MiG-29 vs. F-18

**Jimmy** · 23 Jan 06,, 20:20

Originally Posted by Rusky

Doesn't seem that way.

Well, now I'm concerned that a random internet person doesnt trust me. Whatever will I do?

Yeah, right, but how will an aircraft with a max speed of mach 1.9 stay ahead of a missile traveling at mach 4.5

The point is that they dont have to stay ahead of it for very long.

Anything but yellow press supporting that?

Well, I've heard it from several places, including one guy who was THERE, and I have yet to see/hear any evidence to contradict it. Just a lot of inferiority-complex whining.

I agree, but the thing is an american missile can't do this either and at 100 km Mig-29 can lock on to the F-18 and fire the missile, so how does the AESA give F-18 an advantage in this case?

Nobody said the American missile can do it. That's the difference. Somebody made the claim and I called them on it. I'm not completely spun up on technical pros/cons of AESA/PESA systems, but from a reliability standpoint at least, AESA is superior. Probably beam-steering too. I'm not even bothering to continue the argument that the ADDER is capable of a successful engagement at 60+ miles. Its really not worth the effort. Arguing on the internet...

Yet, still irrelivant to the discussion and completely ridiculus.[/QUOTE]

**highsea** · 23 Jan 06,, 20:33

Originally Posted by Insomniac

...5. Russian military aviation is equal, if not, better than that of the US.

Ermm, Russian military aviation is almost an oxymoron. The Kuznetsov can't get out of port, and only has something like 11 (marginally) operable SU-33's left anyway, and no intention to replace any airframes. The PVO hasn't introduced any new AC in significant numbers in a c.o.o.n's age, and has only upgraded a handful of planes in the last 20 years.

Sukhoi may be doing well as a company, but it's foreign sales that's responsible for that, not Russian orders.

Technologically, Russia lags seriously in signal processing, integrated avionics, LO technology, radar and engine design, just to name a couple areas. Russian NCTR still uses fan blade counting, for crying out loud. There's a reason that India went elsewhere for the cockpit of their Flankers.

While Russia was first with a helmet mounted sight for IR missiles, the American JHMCS is a complete helmet mounted HUD, vs. just a crosshair in the HMS. Not even comparable.

You guys talk like a tech demon is the same as a production AC. The 1.44 and SU37 are just testbeds. I might as well talk about how badass the F-23 is, and how it can take out anything in the air, lol. The 1.44 and SU37 were never even fitted out with weapons. The 1.44 flew for all of 15 minutes, and never even retracted the landing gear. Hardly a threat, except maybe to the test pilot. The sole flying example of an SU37 crashed in the Paris Air Show.

We have something over 70 Raptors in service now, with new AC coming off the line at the rate of 2-3 per month. The first production model F-35 will fly this year, sometime around July-August. These are examples of actual combat aircraft, not tech demonstrators. Anyone who has been involved in AC development knows that a tech demon is nothing like the finished product, and usually bears only a superficial resemblance.

So no, Russian military aviation is nowhere close to the US.

**Rusky** · 23 Jan 06,, 20:41

But we will have PAK-FA flying in 2007, yes you are ahead of us now, but thats only a momentary development, before the raptor it was not so and now we are catching up. Also although SU-37 can be considered mroe of a testbed, the SU-35 that are going to be modified with 3D TVC engines and many other features of the SU-37 are actual combat aircraft that will benefit from the testing done on SU-37.

**highsea** · 23 Jan 06,, 20:55

Originally Posted by Rusky

But we will have PAK-FA flying in 2007....

You hope. And like I said, a tech demon is just a tech demon. Wait until the Pak-fa is in production before you count your chickens.

The best indications so far are that the Pak-fa, if it ever actually enters production, will still be based on the SU-47, which used the forward fuselage and twin tails of the standard flanker series. If this holds true for Pak-fa, it will not have anything like the F-22's LO properties. But we can't know until we see it- right now, everything is speculation.

BTW, for Garry- regarding the RCS values- the B-2 and F-22 are similar at -40 dbsm (as reported by AWST). The Air Force only says publicly "about the size of a marble". You can decide for yourself how big of a marble they are referring to. The standard for future development (such as X-45/47 UCAV) is -70 dbsm. That translates to .0000001 m^2.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 23 Jan 06,, 21:07

Originally Posted by Rusky

So basically, you don't know. The presence of a goal does not reflect the capabilities.

Uh, from what I hear it is damn good at that job. It isn't speculation.

You don't!!!! So far most of us here use some comparisons like "bee" ... or "bird" or I heard here about "golf ball".... Try to clear up yourself from propoganda. Tell - "I don't know what RCS of B-2 or F-22 is! It is classified! BUT I ASSUME IT TO BE VERY LOW in enemies radar

Could you at least not rant when you post? Its better for people to understand what your talking about. And yes, I will take fault. I implied I assumed (I said I didn't know), but I guess I will have to say that all out flatly.

5. Russian military aviation is equal, if not, better than that of the US

In what respect? Did that have anything to do with the discussion? No. In BVR, the F/A-18E/F is the winner. WVR, the MiG-29 will most likely win. But we all know BVR is more important.

But we will have PAK-FA flying in 2007, yes you are ahead of us now, but thats only a momentary development, before the raptor it was not so and now we are catching up. Also although SU-37 can be considered mroe of a testbed, the SU-35 that are going to be modified with 3D TVC engines and many other features of the SU-37 are actual combat aircraft that will benefit from the testing done on SU-37.

