sources go to the Russian webpages, if you want Israeli sources get Israeli sources only checking all the sources from the different warring parties you can more less guess what you will prove by pictures or hard evidence.
claims are like Troy`s story without a real dig of an ancient city all is consider a legend, but if you prove it with an excavation or wreckages or pictures well it becomes a fact
Only claims are not enough 😉
FloggerActually, from what I see, the issue is settled and only few people remaining which are questioning the validity of Israel claims. They often use outdated overly quoted sources. Just recently read a Russian “source” which claims 30 American aircraft shot down in 1986 by Lybian air defence.
In WW2 normally the validation by another one or two pilots was sufficient to validate a claim. Of course captured pilot and wreck was stronger prove.The intention behind the questioning of 1982, 1991 and 1999 are normally pretty easy to identify. I don’t think one should believe American and Israeli figures down to the single digit (the definition of “loss” is not standarized), but in general a write-off cannot be hidden for long.
In Israel one can easily count the aircraft and deduct the operational losses in the mean time.Have fun counting – Israel’s Inventory:
http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/IAFinventory.html
Give Syria`s Air Force inventory 😉 and let`s prove if they indeed say they lost 80 aircraft 😀
FloggerFirst…who cares what Krasnaya Zvezda said?? So what if they said it?? Rusians also said Sebs shot down 130 NATO planes. One can say whatever one wants…
Second…you DON’T need pictures to prove an aircraft was shot down. How would the Israelis show pictures of a Syrian aircraft which fell in Syrian or Lebanese territory where they had no access to it?? Again the key here being…Syrian controlled territory. 100% of Israeli losses would have fallen there as well…so if the Syrians had indeed shot down more than 3 planes they have shown…they shoul dhave little trouble producing perhaps pictures of at leats 1-2 more. They can’t. Israel can’t becasue the planes didn’t fall in its territory. But reagrdless…you DON’T need pictures to prove an aircraft was shot down. Syrians NEVER claimed they lost 24 aircraft or anything of the sort…in fact MAJORITY of their losses correspond pretty well with Israeli claims of their losses…becasue even the Syrians couldn’t hide such massive losses.
Kapedani
That is not even a good historical defence of Israel`s claims, DeAgostini has better evidence and here there have been evidence to justify such claims, Krasnaya Zveda has the same credibility as any source while there are no pictures of wreckages or HUD film footage.
Why? Because you can not justify without hard evidence Israel`s claims supported by the West or Syria`s supported by Russia all this amounts to a war of words, in few words a war of Propaganda.
The very little amount of pictures and the disregard of Russsian or Syrian official claims in the West is not a real way to prove Israel`s claims, hard evidence is needed to accept an account as a truthful and accurate version of what really happened.
Here in the West many claim Russia lies or Syria lied but in that Case Germany`s Luftwaffe Aces scores should be regarded as a Nazi fabrication because Nazi Germany was a fascist state and hardly a Democracy.
A really historical study should take all the accounts and try to prove them with hard evidence without belittling a source just by secondary factors such as where it comes from or what political system any of the warring parties had.
History is full of evidence and that can be proved by wreckages, photos, HUD film footage, reports, press releases.
Sign In
