70% of Russian MiG-29s Out of Service

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4

JFKY And to think... 5/26/2009 3:41:51 PM

THIS IS A THREAD ABOUT THE MIG-29...Herald and Darth are getting as bad as BW and FS. Only unlike them, where EVERY thread becomes a discussion of the vaunted RAFALE, apparently the only thing that Herald and Darth can discuss is the coming "war" between the PRC and the US and why or why not 60 F-22's is or is NOT vital to the US.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 5/26/2009 4:16:48 PM

The man who derailed the thread did so here.

DarthAmerica 2/9/2009 5:52:21 PM

The effect is often jarring, in Washington, when someone inside the Beltway utters an uncomfortable truth. That's what Defense Secretary Robert Gates did at the Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday, putting a damper on pressure from his own Air Force for Congress to buy more F-22 fighters. Gates believes the 183 F-22s currently planned are sufficient. "I know that the Air Force is up here and around talking about 350 or something on that order," the Secretary said. But buying more of the costly F-22 will come at the expense of the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is about half the price.

"The reality is we are fighting two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater," Gates said. That's the kind of statement that sends generals up the wall — not only because it's true, but because it's the Secretary of Defense who's saying it. And the generals know that the next time some eager-beaver congressional budget-cutters want to trim Pentagon spending, they're going to roll out that quote.

Gates made clear he believes there is a need for the F-22. "It is principally for use against a near-peer in a conflict, and I think we all know who that is," he said coyly. He's referring to China, which today represents the only hope for both the U.S. Air Force and the Navy to justify spending billions of dollars on weapons initially designed to battle the Soviet Union. Since the end of the Cold War, the phrase "near-peer" has increasingly crept into Pentagon documents meaning a potential foe that could almost match the U.S. on the battlefield.

Well, do we need more F-22 to battle Beijing? Once again, Gates depressed the generals with his unassuming tone and logic. "Looking at what I regard as the level of risk of conflict with one of those near-peers over the next four or five years until the Joint Strike Fighter comes along," he said, "I think that something along the lines of 183 is a reasonable buy."

Deep in the Pentagon, Air Force generals know that the Bush Administration's decision to close down the F-22 assembly line won't come into effect until 2010. That gives them time to convince a new Administration that additional F-22s are vital to U.S. security. That's because what Gates finds reasonable, some Air Force generals will treat as treasonable.

I never even replied to that amateur :originally. I confined my F-22 response to AGA.

Aussiegunneragain Relax Dudes 5/24/2009 7:43:34 AM

Does anybody see the irony in all the hand wringing about the US "only" having 183 F-22's on this thread? The only country that is going to be arming this "near peer" power can't even keep its own airforce in the air. It isn't going to be building something to challenge 183 F-22's any time in the next 15 to 20 years and to be frank the F-35 would probably wipe the floor with anything likely to come out of Russia or anywhere else during that time. Keeping the F-22 in production "just in case" would be nuts, the USAF would be better off directing money into long term RnD for the next generation of aircraft while the threat remains low. Other than that right now the US Government would be better served by paying down debt, because the "near peer" power's most effective weapon against the US right now is that they finance so much of its economy.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Setting aside the comedy. 5/24/2009 10:20:22 AM

-You need to keep a generation of aviation engineers busy.

-The ORCs plan on building the junk they have (numbers matter)

-The idiot in Washington has no intention of funding R&D. In fact he cuts it for "community programs".

-As for Gates, I hold him in about as much contempt as I hold McNamara and Rimsfeld.

-Our resident F-22 expert isn't. He can't even figure out a roll period, so why should I take his opinion for anything?

As for the R&D for basic science and technology? All for it. Where is it for propulsion, shipbuilding, poweerplants, materials science, basic physics, and basic chemistry? WHY is our money going OVERSEAS to do this?

Why don't we do that science at HOME? Well?

Herald

Then there is this from another amateur..And ,my reply was again to AGA not tto that amateur or to the other "expert".

french stratege 5/24/2009 11:15:29 AM

If we take reality of Russian aircraft today, they don't have probably more than 400 serviceable front line fighters like 200 SU27/30 and 80 Mig 29 and as much MIG31.Of course they have about 800 fighter in holding which is not the same than real available fighters.

Plus as much SU24 and SU25 for ground attack (no air to air capability)

And about 130 front line strategic bombers (Blackjack, Bear and backfire)

h*tp://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/av-main.htm

Moreover they do not train as much than NATO and do not have a lot of trained pilots per aircrafts.

They probably could not log more than a sustained thousand sorties per day for non strategic part (or myabe 1500 at peak), which is close to french air force (+navy) for exemple.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Benefits and problems. 5/24/2009 11:25:16 AM

1. Fixing the F-22 foulups that LockMart screwed up in the first place has already yielded one materials science breakthrough on top of the previous ones we achieved.

2. We have to many "experts" in Congress. Explain SCIENCE to them. Arrogance and stupidity in one package, remember?

3. I published evidence on Gates in the F-22 thread. He's a liar and political conniver. CREF there for details.

4. That you happen to agree with Darth should be an automatic alarm bell. Re-examine assumptions.

5. Money goes where profit is. So does research.

6. Bird in hand is worth more than promised bird never delivered.

7. The money isn't there. We're broke. CREF 2, 3, 4, and 5.

8. ORCs was a typo. PRCs. JH-7s J-10s, J-11s, and other aircraft. 052s, 53s, 054s and other floating PLAN junk. Varieties of TBMs and cruise missiles all of it pointed out to sea-much of it at the RoCs, but MOST of it at the RoKs and Japan and US. Ballistic missiles for example are not exactly DEFENSIVE.

Anyway, this is about the MiG 29 which is failung. What is NOT going out of production or grounded for design flaws and wearout, but actually increasing in use is the SUKHOIs. There are more of those FLANKERS being built in the HUNDREDS. Even in Russia.

Herald

Still not talking about or to that amateur except to tell AGA not to accept the crap logic he uses/

And then:

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica Herald STOP FLAMING ME 5/25/2009 7:17:07 AM

Whether or not I dislike the technically unqualified and over opinionated asserter is not relevant. You take tbose assertionshe makes, the facts as you see them and co-mingle with ACTUAK DATA and you still have sludge for your outcomes. GIGO. The priorities this Memorial Day as I read the public news just had a 4.7 Ruchter scale event as a datim point to show me that you are wrong.

So then keep my name out of your mouth if it isn't relevant. Besides, the only person who's opinions here have been found to be technically unqualified and over opinionated assertions are yours and I can prove that...

Read this for just one of many examples of complete technical, tactical and strategic misunderstanding. This is followed by numerous attempts at rehab by subject matter experts. BUT I'M OVER OPINIONATED...lol. THis guuy has never used rocket or machine gun in anger before mind you ...lol.

Add to that suggestions that:

touch screens are useless in fighter cockpits

UAVs can't fight fighters

The USAF should buy several hundred "Bomb Widows"

Not knowing that the OIF MSR does not go through Basra

Here is a hint. Be a good boy like SysOp told you to and stop inflicting your personal grudge against me on the rest of the forum troll. Again, the only person technically unqualified is you. Anyone following the link above can see that as a matter of record.

-DA

Aside from the attempt to bully again, the threats the name calling and the lies about what I actually said about touch screens: who actually derailed the thread and tried to make thus about the F-22 and HIM again?

That's right Darth. And don't kid yourself. He's been the one who's tried to salvage his destroyed reputation everywhere.

I don't need to mount an ego defense so energetic. I can admit mistakes. I make them all the time.

Now who derailed the thread? Evidence is right there in front of you.

Herald

Don't accuse me of a crime I did not commit. Not this time.

Let Darth man up to it. He won't, but the evidence is right there.

Herald

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica JFKY reply 5/26/2009 4:19:30 PM

Keep in mind if you read my responses that they are in the context of the low readiness of the Mig-29 fighters justifying the decrease in demand for F-22's. I didn't bring up the PRC, I don't consider them a threat and they aren't a Mig-29 user. I responded in that context. However, I sense your frustration to discuss the direct thread topic and will respect that especially since I've said more then enough to support my opinions whether or not people choose to agree or not. I'll provide further analysis and comments in a dedicated threat or in threads where such materials are relevant.

Sincere Apologies

-DA

Quote Reply

JFKY Herald 5/26/2009 5:23:40 PM

"oh mommy, mommy HE started it" is not really an adult excuse is it?

You said a silly thing earlier about people being "qualified to comment'...here's a hint to you Herald:

IT'S NOT YOUR BOARD.

When YOU run a board you can screen commenters and ask them to provide Bona Fides of whatever sort you desire. On THIS board as long as you can read the postings, input, and have a way of posting in response, output...you ARE "qualified."

It doesn't make you right or worth reading, but it makes you qualified...so please drop the "qualified" stuff, because well all anyone of us are, here, are disembodied Internet "voices"...you may or may NOT have an advanced degree in Engineering or Materials Science. how would we know? You can disagree with Darth or Rocky, you can IGNORE them, but you can not call them unqualified or QUALIFIED, because well all we have is YOUR word for it:

1) that they are;

2) you have the "qualifications" to make that judgment; and

3) that they have been found wanting.

All you can do is say whether or no you AGREE or DISAGREE with them. That's not the same thing as judging someone's "qualifications."

Your word, as a disembodied Internet "spirit" is no more valid than MY word...the ONLY "voice" who IS qualified to judge fitness to post is the SysOps Collective.....and they only monitor Terms of Service, not some mythical idea of "qualified to comment."

