dark light

uss novice

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 911 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread – 19 #2304597
    uss novice
    Participant

    Deutsche Demokratische Republik = German Democratic Republic
    Bundesrepublik Deutschland = Federal Republic of Germany

    Thanks, been a while since I saw those abbreviations.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread – 19 #2304658
    uss novice
    Participant

    The old girl did surprisingly well if flown with its abilities.

    In respect of radar if we are talking about the F-4 ICE then its no contest as it is fitted with the AN/APG-65 which is vastly superior to the fairly basic system fitted to the DDR Mig-29.

    Btw, what does DDR stand for? I know former east Germany was abbreviated as GDR iirc, but what is DDR, GDR AF?

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread – 19 #2304698
    uss novice
    Participant

    Once the Luftwaffe got rid of most of the useless ex East German pilots and put ex Phantom pilots in their Mig-29 the results were interesting.

    BVR or long WVR using Radar guided missiles the Eagle dominated pure and simple (for that matter so did the Phantom), the radar fitted to the Mig-29 at that point was just obsolete in comparison to the latest western systems (with the caveat that we hadn’t seen the best Russian radars fitted to the Mig-31 and Su-27) . WVR Mig-29 was lethal albeit that was in many ways more down to the AA-11 and helmet mounted sight combination. Then again the early model Mig-29 the Germans operated were almost Bingo fuel by the time they could get WVR.

    What bemused the West German air force pilot community was doctrinally the East Germans favoured the old style GCI tactics of Eastern Europe and didn’t make the most of what the missile HMS gave them capability wise…then again I add a cautionary note to that conclusion: I think the Russians kept the DDR pilots on a very short leash!

    In the end those early Mig-29 were designed as an affordable (even disposable) replacement for the Mig-23 and its main area for operation would of been the FEBA.

    Yes, I’d imagine the 29s would have trouble vs. the Eagle in BVR. We have to also keep in mind that the German fulcrums were somewhat monkey versions – in terms of engines, and possibly radar(?).

    It’d be interesting to know how IAF MiG-29s fared vs. USAF F-15s, F-16s and Adla M2k-5s. AFAIK, these 29s saw some periodic upgrades and fielded the rather capable N019, further, they tweaked the airframe a bit as well with composites and what not to reduce weight + RCS I am guessing.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread – 19 #2304833
    uss novice
    Participant

    its a bit of an unfair comparison in the end

    Mirage 2000 is the size of a Gripen

    MiG-29 is the weight of the F-15A and almost the same size too!

    Fair enough, how well have fulcrums held up against F-15s? Did USAF F-15s do DACT vs. Luftwaffe 29s? How about IAF Baaz?

    I think pure WVR, the HMS for the fulcrum would again give it a major advantage. Have no idea about turn rates, although there was this gent on F-16.net who had flown the F-15, F-16 and MiG-29 for plenty of hours. He said if iirc, that the STR on the 29 and 15 were comparable but the F-16 was ahead.

    I think if the Eagle had much better endurance and could disengage/reengage as and when needed. Fulcrum always had short legs.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread – 19 #2305148
    uss novice
    Participant

    to summarize

    MiG-29 Spanks M2K in raw performance
    MiG-29 engine thirstier but more power means less time in afterburner so range issue nullified against M2k
    MiG-29 skin rougher more crudely built than M2K
    MiG-29 avionics spanks M2K when actualy working

    M2K spanks MiG-29 in finish

    but when combining with other reports from IAF
    M2K spanks MiG-29 in serviceability and uptimes
    M2K spanks MiG-29 in A2G

    I recall the late BHarry mentioning something like a 7:1 BVR score in favor of the fulcrum in IAF Dact (Acig.org). The N019 was much more powerful than the RDI?, and the R27 has longer legs than the Matra Super 530.

    In WVR, apart from the advantages mentioned by AM Masand in the above article, let us not forget the incredible advantage provided by the Archer/HMS combo – something that USAF F-16s found rather painful vs. Luftwaffe 29s.

    Overall, pure A2A performance, BVR/WVR, the fulcrum comes out on top vs. both the M2k and even the F-16.

