Fighter performance; actual plane analysis

[adriann]

I have already read "Fighter performance in practice; Phantom vs MiG-21" at eBay (Fighter Performance in Practice: F-4 Phantom vs MIG-21 - eBay (item 290477872650 end time Oct-20-10 05:49:04 PDT), but I think it can be downloaded free on net),
can somebody recommend any similar title where one can learn something useful ?

[USSWisconsin]

Hi Adriann, Please drop in at the member introduction forum and introduce yourself, it is considered the first step in being part of the WAB

[Stitch]

The best book I've read on this so far (though it's a bit pricey) is Robert L. Shaw's Fighter Combat: Tactics And Maneuvering ; I'm pretty sure choggy's read it, too.

[adriann]

Hello all,
Shaw's Fighter Combat is great book, but now I'm talking about detalied comparison of actual war competitors. Not just: F-86 is more maneuverable (? instantaneous, sustained, higher g-limt ? at which speeds?) or MiG-23 is faster (at what altitude, in level flight or in dive...)...
Any such comparison between F-100/MiG-19 ?

[Chogy]

Hi Adriann - what you'd really need are the jets' actual operating manuals, containing reams of data, specifically EM (Energy - Maneuverability) diagrams that can be overlayed with each other. Actual charts of acceleration, ceiling, other hard numbers. Along with those, you'd need a lot of time to dig the information you seek from them, because it is often buried.

Literally, you'd need access to a major State's archives of this stuff, both classified and unclassified.

If you can find EM diagrams, that would be the place to start. They were and are invaluable tools, almost magic, when they appeared and became common. Thank Col John Boyd for their existence.

[adriann]

Maybe article helps understanding 21 family abilities...

[Chogy]

Interesting read, but definitely biased in favor of the MiG. Constant Peg (now declassified) was the program that allowed U.S. fighter aircraft to combat the MiG-21 (among others) in Nevada, and my impressions of the MiG-21 as an adversary were favorable... MUCH superior to the woeful MiG-23. Like all fighters with a primarily delta-winged planform, its instantaneous turn rate is excellent, but turn rate (degrees per second) fell off rapidly after 120 to 180 degrees, and the ability to sustain an effective turn was extremely limited. An F-14, 15, 16, 18 would own the vertical.

Even the mighty F-15 Eagle had no solution in dogfight below 150-250 knots against MiG-21 in US Agressor hands

This statement is patently ludicrous, and vs the F/A-18, the situation for the MiG-21 was even worse.

That said, the MiG-21 was ahead of its time when it was introduced, and its longevity is a testimony to its excellent design. It's fatal design flaw, which makes it now obsolete, is the lack of space for an effective radar; and its internal fuel load made its ability to sustain any sort of a fight very suspect.

That, and I've always wondered why every MiG designed before the -29 had horrific visibility. Take a basic MiG-21, raise the cockpit, add a better canopy, equip with all-aspect IR missiles and a helmet-mounted sight, and you'd have a reasonably effective day fighter suitable for defensive operations.

[adriann]

You' re right, visibility was limited. These flaws are, maybe corrected in these Chinese derivatives... lack of equipment space was a problem, similarly like in other light a/c, maybe fuel fraction is not so bad, but poor lift at low AOA is feature of delta wing. But 21's high T/W helps as well as big wing area, so sustained turns are among the best of its generation. Delta a/c usualy have low dyn. directional stability limiting AOA to ~ 15 deg, but not in MiG-21. Soviet pilot manuals were very conservative, they limited instantaneous turns to average.
Comparison with F-15 is cited from Red Eagles book from people who tested both in mock combat.

[Chogy]

Adrian, I read your PDF from start to finish. As I mentioned, it was written with some sort of agenda in mind, and all I can think of is that it is some sort of a position paper to upgrade MiG-21's rather than purchase more expensive fighters. As a concept, that really isn't bad, but again, you must realize that you'd be limited to a short-ranged day fighter, utterly helpless at night, and incapable of any sort of offensive operation. If that's what a nation seeks, then it yields the night... completely.

I was an F-15 pilot, and I did combat the MiG-21 in mock combat, flown by the very best USAF pilots. That is why I stated that quote was ludicrous. In terms of a high AOA fight, the only platform we feared was the F/A-18. I'd be more concerned about a well-handled MiG-17 if it were equipped with modern missiles, but again, that ignores the vertical, which is the exclusive providence of high thrust/weight fighters. The vertical can be simply described as powering over the top, pirhouetting or repositioning, while the target wallows helplessly below, trying to jack his nose upwards to follow.

