"oh please... the Migs can carry many more bombs and missiles than the F-16 can... it has more external points because of it's greater wing area... And by the way the Block 50/52 F-16's have a thrust of 30,000lbs and the Mig-29 has a thrust greater than 18,000 lbs so I don't know where you're getting your figures from... The Mig-29 can carry more AMRAAMS than the F-16..."
You have proven you don't know what you are talking about.
The MiG-29 has 7 external loading points while the F-16 has 9, two more in other words and that is not including the "chin" points which are used for LDPs like the Sharpshooter/Pathfinder, ATLIS II, LITENING II, Lantrin and others.
F-16s have dropped 2000lb laser guided bombs in live combat along with being able to carry 4 AIM-120s, 2 fuel tanks, an external jammer and the LITENING II. The F-16 is able to carry a payload of over 12,000lbs of dispobable equipment. which includes JDAMs, GBU-10/12/22/24s, Popeyes, AS-30Ls, AGM-65s, AGM-84s, AGM-88s, SPICE, Opher, Lizard, Griffin laser guided bombs and many other types of weapons.
The MiG-29 can only do 8000lbs on its 7 external hardpoints and can at best currently (we are only talking operational models) carry rockets and dumb bombs.
The MiG-29 with R-27s can only carry 2 and could in theory take up 4 R-77Es the balance of R-73Es would be 4 and 2 respectively. And F-16 could carry up 6 AIM-120s and still out CAP the MiG-29.
And of course the F-16 is a far more offensive plane with the range, payload and SA to carry the war into enemy air space.
"Oh please... read the post again, i said that it hit the bomb OR it was shot down by his wingmen... I stated both reasons which have been claimed... And I mean, a Pakistani F-16 got shot down? But I can't say that so not to insult Pakistan??? it is a fact! and I said it."
The bomb story was fake.
"Like i said, the Russians need money bad so they sell to countries who can't affors all the advanced avionic and EW suites that America sells to."
"The bottom line is that the Mig-29 is capable of BVR engagements..."
Rather limited compared to the fact most F-16s carry around the AIM-120. The R-27R has a PK similar to the AIM-7E-2 from the Vietnam War.
"Easy to Jam??? I believe you're talking about users again... Only easy to jam for users that have the jamming capability opposed to users that don't have anti-jamming devices... The bottom line is that you need to have your jammers set at the same band as the planes radar to jam... which the Americans can do with ease because of AWACS support and advanced EW... "
Iran did it to Iraq in the 1980s. We are talking F-4s going on a mission jamming the MiG-29s, bombing the target then flying under the same MiG-29s on the way home.
"they are developing HMS, they don't have it at present. Now these are future F-16's, if you look back, the first Mig-29's that rolled out had HMS..."
The IDF/AF has had a HMS for quite a while. The HAF has a HSM.
"India has just ordered the Mig-29K's to operate on their carriers..."
And zero are in service...
"No not in comparing the users...if you take an upgraded F-16 facing an old, ruting Mig-29, that is being very unfair... "
Ok you know nothing about modern combat. And of course seeing as practically every MiG-29 that one will see is old... even Russian ones...
"To compare the planes, an equally upgraded Mig-29 has to be in combat with an equally upgraded F-16 with no outside support like AWACS..."
Maybe because you are repping a nation with a primative air force, real air wars are decided by AWACs, jamming, EW at stand off and BVR ranges.
" America has built much sh*ttier planes like the F-104 and the F-4 (which got raped in Vietnam). And besides if the Russians had the money like the Americans do, the Mig would've been much more advanced electronically than present..."
More MiGs have been shot down then anyother type of plane in the world since the end of WW2. The USAF/USN actually had a kill ratio in thier favor in Vietnam. Russian planes have been generally low tech, hard to maintain and prone to failure.
Syria refused to pay Russia because they thought rather correctly that Russian equipment was junk compared to the high standard American equipment the Israelis get.
"Example, Iranian F-14's..."
Bad example. The Iranians scored over 100 kills in the Iran Iraq war. 58 are still in service and fully combat ready and can use the AIM-54A. Iran scored the first F-14 kills and the only ones with AIM-54s. The majority of thier victims were Russian planes (Tu-22, MiG-25, MiG-23, MiG-21, Su-22, MiG-27 (flown by Russians), Su-20, Su-7). And they had an exllecent kill when one shot down a C-601 missile and then the H-6D which fired it within seconds of each other.
"It seems you keep comparing obsolete old Mig-29's with upgraded block50 F-16's... comparing an F-16 block 50 and a Mig-29 Fulcrum A Is not really a fair comparison..."
This is the real world the majority of MiG-29s flying around are old MiG-29A/UBs.
"The Mig pilots can target enemy planes just by turning their heads in the direction of the enemy plane and locking on... something the F-16 doesn't have..."
Several F-16s already have it but the most important thing is the fact so many F-16s have an ARH BVR missile which kinda means you don't have to get up close. In air combat one does not want to get up close and turn.
"i'd like to point out to you from your own article... also, I already said that the F-16 has a more user-freindly cockpit, better view, than the Mig-29."
You didn't read the article more or less it settled the issue the F-16 was the more capable plane...
Might as well lock this topic seeing as you have shown you know nothing about either plane and are carrying around a bias.