    Multirole and A2G, however, the other two are clearly ahead.

    Serviceability is a draw with a marginal advantage to the teen/M2k. The fulcrum’s complaints were mainly due to the break up of the FSU. It is not as much an issue today.

    in reply to: RuAF aviation, news and development thread #2307667
    uss novice
    Participant

    So then what is the VVS inventory like as of today and projected (2020)? I am thinking mainly of the upgrade programs and newer fighters

    Current: ?
    MiG-31BM X ?
    Su-35 X 0
    Su-34 X 10?
    Su-27SM X ?
    MiG-29SMT X 20

    Circa 2020:
    MiG-31 BM X 60
    Su-35 X 90
    Su-34 X 100?
    Su-27SM X 53
    MiG-29SM X 20
    Pakfa X 30

    in reply to: Quadbike Indian Air Force Thread Part 18 #2309483
    uss novice
    Participant

    That canopy looks soo MKIish!

    in reply to: Could India buy one of the British carriers? #2020606
    uss novice
    Participant

    seeing as theres a likelihood the UK might just stick with one and India wanting to build a new larger one.. win win for both?

    Sure, if the ship is built in India. OR if follow-ons are entirely built in India. Depends on how quick India wants it. If they are in a hurry, it might make sense to buy the carrier from UK, while simultaneous work starts in Cochin for number 2.

    But rather unlikely imho.

    in reply to: Quadbike Indian Air Force Thread Part 18 #2322191
    uss novice
    Participant

    That MiG-29 upgrade seems to have a real small nose cone, what gives? Trainer?

    in reply to: RuAF aviation, news and development thread #2338596
    uss novice
    Participant

    It’s definitely a Flanker of some sort, as can be seen from the canopy frame shape. Moreover, it has the standard Su-27 HUD rather than one of the new designs which have a Western-style UFC panel. Unless the wide-angle HUD for the Su-35S is giving trouble (seems unlikely, as unlike the T-50 HUD it is a simple, non-holographic system) I can’t see this being one of the production aircraft.

    T-50 avionics testbed (without the new HUD) is a distinct possibility.

    Hmm, my guess – latest Super 30 MKI layout, the HUD might change in time.

    uss novice
    Participant

    Regarding Russia offering the Su-35 OR China expressing interest in it:

    This might just be another clever trick by the sneaky Russkis to get more of the Indian cake. To “compensate” for givng Fra the Rafale. :diablo:

    Russia: “Hey lookie – the Chinese want our Su-35, and you know we could soo use another sale, but of course, we prefer our strategic partners to buy it instead of China”

    India: “Damn! The last thing we need is for China to get Su-35s, fine we’ll buy another 40 MKIs – our sqd strength needs to come up anyways – forks over the $$s”.

    USS.

    in reply to: Quadbike Indian Air Force Thread Part 18 #2294648
    uss novice
    Participant

    Man I can’t get over how disproportionately large that radar nose cone looks on that small fighter, both in length and breadth. Must have an oversized dish for a small fighter. Any specs on the MMR?

    FWIW: Just did a comparison with other contemporary fighters (F-16, Mirage 2000, Gripen, MiG-29) and found/felt that ratio of nose length to length of the airframe is probly greater for the LCA. Counted 6-7 noselengths and as many as 9 on the F-16.

    USS

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2317380
    uss novice
    Participant

    Sorry to belabor the MiG-29 – RD33 – fuel hog discussion, but I beg to disagree – the RD 33s seem rather economical, and despite having 2 rather powerful engines and almost the same amount of internal fuel capacity as compared to the F-16 or Mirage 2000, it still gave about 15-1600km on internal fuel range.

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2329612
    uss novice
    Participant

    [otaku mode on] There is no aircraft there, only S ducts! If you don’t believe me, I will draw elaborate diagrams to numb your senses, capiche? [/otaku mode off]

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2329618
    uss novice
    Participant

    [kapedani mode on] But I don’t think there are S ducts there – too much of compressor face is visible [/kapedani mode off] ::)

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 911 total)