Regardless, only a fool gets sucked into a regime where his aircraft is at a disadvantage, whatever the platform. You don't scissor with an F/A-18, you conserve your energy and work the fight upwards. The F/A-18 cannot follow.

The statement at the end of the document postulating 50:1 kill ratio vs modern U.S. fighters is evidence of a lack of real analysis.

As I mentioned, the MiG-21 was well ahead of its time. Whether by luck or brilliant engineering, the MiG design bureau produced a very capable machine, worthy of respect. But time and technology has left it behind, as the F-22 has left almost all other platforms behind, including the "teen" series of U.S. fighter aircraft.

[GGTharos]

Delta a/c usualy have low dyn. directional stability limiting AOA to ~ 15 deg, but not in MiG-21. Soviet pilot manuals were very conservative, they limited instantaneous turns to average.

... because MiG-21's are magical?

Comparison with F-15 is cited from Red Eagles book from people who tested both in mock combat.

The F-15 only has one A2A gun kill to its credit. The BFM was against a MIG-21, which turned out to be entirely incapable of out-turning an F-15.
The MiG-21 has great nose Authority and high AoA controllability, but guess what: After that little trick (which seems common to many Russian fighters) expires - ie. it is seen in use once or twice, the F-15 drivers will wise up, take the right spacing and mug as many MiG-21's as you can manufacture. It won't even be a fight ... not that the F-15 has been doing it to every highly maneuverable Russian fighter it's met so far-oh wait.

You have to be careful with analyses that don't in fact reflect reality ;)

[Stitch]

I have zero eperience in BFM, but I have to respect chogy's position; he's been there in the sh!t and fought against dissimilar opponents. Besides the fact that the F-15 is probably the second best A-to-A platform in the world (I'll let you guess which one is the best), I have a hard time believing a Russian fighter (no matter how inspired the design is) designed in the '50's could POSSIBlY best a US fighter designed in the '70's, and that with only one thing in mind: beat the Russian fighters to the punch, no matter what. Admittedly, it usually comes down to pilot training, no matter how good the platform is, but US pilots are probably (I did say PROBABLY) the best-trained pilots in the world, even in BFM; so a scenario where the MiG-21 could best a -15 is HIGHLY unlikely.

[adriann]

Nice replies, thanks.
Concerning F-15, one has nothing to do but to admire to the beautiful design. I did not want to believe that old a/c as MiG-21 could have anything that can harm Eagle. But nature does not have respect to anything and one learns that it is all matter of compromises.
I attached some excerpts from book from which it can be seen that there must be something. I also read some Russian papers where it says that some Syrians for example flew 21 to zero airspeed fearing of no plane. Probably it is impossible to find out their experience or somebody's else tough enough. What cited F-15 pilot describes nose heavy because of heavier radar it is in fact longitudinal superstablity because of low horizontal tail and lack of LEX or high sweep wing.
Trouble with vertical is (I assume that mock combat was done with winning scenario achieving guns only envelope positioning) that if 'bad' guy is armed with missile, especially if of newer generations, blue guy in front will be exposed to "Atoll" head.
Fact that Soviet R-73 IC AAM was oversighted by US Intelligence was serious blow to Western security. I imagine that CIA/DIA were, as usual, busy setting governments in other countries.
During last half of '70s AIMVAL/ACEVAL tests were conducted. In simulations F-15 with AIM-9J (newer generations IC head) against MiG-21 with earlier gen. say AIM-9B achieved 18:1 kill ratio. When AIM-82 (R-73 equivalent) was used in F-15, kill ratio jumped to 955:1. That's why I was conservative estimating 50:1 ratio advantage for MiG-21/R-73 combination.

[Chogy]

Adriann, I appreciate your enthusiasm. Did you write the paper?

That very first word in your post: "Geisler" - That is "Paco" Geisler, my commander (and friend) when I was in the 58th TFS. One of the best pilots I knew, and an absolutely outstanding CO. We flew together, and along with squadron mates, lived and breathed this stuff for my few lucky years in the Eagle.

I really don't know what else to say. I have rightly praised the design. I really couldn't care less what the Soviet flight manuals say about the platform; all I knew was that it was dated in 1986, and it is even more dated now. I don't mean to be cruel, it's just reality.

Your postulated combat assumes a neutral 1 vs. 1 in a sterile environment. This does not happen in the real world. What makes modern fighters so much more effective (even ignoring BVR completely for the moment) is their situational awareness and teamwork arriving at a merge. They know where the opponent is, what their formation looks like, the numbers, spacing, even the type. A flight of MiG-21's would arrive at the merge relatively clueless, even assuming some sort of AWACS or GCI system advising them.