How do you know if it is going to catch-up or even fly then? According to sources, the military isn't even funding it at the level they said they would. As for the Su-35, I'll tell you that an Su-35 is no match for a F-22, no matter what time of day it is. The Su-35 is pretty much the pinacle of stuff you can get out of that airframe. There's no room left to expand. Its matured unlike the F-22 which has plenty of room to expand and further develop its capabilities.

**Rusky** · 23 Jan 06,, 22:14

Originally Posted by The_Burning_Kid

Uh, from what I hear it is damn good at that job. It isn't speculation.

Yeah, it actually is.

How do you know if it is going to catch-up or even fly then? According to sources, the military isn't even funding it at the level they said they would. As for the Su-35, I'll tell you that an Su-35 is no match for a F-22, no matter what time of day it is. The Su-35 is pretty much the pinacle of stuff you can get out of that airframe. There's no room left to expand. Its matured unlike the F-22 which has plenty of room to expand and further develop its capabilities.

I am not comparing Su-35 with F-22, either way, what the military tells us is that the development of PAK-FA is going according to the graphic.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 23 Jan 06,, 23:29

Originally Posted by Rusky

Yeah, it actually is.

They wouldn't say the B-2 is capable of evading radar and slipping through air defenses if it couldn't.

I am not comparing Su-35 with F-22, either way, what the military tells us is that the development of PAK-FA is going according to the graphic.

I doubt it. It's only been around a few years, and they expect to have a flying 5th generation aircraft out yet?

**Rusky** · 24 Jan 06,, 02:56

Originally Posted by The_Burning_Kid

They wouldn't say the B-2 is capable of evading radar and slipping through air defenses if it couldn't.

Yeah, maybe, but it all goes down to what model of radar?

I doubt it. It's only been around a few years, and they expect to have a flying 5th generation aircraft out yet?

2007 will be a working prototype, 2010 production will begin.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 24 Jan 06,, 03:24

Originally Posted by Rusky

Yeah, maybe, but it all goes down to what model of radar?

That has yet to be released and there are too many radar types to list them all.

2007 will be a working prototype, 2010 production will begin.

I doubt so still. They haven't even begun construction on it yet. It will take more than a year to do just that.

**Rusky** · 24 Jan 06,, 04:23

Originally Posted by The_Burning_Kid

I doubt so still. They haven't even begun construction on it yet. It will take more than a year to do just that.

How do you know that? How do you know that they haven't begun the construction? Did Lockheed tell everyone then they begun the construction?

**avon1944** · 24 Jan 06,, 08:41

Originally Posted by Captain Drunk

Iranian engineers have considered retrofitting the Russian-designed .....
the Tomcat’s pre-digital-age AN/AWG-9 radar with a contemporary Russian model, such as the Phazotron N010 Zhuk or the NIIP N011M Bars.

I knew for many years the Iranian AF worked with the Soviet AF. There is a satellite photograph on the internet showing an F-14 at Ramenskoye flight test center near Moscow!

Originally Posted by Captain Drunk

the Mig-29 is matched more with an F-14, a fighter of its class and type, clearly superior to any F-18 variants.

No, the Mig.-29 is NOT superior to the F/A-18. Each has areas of strength and weaknesses. They are closely matched.

Originally Posted by Captain Drunk

Russians who bought off a few Tomcats from Iran for testing, found their Migs had superior qualities.

I did know the Soviets purchased some Tomcats, I did know that back in the 1980's the USSR lended technical assistance to the Iranian AF in exchange for the opportunity to examine the F-14A Tomcat and Phoenix Missile.

As far as the F-22's supercruise, the USAF did several studies on aerial combat and they found that an aircraft traveling around the battle space at speeds of Mach I.4 or higher has little to fear from being shot down by and enemy who is "not" in his forward hemisphere!
Now, I will admit I don't understand all the dynamics involved with aerial combat but, that is the reason the F-22 has a minimum supercruise speed of Mach 1.4.

Adrian

**~~Sameer~~** · 24 Jan 06,, 14:48

The MiG-29A can dance around a Tomcat but who the heck ever said that a Tomcat is better than an F-18?

It would be a close fight btw the mig and hornet but i will put my money on the hornet.

The Super Hornet vs MiG-29M2 is probably more interesting again i will give it to the Hornett by a slight margin.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 24 Jan 06,, 21:16

Originally Posted by Rusky

How do you know that? How do you know that they haven't begun the construction? Did Lockheed tell everyone then they begun the construction?

Uh, common sense. And yes they actually did tell when they began construction (not exactly but in what year).

**Rusky** · 24 Jan 06,, 21:30

Originally Posted by The_Burning_Kid

Uh, common sense. And yes they actually did tell when they began construction (not exactly but in what year).

Common sense? Basically your opinion, that isn't worth anything.

**The_Burning_Kid** · 24 Jan 06,, 21:47

Originally Posted by Rusky

Common sense? Basically your opinion, that isn't worth anything.

In RL, sure but does yours matter either? Don't think so.

View Poll Results: MiG-29 or F-18

Thread: MiG-29 vs. F-18

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

RE: MiG-29 vs. F-18

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

FIGHTER OF THE CENTURARY : MiG – 21 The “Hunter Killer”

IAF MiG 29 Baaz Vs F16 blk 50+. F 15 E

Now, MiG engines may light homes

MiG 1.42 MFI “RAPTOR KILLER” : THE F-22 SLAYER

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions