MiG-29 ‘Falcon Hunter’ : The F-16 Killer

[Mr_Vastu]

Following all the sabre-rattling about the MiG-29 vs F-16 on this forum, I decided to start this thread that would lead to the final verdict after a Blitzkrieg of intelligent posts.

The Falcon…and……




...the Falcon Hunter……



It was after the Kargil War when PAF F-16s were locked on at maximum range by a BVRAAM armed Mig-29 that kept them at bay that the famed Fulcrum got the nick name ‘Falcon Hunter’ in IAF circles.

[Mr_Vastu]

Airframes and Aerodynamics

Airframes and Aerodynamics

With regards to aerodynamics, the MiG-29s superior speed (Mach 2.35) and cobra manouveribility itself supercedes the F-16 that barely makes it to Mach 2.0 due to structural fatigue, only accelerating to fire its missiles. While the MiG-29 was designed with an AoA (Angle of Attack) of upto 45 deg., the F-16 was never designed to stall something that prevents the aircraft from getting into situations where it could stall or break apart from excessive gravity forces mounting on the structurally weak F-16 hull. The twin finned, lift-generating fuselage design ensures agile handling, and stability at extreme speeds making the Fulcrum more than a match for any fighter plane in its class.

The few Air Forces that operate the F-16s are well aware of hairline cracks developing in their F-16 hulls. Wing cracks and afterburner problems would be the reason why the USAF retire all of its pre-Block 15 'small tail' ships while production of some airframes of which many were singel-seat F-16N's and double-seat TF-16N's were also found with multiple hair cracks discovered in several bulckheads, believed to have ultimately being stored then replaced by embargoed ex-Pakistani F-16s The Air National Guard just checked its fleet of F-16s after inspectors found a number of hairline cracks in the engines of F-16s at Luke Air Force Base in Glendale. Compared to the Falcon the MiGs twin finned, lift-generating fuselage LERX airframe is more solid and sturdy. With the F-16A the AoA limit is just 25deg where as the MiG-29 has been cleared of an AoA of up to 45deg, this is where it gets impossible for the F-16 to dogfight with the MiG.

[Mr_Vastu]

Aircraft Engines

Aircraft Engines

So far the Two Klimov/Sarkisov RD-33 turbofans each powering the MiG with 18,200 lb thrust with afterburning push the Fulcrum to higher Mach numbers way above Mach 2.2 while the F110-GE-132 engine, the highest-thrust fighter engine ever developed for the Falcon ensures that the F-16 barely makes it to Mach 2.0 due to the jets structural weakness. This clearly shows the RD-33 engines superiority over the F-16s not to mention the new VK-10M, being developed by Klimov for production from 2010, with a thrust of upto 24,250 to 23,350 lb st. and thrust vectoring assisted. These would be used by the navalised variants supposedly to be operated with the Indian Navy. The R-33 turbofan engines, provide a thrust to weight ratio higher than unity for highest manoeuvrability which no western fighter can match to this day.

It was dreaded engine failures that caused the USAF to ground nearly 400 F-16s following several engine related crashes at Luke AFB a few years back, nearly one third of the F-16 fleet the USAF has in its inventory. Like the USAF F-16 that developed engine failure, particularly the high pressure turbine post, causing the HPT blades to break free and damage the engine another example was a RNoAF F-16 departing Banak Airbase lost its engine in flight due to a turbine failure and went down in flames. Earlier on Thailand had grounded each and every F-16 they had and so did Israel after having problems with their F-16D. The main spate of these failures in the F-16s are due to various factors, not one. One cause of the crash was numerous cracks in the afterburner wall which caused fire to spread. Others speculate are weld failures in the augmentor ducts. Its such careless planning and designing of the plane itself that makes engine nozzle and entire augmentor assemblies get detached at high speeds which is why most F-16s were designed to only make it to Mach 1.9. For poorer nations like Egypt and Pakistan with no replacement of spares for third stage fan blades and disc, and retrofitting of an improved low-pressure turbine module the F-16s would become more vulnerable to crashes. As for FOD problems, the lower edge of the Falcons intake lip is only 38 inches above the ground, which is not surprising why many F-16s deployed to police Iraq and Afghanistan crashed in those countries.

Although the US sources claim that the F-16s engine is one of the safest to fly, being a simple fighter this is not the case as becomes very clear of the fact that General Dynamics got sued for errors in the F-16 which are actually multiple problems. From mechanical failures of the main thrust bearings leading ultimately to engine failures to structural failures getting into situations where an F-16 could stall or break apart from excessive gravity forces you name it, the F-16 had it right from its design inception. Another report suggested accidental cause due to failure of the high pressure turbine post, allowing the HPT blades to break free and damage the engine something that’s almost unheard of as regards the sturdy Tumansky or Kilmov engine designs. Those engines are meant to take quite a beating, from rough whether and rugged airfield landings to desert sand storms. It is quite like comparing the F-16s to IAFs age old MiG-21s dubbed the ‘Flying Coffins’ which most pilots would even dread flying during peacetime, but those are 20 years older than the first F-16s.