[GGTharos]

Nice replies, thanks.
Concerning F-15, one has nothing to do but to admire to the beautiful design. I did not want to believe that old a/c as MiG-21 could have anything that can harm Eagle. But nature does not have respect to anything and one learns that it is all matter of compromises.

Yes, fighters are. But your article is very biased - note the passage you highlighted. Maneuverability is NOT measured in that way, not in the least. Yes, that is a measure of the slow, high AoA envelope of fighter combat, but it is but one small part of the envelope. The MiG-21 is certainly not more maneuverable other than that particular regime, and everything else goes to the Eagle. Basically the idea here is that unless the Eagle pilot messes up, the slow fight isn't even a factor. I'll add that the F-15 can also float around at 115kts (even less) at the right weight, but that wouldn't be a combat-loaded F-15. Realize that in a merge, the MiG-21 is double-inferior: The F-15 will out-sustain it in a turn (higher g in a sustained speed level turn ... g = turn rate) and out-climb it. If the bandit goes super-slow the Eagle has but to extend slightly and climb where the MiG can't follow. Eventually the MiG has to drops it's nose and it's game over.
I'll repeat it again: You have to sucker that Eagle pilot into a flat scissors, which you might be able to do with a Rookie, buuuuut :)

I attached some excerpts from book from which it can be seen that there must be something. I also read some Russian papers where it says that some Syrians for example flew 21 to zero airspeed fearing of no plane. Probably it is impossible to find out their experience or somebody's else tough enough. What cited F-15 pilot describes nose heavy because of heavier radar it is in fact longitudinal superstablity because of low horizontal tail and lack of LEX or high sweep wing.

Flying it to zero airspeed implies a tail-slide. In combat, unless you've sucked someone in, slow = dead. You cannot move into of a gun pipper and you cannot perform an out-of-plane maneuver against a missile. You are LITERALLY a sitting duck.

Trouble with vertical is (I assume that mock combat was done with winning scenario achieving guns only envelope positioning) that if 'bad' guy is armed with missile, especially if of newer generations, blue guy in front will be exposed to "Atoll" head.

The guns envelope position is important, because you'll pretty much rmin all missiles ...

Fact that Soviet R-73 IC AAM was oversighted by US Intelligence was serious blow to Western security. I imagine that CIA/DIA were, as usual, busy setting governments in other countries.
During last half of '70s AIMVAL/ACEVAL tests were conducted. In simulations F-15 with AIM-9J (newer generations IC head) against MiG-21 with earlier gen. say AIM-9B achieved 18:1 kill ratio. When AIM-82 (R-73 equivalent) was used in F-15, kill ratio jumped to 955:1. That's why I was conservative estimating 50:1 ratio advantage for MiG-21/R-73 combination.

Not a good estimation for a pretty simple reason here: The MiG-21 cannot set up as easily against the F-15 (low SA). Even F-16's vs fulcrums didn't suffer that much, and further as you may be aware (or maybe not?) a single F-22 with only its 2x9M's (AMRAAMs expended upon previous engagement) happened upon 4x F-16 bandits with 9X, whooped up on two with the gun, another two with sidewinders, mutual-killing with the last one.

This is the fate of the MiG-21 as well due to its lower SA, despite R-73.

You can't simply slap a new missile on it and say 'oh, it's better' ... if this was true, there would be no Su-27's, no MiG-29/35, no PAK-FA, no F-15's, no Raptors. Any notion that a MiG-21 can have a serious advantage over an Eagle is simply pure fantasy in any type of high-aspect/neutral setting. The only way for a MiG-21 to have a real chance is with numbers and ambush - ie. forcing many superior numbers of MiG-21's at WVR ranges so the Eagles can't thin'em out ahead of time. It is a cheap point-defense fighter. It cannot and will not ever be anything more.

[Stitch]

Even F-16's vs fulcrums didn't suffer that much, and further as you may be aware (or maybe not?) a single F-22 with only its 2x9M's (AMRAAMs expended upon previous engagement) happened upon 4x F-16 bandits with 9X, whooped up on two with the gun, another two with sidewinders, mutual-killing with the last one.

I seem to remember this engagement; was it Red Flag a few years ago? IIRC, the Raptor took out a few F-15's with it's AIM-120D's, and on egress happened upon the luckless Vipers and took them out more or less before they realized what hit them.