MIG 21 BIS vs F-15 or any non stealth fighter-

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

DarthAmerica 11/7/2008 2:46:13 AM

MiG 21 BIS is an upgraded IAF MiG with Israeli radar. I wouldn't bet on the F-15 recklessly maybe 50/50. Its probably more effective than the SU30s too.

A plane to be respected but the mere comparison of these two VERY DIFFERENT type of aircraft suggest a gross over estimation as well as a misunderstanding of requirements.

-DA

Quote Reply

FJV 11/7/2008 12:05:49 PM

F15 fires amraam, Mig gone....

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica 11/7/2008 12:52:25 PM

F15 fires amraam, Mig gone....

It really all depends on how they come into contact and the quality of the people. It's highly unlikely that a lone Mig-21 and F-15 are just going to find each other in all that sky. The only F-15 users Mig-21 Bis users would likely face are the USAF. So the F-15 is probably going to enter the fight with huge SA advantages. After that the F-15 being bigger and faster will have more opportunities to exploit against the Mig. The one exception being at close range were the bigger fighter is more easily seen. A minor issue to me but I'm not a fighter pilot so I'll leave that kind of thing to them.

-DA

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 11/7/2008 3:01:33 PM

again - it's DACT. the parameters are scripted to trigger a training requirement.

it's really frustrating to see some people generating/extrapolating tech outcomes based on soundbite material.

"biggles events" are DACT in it's lowest form of script training - it's not a systems real world event.

Red Flag and Blue Flag are not literal events where anyone should come out and start to make empirical statements about older generation platforms vs newer generation - its patently ridiculous.

the RAF discovered years ago that the Israeli modified Romanian Mig 21's were lethal - (Lancers) - but they were committing aircraft againts scripted scenarios designed to maximise a learning/training requirement. Those events were not "real world" by a long shot.

Ditto for this Red Flag. eg in some scenarios read team can constantly regenerate from dead aircraft, whereas blue team goes into force degradation - eg if you're dead, you stay dead and cannot do a combat Lazarus. Thats designed to excalate demand, fatigue, tempo against blue force etc... So, again, not being privy to the script sets means that proclamations such as "Mig 21 can chew (insert western aircraft name here) their arse" is a fanboy comment.

When you have a scenario where Red Flag and Blue Flag are run concurrently (in the same battlespace) and where the entire combat space is unscripted, system supported and weapons free - then you might have the beginning of real world results.

Quote Reply

Shaken 11/7/2008 5:05:13 PM

Quote Reply

Beryoza 11/8/2008 12:01:30 AM

MiG-21bis is a 100% Soviet aircraft with a 100% Soviet radar.......I think you're referring to the MiG-21 Bison

Quote Reply

smitty237 Lots of factors, but probably futile 11/9/2008 3:45:03 PM

I'm definitely with the crowd on this one, but there are a lot of factors that could come into play. In a real-life shooting war a flight of MiG-21's don't stand a chance against a flight of F-15's, but I could forsee a scenario where the rules of engagement are so tight that a MiG was able to get off the first shot and down an F-15 before the F-15 was able to react. You also have to take pilot skill into account. During Vietnam the MiG-21 was a feared and respected aircraft, and a souped up MiG-21 with modern electronics and weaponry in the hands of a skilled and experienced pilot could probably hold its own in a close up dogfight.

Quote Reply

dwightlooi 11/9/2008 8:41:46 PM

Equipped with modern radar and other electronic stuff it light (8.7t) fighter is comparable with 4th generation aircrafts. It can be stealthy with surface covering that reduces radio visibility in 10 times.

To FJV: Mig-21 has missles also. It fires R-77 with range twice of AIM-120. F-15 will be done and forgets about it's AMRAAMs forever.

I don't know about the R-77 being twice the range of the AMRAAM part. The advertised range means very little for both missiles. What constitutes "effective" range is highly subjective and what constitutes "range" for public consumption is even more subjective.

From the cutaway of both missiles it appears that the R-77 has a similar propellant volume fraction (the percentage of internal volume occupied by the solid motor) as the AIM-120C5 and slightly less than the AIM-120C7/AIM-120D. For the most parts the specific impulse of solid motors amongst competent developers haven't changed much over the last 25 years. Ever since the introduction of HTPB solids high performance missile solids have been around 240~250 seconds IpSec. That is to say they make one pound of thrust for one pound of propellant burned for 240~250 seconds, or alternatively they can make 240~250 pounds of thrust for 1 second using up 1 pound of propellant mass. For solid rocket powered missiles, the propellant fraction by and large determine kinematic range. The guidance system may employ the raw kinematics more efficiently or less so, but by and large how fast a missile goes and how longs it stays fast is defined by propellant fraction and specific impulse.

Unless you believe that the Russians somehow made a secret, Nobel worthy, breakthrough in chemical rocket propulsion there is no reason to believe the claim that the R-77 is twice the range of an AMRAAM. If anything they are hampered by slightly less efficient electronics packaging which is the reason the the R-77 has to be slightly larger to maintain the same propellant fraction.

Quote Reply

warpig 11/13/2008 7:14:57 PM

Shaken, I hope you'll try again to post your comments. I always like to read what you have to say. Regarding the MiG-21 BISON, yes the upgrades keep it competitive as a short-range interceptor. I'd guess the single biggest reason it could still hold its own in a fight with F-15/16 and better would be the EL/L-8222 pod slung underneath. Take away the Elta wizardry and I doubt it would fare well. Given that any fight against an American jet would have to face similar jamming, I'd bet the winner is likely going to be heavily influenced (even moreso than usual) by who has the best situational awareness being fed to him from off-board.

Quote Reply

maruben Comparison with AIM-120 AMRAAM 11/27/2008 11:41:35 AM

Comparison with AIM-120 AMRAAM

Range

The R-77's main advantage over the AIM-120 AMRAAM... is in range and maneuverability. The longer range is because the R-77 is a larger 200 mm vs 178 mm (8 vs 7 in), heavier 175 vs 150 kg (386 vs 335 lb) missile than the AMRAAM... and contains more propellant. Like most AAM weapons, the claimed range is for a non-maneuvering target, at a high altitude, and probably on a head on aspect with a respectable closing rate. Lower altitudes, rear aspect, or maneuvering targets will all reduce this range, but the same applies to the AMRAAM.

The planned upgrade of the AIM-120, the AIM-120D, is to have a much greater (+50%) range and thus no-escape zone which will exceed that of the standard R-77 by a large margin. It is unknown how the AIM-120D will compare to the R-77M design in terms of range.

Maneuverability

The missile's maneuverability relies on the lattice work fins at the rear. The R-77's aerodynamic configuration is claimed to provide superior maneuverability than the conventional deltas used on for example the AIM-120,^[3]. The weapon is reported to be able to handle a target maneuvering at up to 12g,^[4] a substantially higher rate than any manned fighter.

Quote Reply

1 2