[Mr_Vastu]

Radar Avionics and Weapon Systems

Radar Avionics and Weapon Systems

In an air combat situation, it is the plane that approaches the target first and fires first that becomes the winning killer. With a high approach speed of Mach 2.3 a MiG-29 would close in on an F-16 and shoot it down with its superior array of BVRAAMs. All F-16 pilots know that any aircraft within 45deg's of the nose of a MiG-29 has a zero chance of survivability. And as discussed earlier in ACM mode the helmet mounted sight coupled with the AA-11 Archer gives the Mig 29 a kill zone greater than any aircraft serving, the rude shock the Falcon pilots got while up against those Luftwaffe Fulcrums. The Fulcrums fire control and mission computers link radar with a laser rangefinder and IRST sensor in conjunction with helmet mounted laser target designator (HMLTDS) wherein targets can be approached and engaged without emission of detectable radar or radio signals. Also Russian electrical systems in the MiG-29 are far more superior to weak electrical systems of the west, the reason for most F-16, Blackhawk and Apache avionics and computer systems crashing and giving way in blazing hot desert regions like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Further more, the radar in combination with the laser rangefinder and IRSTS allows the pilot, who wears a helmet-mounted target designator, to approach and engage targets in electronically silent mode, not giving the frenzied Falcon pilot even a clue hes being aimed and about to be shot at The MiGs have radars with wider scan and track angles inazimuth: +/-60 degress for the F-16C, +/-70 for the MiG-29 The Zhuk M’s acquisition range has increased 1.5 times and features a wide scan and tracking area of +/- 85 deg. in azimuth and +/- 60 deg. in elevation, terrain following mode and ground target acquisition mode including high resolution modes. The original MiG-29B had Phazotron N-019/RP-29 Saphir (Sapphire; NATO reporting name 'Slot Back') multi-mode Doppler radar. This had reasonable range, about 100 km (60 statute miles) against fighter-sized targets, and a 10-target tracking ability, but its processing capability was limited, and it was not easy to use. Later radars will be the Phazotron Zhuk type, capable of tracking ten targets to a maximum range of 150 miles. In response the Soviets hastily developed a modified N-019M Topaz radar for the upgraded MiG-29S aircraft. The latest upgrade aircraft offer the N-010 Zhuk-M, which has a flat planar antenna rather than a dish, improving range, and much superior processing ability, with multiple target engagement capability and compatibility with the RVV-AE (NATO AA-12 'Adder') air-to-air missile.
A useful feature of the MiG-29, shared with the Su-27, is the S-31E2 KOLS, a combined laser rangefinder and infrared search and track (IRST) in an 'eyeball' mount foreward of the cockpit canopy. This can be slaved to the radar or used independently, and provides exceptional gun-laying accuracy. Much of which are the attributes of the MiG-29 ‘Sniper’ which can easily kill any F-16 variant with ease.

[Mr_Vastu]

Missiles and Armament

Missiles and Armament

Compared to the MiG-29s BVRAAMs what the F-16 has is basically dogfight missiles from a bygone era of Vietnamese air warfare. If the west claims they’re superior to Russia in electronic warfare, the Russians are definitely superior to the west in terms of rocketry and propulsion systems. While the AIM-9 which is the oldest and cheapest missile going, probably used with F-16s serving poorer nations the AIM-120 is not far better. Aerodynamically, the R-27 which arms the Fulcrum is superior to the AMRAAM with a range of 130 km, while other variants have a maximum range of between 70 to 170 kilometers. Whereas the R-77RVV-AE has a range of 100 km, with the seeker locking on at around 20 km, and a maximum speed of Mach 4.5. Its range puts it in the long-range class and is equivalent to that of the AIM-54 Phoenix. At this rate the AIM-120 is no where near the R-77 since it has a range of only 50 km (30 miles), 50 km less than the superior R-77.
French air-to-air missiles such as the Super 530D and Magic-II can also be carried by MiG-29s in service with the IAF

[Mr_Vastu]