Quote Reply

warpig 5/26/2009 6:34:57 PM

"oh mommy, mommy HE started it" is not really an adult excuse is it?

You said a silly thing earlier about people being "qualified to comment'...here's a hint to you Herald:

IT'S NOT YOUR BOARD.

1) that they are;

2) you have the "qualifications" to make that judgment; and

3) that they have been found wanting.

All you can do is say whether or no you AGREE or DISAGREE with them. That's not the same thing as judging someone's "qualifications."

Right on target.

Quote Reply

DarthAmerica Back on Topic 5/26/2009 6:47:03 PM

Refurbished Bulgarian Mig-29s getting 4000 more flight hours added to their service life. You know Mig and aftermarket companies can profit quite a bit on rebuilding these aircraft to be competitive with other late model 4th Generation fighters. The Mig-29 is an astonishingly good airframe and with modern avionics is still a capable bird. For ~$10,000,000-$15,000,000 each you could easily have a fighter that would be comparable. If MIG can make sure they can handle such upgrades in volume and in a timely manner then I think they have a strong platform.

What's still amazing is that as many of these planes are still in front line service considering the decade long neglect and poor service in the absence of the Soviets. I think that these planes get a bad rap based on wars like Allied Force where many of the MIGs critical avionics were degraded or inop due to parts shortages.

-DA

Quote Reply

RockyMTNClimber AGA 5/26/2009 7:36:10 PM

I believe we have achieved economies of scale in production of the F22 that we have not achieved in the F35. The next F22 purchased today is less than half the cost of the next F35 since the F35 is still a custom built aircraft at this point. If they extend the F22 build another 60 airplanes the savings will go up marginally higher, for the reasons you have already agreed with. Yes I am familiar with the terms & I think a good case has already been made to meet the USAF's requirements.

The decision to not purchase the 60 extra aircraft was political, as all such decisions are, and what ever savings we achieved by limiting production further actually went to our obscene federal spending programs, including nationalizing our auto industry to the benefit of a few union bosses, supporting a corrupt political action organization that would make the "brownshirts" of old proud (ACORN), and a $900,000,000.00 bonus to Hamas to keep up the good work firing rockets into Israel and generally trying to murder western leaning leaders in the Palestinian territories and Lebanon.

Perhaps this would appear to be a better decision if our Gov't was actually saving the money in order to pay down debt and limit the deficit.

Check Six

Rocky

Quote Reply

RockyMTNClimber Russia can't do what Bulgaria can? 5/26/2009 7:49:29 PM

Refurbished Bulgarian Mig-29s getting 4000 more flight hours added to their service life. You know Mig and after market companies can profit quite a bit on rebuilding these aircraft to be competitive with other late model 4th Generation fighters. The Mig-29 is an astonishingly good airframe and with modern avionics is still a capable bird. For ~$10,000,000-$15,000,000 each you could easily have a fighter that would be comparable. If MIG can make sure they can handle such upgrades in volume and in a timely manner then I think they have a strong platform.

-DA

The point would be that the Russians can't do with their own aircraft what can be achieved by other competent air forces. The Indians have kept their Mig21's viable through the use of western technology. We all remember the comments on the RedFlag excersize where the briefer was dismissive of the French but had strong cautionary language towards the old -21's which were updated & flow by competent aggressive pilots who understood their limitations.

I think the evidence is that the Russians see the Sukoi platform as their future, they intend to let the Mig line whither on the vine. They simply don't have the resources to keep two major platforms in service.

Check Six

Rocky

Quote Reply

JFKY Herald 5/26/2009 8:51:46 PM

I couldn't care less about the availability rate of MIG-29's...I just get tired of endless debate OFF TOPIC.

I also weary of YOU discussing people's "qualifications"...since we don't know YOURS who are YOU to question anyone else's?

Sure, Stratege is going off the deep end talking about 1000 sorties per day for the AdA OUTSIDE France ...However, this has nothing to do with whether or not he's "qualified"...Heck he could have a PhD...he's just WRONG, not "unqualified"...Truth to tell, I find YOU "unqualified" when you comment on MacArthur or Halsey...unless you've been to C&GS School, or the Navy War College, or the Army War College or you have a PhD in History...do you? And can you "prove it?" How could you?

So I'll stop "thread jacking" with this post and see what you all have to say about the MiG-29.

Quote Reply

Aussiegunneragain Rocky 5/27/2009 7:41:36 AM

It is only a saving if you delay the purchase of the F-35 prototype for long enough to offset the cost of the extra 60 aircraft. Otherwise it is just a purchase of 60 extra aircraft.

Perhaps this would appear to be a better decision if our Gov't was actually saving the money in order to pay down debt and limit the deficit.

I think it is a good decision in its own right as you just don't need the extra aircraft, though I do agree that the savings are wasted if it is blown on something else stupid.

Quote Reply

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4

	News As History - November 24, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us