Cockpit Ergonomics

Cockpit Ergonomics

The Fulcrum’s cockpit has conventional dials, with HUD, etc. Emphasis seems to have been placed on making the cockpit similar to the earlier MiG-23 and other Soviet aircraft for ease of conversion, rather than on ergonomics. Nonetheless, the MiG-29 does have substantially better visibility than most previous Russian jet fighters. Upgrade models introduce 'glass' cockpits with modern CRT multi-function displays and true HOTAS. The seat is also less declined backward as compared to that of an F-16. Whereas the Goldfish bowl canopy of the F-16 – the Sabre styled bubble cockpit with the 30deg inclined pilot seat with that ‘sidey’ side stick system ;) is not what most pilots would just hate. We’re not fighting Korean or Vietnamese style here, where you need have a view to a kill, we’re talking BVR air combat at Mach 2. With high mounting speeds and crushing Gs an F-16 pilot fighting the ‘seat of the pants’ effect, straining his neck forward from his inclined seat would find the F-16s cockpit a pain in the neck and a pain in the ass as well :) :)

[Mr_Vastu]

Service Life and Maintenance

Service Life and Maintenance

Like the MiG-21 Fishbeds that saw Korean styled dogfighting over Vietnam with unguided bombs and rockets to the MiG-21-93 of the IAF with BVRAAMs and HMS systems getting modified upto their fourth generation upgrades, the MiG-29s too would undergo various upgrade programs with new variants in the export market. From the a super-maneuverable MiG-29OVT variant, with three-dimensional thrust-vectoring engine nozzles to the Plasma Stealth Mig-29 SMTs, MiG-30 and ‘33’ Fulcrums the Fulcrum is going to be another air superiority cousin to the formidable Flankers. With the MiG-29K program itself revived in response to the decision of the Indian Navy to acquire the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier, the Fulcrum stands to last in service for the next three decades way into the 2040s :) long after the last breed of Falcons would have become extinct Also due to the its structural fatigue, the F-16s service life is expected to be until 2015, after which most wont be airworthy if one goes by the current maintenance service standards.

[Mr_Vastu]

Variants

Variants

While advanced versions of the MiG-29s like the MiG-33s, SMT would all fly at speeds in excess of Mach 2.3, the F-16 and its clones, the F-16 XL, IAI Lavi, etc. all keep chugging along hard to make it to Mach 1.8 way below a Mach 2 class jet. The more advanced the F-16 gets, the slower it goes with the F-16XL and Lavi both being believed to have been advanced versions of the F-16, yet flying very much slower.

New variants of the mig-29 such as MiG-29M2, MiG-29SMT and MiG-29UTB, incorporate a number of design changes. These include updated avionics, Western-style cockpit equipment, new powerful radars and, most importantly, enlarged fuel capacity giving the aircraft considerably extended range, the most advanced of all MiG-29 developments.

Some Mig-29 Upgrades include :

MiG-29SMT-II (Factory index 9.17-II): Further upgrades to the SMT are already planned or on offer, under provisional designation MiG-29SMT-II. Improvements include frontal RCS reduction measures, IR signature reduction and further increases in fuel tankage and warload. Fuel capacity to be increased to 5,600 kg (12,346 lb) through installation of new 219 litre (58.0 US gallon; 48.0 Imp gallon) tanks in LERX, replacing auxiliary air intakes and ducts, as in MiG-29M and original SMT scheme. Eight hardpoint wing (either based on MiG-29M, with broad span ailerons, or merely rebuilt standard wing) will allow warload increase to 5,500 kg (12,125 lb). Potential avionics improvements include new radar (N010, Zhuk, Zhuk PH or NIIR Zemchug). Some expect future MiG-29 variants to receive a new engine, the VK-10M, being developed by Klimov for production from 2010, with a thrust of 108 to 113 kN (24,250 to 23,350 lb st). Thrust vectoring may be offered. May use triple redundant digital FBW FCS developed for MiG-29M.

MiG-29OVT: MIG-29 version with 3-d thrust-vectoring nozzles. A fully representative prototype is due to fly by the year-end or early 2002. The nozzles installed on MIG-29OVT can move in any direction over the rear hemisphere at any range of engine operation, offering the aircraft astounding manoeuverability. Fire-control system including, Phazotron Zhuk-M radar and the full range of air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles, including the R-77 air-to-air missile and the KH-31 and KH-35 air-to-surface missiles.

MiG-29 Sniper: The upgraded MiG-29 SNIPER was first demonstrated in Berlin- ILA 2000 and Timisoara Air Shows . The SNIPER maiden flight on 5th May 2000 demonstrated that the cooperation between Daimler Chrysler Aerospace (now EADS), AEROSTAR S.A. from Romania and ETBIT SYSTEM Ltd. from Israel was completely fruitful. The Parties utilized an aircraft that is used in the Romanian Air Force, extended the aircraft life and upgraded it with enhanced avionics.

MiG-29K-2008: upgrade configuration could add a computer upgrade and additional electro-optic, radar, IIR and recce pods, together with take-off performance improvements. In December 1999, it was reported that India had selected the MiG-29K for use aboard Admiral Gorshkov, and an initial order for 50 aircraft.

A MiG-29 Sniper taking off from a rough terrain airfield only goes to show the ruggedness of these new Fulcrums :

[Mr_Vastu]

Specifications

Specifications

And finally, to add the "coup de grace" to this thread the MiG-29 is the ‘Falcon Hunter’ as :

The Mig-29 is faster than the F-16 : Mach 2.35 as compared to Mach 1.9

The Mig-29 has better range : High-speed interception range of 410 km as compared to 389 km

The Mig-29 has a higher ceiling : Above 60,000 ft. as compared to 50,000 ft.

The Mig-29 has a better climb rate : AoA for Mig = 45 deg. ; AoA for F-16 = 25 deg.

The Mig-29 has a 30mm cannon compared to the F-16s 20mm Vulcan

The Mig-29 has better Radar aerial target detection range : 80 km as compared to 50-60 km

The Mig-29 has better engines and BVR AAMs than the F-16

The Mig-29 has been credited with an F-117 ‘Night Hawk’ kill, so the non-stealth Falcon would be too easy a kill .

[ajaybhutani]

vastu the prob is that Mig29 still lacks the current avionics ( we all know that russian avionics are not as good as the western ones esp the american) . The stuff u talked about is limited to indian Mig29 or may be a few other and the ones that will be rolled out in the near future. Now if we compare them with the F16 Blk 60 with aesa which some of the nations are recently procuring then the picture is not so bright.

About the engine of mig29 we all know how shitty the R33 engine is. This forced india to look out for american engines for their LCA rahter than the R33 which was already available to them. so clearly i donot approve of ur analysis of Mig29 engine as better.

The F16 mostly have an advantage of using the AWAC radar cover which the Mig29s mostly donot have


The western ECMS are better .
the comparison of aerial target rage of radar done by u for which version of Mig29 with whcih version of F16. Frankly it surely dsnt look like an AESA radar range.


U used the range of aim120A for comparison but the AIM120C is already in service and i ahvent been able to find out its range yet. So one cannot really say how far away the latest aim120C can go .

[Tronic]

ajay... i'm pretty sure the F-16's don't get AESA.

[troung]

"It was after the Kargil War when PAF F-16s were locked on at maximum range by a BVRAAM armed Mig-29 that kept them at bay that the famed Fulcrum got the nick name ‘Falcon Hunter’ in IAF circles."

Cute. So that would make USAF/RNAF F-16s "MiG-29 killers" right?

You know the USAF/RNAF F-16s have shot down MiG-29s but no MiG-29 has shot down an F-16.

"ajay... i'm pretty sure the F-16's don't get AESA."

The UAEAF F-16E/F B-60 has the APG-80 which is an AESA set, oh yeah and it also has an IRST as well along with CFTs.

"The Mig-29 has better Radar aerial target detection range : 80 km as compared to 50-60 km"

The APG-66 (v) 2 has a 130km range. The APG-68 (v) 5 has a 140km. That's leaving out the APG-68 (v) 9 and APG-80. FYI the APG-66 (v) is far more common then the old APG-66.

"The Mig-29 has better engines and BVR AAMs than the F-16 "

More F-16s have AIM-120s then MiG-29s have R-77Es. The far and out majority of MiG-29s are limited to the R-27R.

"The Mig-29 has been credited with an F-117 ‘Night Hawk’ kill, so the non-stealth Falcon would be too easy a kill"

Never happened...

"The Mig-29 has better range : High-speed interception range of 410 km as compared to 389 km"

Ok you have really been drinking...

"If the west claims they’re superior to Russia in electronic warfare, the Russians are definitely superior to the west in terms of rocketry and propulsion systems."

Russian missiles have had the lowest hit ratios of any nations type.... the R-13, R-23, R-24, R-40, R-60 and R-27R have all blown in REAL life...


What is with morons opeing this topic over and over again....

[Bill]

"ajay... i'm pretty sure the F-16's don't get AESA."

The Block60 Falcons have AESA radar.

[indianbomb]

Torng, I agree that the F-16s have kills against the Fulcrum. However you have to also see the scenario and the opposition in which the kills were made. I dont consider Arab air forces as quality opposition. I am damn sure that if they flew the falcon and the Israelis/US flew the Migs you would still make the kills. You cant put a camel driver into a cadillac and expect him to beat a schumacher.

[MIKEMUN]

[QUOTE=indianbomb]Torng, I agree that the F-16s have kills against the Fulcrum. However you have to also see the scenario and the opposition in which the kills were made. I dont consider Arab air forces as quality opposition. I am damn sure that if they flew the falcon and the Israelis/US flew the Migs you would still make the kills. You cant put a camel driver into a cadillac and expect him to beat a schumacher.[/QUOTE]

Very bad analogy...A lot of camel drivers now have Caddies... And you don't race in a caddilac in Formula One...