Tôi cần thông tin về MIG29

http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id249.htm
27. Raid on Libya
Copyright 2000 Jason Manning All Rights Reserved
An F-111F in flight over the Gulf of Sidra
On April 14, 1986 at 17:36 Greenwich Mean Time, twenty four F-111Fs of the USAF 48th Tactical Fighter Wing took off from the Royal Air Force base at Lakenheath, England. Twenty eight refueling tankers took to the air from bases at Mildenhall and Fairford, while five EF-111 Ravens equipped with high-tech jamming equipment soared skyward from a fourth base. Operation El Dorado Canyon was underway. The target: Libya. The American aircraft roaring through the English skies that evening were embarked on what would become the longest fighter combat mission in the history of military aviation, and the first major USAF combat mission in more than a decade.
The Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, had been an enthusiastic sponsor of terrorist acts against the West for years. The son of a Bedouin shepherd, he became an officer in the Libyan army and in 1968 led a successful coup to overthrow King Idris. A self-proclaimed mystic and prophet of Islam, Gaddafi's grandiose vision was the creation of a Great Arab Nation encompassing all of North Africa, powerful enough to destroy Israel and punish the United States for its many sins against the Arab world. Purchasing over $12 billion worth of Soviet military hardware, Gaddafi in turn supported terrorists of all stripes -- the Irish Republican Army, Basque ETA separatists, Colombian M19 guerrillas -- maintaining as many as twenty terrorist training camps in Libya. He had given sanctuary to the Black September murderers of eleven Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics and to the Palestinian terrorist mastermind, Abi Nidal. It was Nidal who orchestrated Libyan-sponsored terrorist bloodbaths at the Rome and Vienna airports in December 1985 that left twenty people, four of them Americans, dead.
The U.S. and Libya had clashed before -- in 1981, when Gaddafi launched an air strike against provocative American naval maneuvers in the Gulf of Sidra, international waters that Gaddafi claimed for Libya. Two Soviet-built SU-22 fighters were shot down. That same year, U.S. intelligence learned that Libyan hit squads would be dispatched to assassinate Reagan and other government officials. Though some anti-terrorist experts suggested that a covert operation to kill Gaddafi was doable, this was not an alternative available to Reagan. He had promised to adhere to Executive Order No. 12333, issued in 1976 by President Gerald Ford, which banned the government from engaging in the assassination of world leaders.
In January 1986 Gaddafi proclaimed a "line of death" across the Gulf of Sidra, warning that if American ships or planes crossed that line they would be destroyed. In March the U.S. responded with Operation Prairie Fire, consisting of 45 ships and 200 planes. Aircraft from the Sixth Fleet's three carriers, Saratoga, Coral Sea and America, made forays across the "line of death." Then three surface vessels crossed the line, supported by planes overhead and Los Angeles-class attack submarines beneath the surface. On Monday, March 24, the Libyans fired several SA-5 surface-to-air missiles, but none came close to hitting an American target because they were diverted by jamming devices carried by EA-6B Prowler aircraft. Vice Admiral Frank Kelso, Sixth Fleet's commander, waited until dark to respond. A pair of A-6 Intruders from the America hit a Libyan attack boat with HARMs (high-speed anti-radiation missiles). Several more Libyan vessels venturing near the fleet the following morning were struck, with one confirmed destroyed. Reagan congratulated the airmen and sailors of the Sixth Fleet, some of whom wore "Terrorist Buster" t-shirts and buttons, for a job well done, and on Thursday, March 28, the naval "exercises" were concluded. There were no American casualties; 56 Libyans had been killed.
A Newsweek poll revealed that three out of every four Americans believed the U.S. attacks on Libyan boats and missile batteries were justified, while two-thirds feared that Gaddafi would retaliate. On March 25, Gaddafi ordered his embassies (or "people's bureaus") in East Berlin, Paris, Rome and Madrid to carry out terrorist action against Americans. At a mass rally in Tripoli, Gaddafi declared Libya to be in a state of war with the United States, and the crowd was entertained with the slaughtering of an ox with Reagan's name painted on its side. Less than a week later, 21-year-old Army Sergeant Kenneth Ford of Detroit was slain when a bomb blast ripped through Berlin's La Belle discotheque, a nightclub frequented by American servicemen.
The National Security Agency used high-tech eavesdropping equipment to intercept three secret messages between Tripoli and European-based Libyan agents. Libya's diplomatic code had been broken, and the messages made it clear that Gaddafi was behind the bombing of the Berlin disco. On April 7, Reagan met with his chief aides to discuss an appropriate response to the Libyan terrorist act. "The president had maps all over the floor of the Oval Office," recalled Edwin Meese III, U.S. Attorney General and Reagan's close friend, in order to select potential targets. These included airbases at Tripoli and Benine, naval bases at Taranbulas and Benghazi, a terrorist training camp at Sidi Balal, and the Bab al Azizia barracks where Gaddafi often stayed in a Bedouin tent equipped with telephones, heaters and a television set.
Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher signed off on the use of British bases in the operation, but Spain and France refused to grant American warplanes overflight permission; this meant the planes would have to fly 2,800 miles to reach their targets, and be refueled five times in the air. Italian Prime Minister Bettino Craxi spoke for many European leaders when he expressed concern that any American retaliation would simply trigger more terrorist acts in reprisal. But the Reagan administration was determined to act. It felt that someone had to take a stand against worldwide terrorism that had run rampant in the Eighties. Gaddafi and others like him, said the president, had to be given "incentives . . . to alter [their] criminal behavior."
Those "incentives" were provided on the evening of Monday, April 14, as the F-111s from the British bases joined a dozen A-6 strike aircraft launched from the carriers Coral Sea and America and thundered through Libyan anti-aircraft fire to drop more than 60 tons of laser-guided bombs on five targets. Five F-111s hit Gaddafi's barracks compound with sixteen 2,000-lb. Paveway II gravity bombs. Five more American warplanes struck the military sector of the Tripoli International Airport. Army barracks and an airfield at Benina and the naval port at Sidi Bilal were also bombed. The raid lasted eleven minutes. Four Libyan MIG-23 interceptors, five Il-76 transports and two Mi-8 Hip helicopters were destroyed. Libyan radio reported many casualties, including Gaddafi's 18-month-old adopted daughter Hana. An F-111 was destroyed by a Libyan SAM (surface-to-air missile); pilot Captain Fernando Ribas-Dominicci and weapons system officer Captain Paul Lorence were killed.
President Reagan made a televised address to the nation later that evening. "I said that we would act . . . to ensure that terrorists have no sanctuary anywhere," he said. "Tonight, we have." Polling showed the American people overwhelmingly approved of the raid, though there were some who concurred with former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski who complained that "we haven't really dealt a blow to terrorism; we've just made ourselves feel good." In Britain, Prime Minister Thatcher was roundly criticized for going against the advice of her cabinet and supporting the American strike. In the House of Commons she stood firm -- like a "lioness in a den of Daniels," said the London Times -- against shouts of disapproval from opposition members. The Iron Lady felt she owed Reagan for U.S. support during the Falklands War, and she knew Gaddafi was giving aid to the IRA.
There were repercussions; three hostages were executed by Arab Revolutionary Cell gunmen in Lebanon, two of them British teachers and the third an American, Peter Kilburn, while William Cokals, a U.S. embassy official, was shot down in the streets of Khartoum, Sudan. For a time there was widespread concern that terrorist revenge attacks would occur on American soil, and experts warned that the U.S. was woefully unprepared to deal with such a contingency. The attacks never came.
The Soviet Union responded to the raid by canceling scheduled talks between Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze and Secretary of State George Shultz that were intended to formalize plans for a summit meeting between Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, who promised Gaddafi that the USSR would help Libya strengthen its military defenses. But Gaddafi, described by Reagan as the "mad dog of the Middle East," was strangely subdued in the aftermath of the raid. According to Secretary Shultz, the administration's leading proponent of strong action against Libya, Gaddafi "retreated into the desert." An Arab diplomat told Donald Gregg, national security adviser to Vice-President George Bush, that when Gaddafi was seen "carrying the body of his dead child out of the wreckage, he lost all stature because it as shown that he couldn't protect his family." For whatever reason, Gaddafi acted with uncharacteristic restraint in the years that followed. According to a 1989 Department of State Bulletin, while terrorist activity continued on the rise in 1987 and 1988, Libyan-sponsored terrorist acts declined significantly.
Psychological Warfare
In 1986, CIA and State Department political officers proposed encouraging a coup against Muammar Gaddafi -- a plan supported by CIA Director William Casey, National Security Adviser John Poindexter, and Secretary of State George Shultz. President Reagan authorized a campaign of disinformation and destabilization which included CIA operations to aid and abet Libyan dissidents and exiles. The CIA and NSC leaked false information about Gaddafi, implying that he was impotent, insane, and a cross-dresser. The campaign came under fire when the Washington Post revealed the details of the scheme on October 2, 1986.
Mike,

Lính đánh thuê, danh nghĩa là phi công huấn luyện. Điều thú vị là cả Su-27 của Ethiopia và MiG-29 của Eritrea đều mua của công ty xuất khẩu vũ khí Rosvoorouzhenie của Nga, Ukraine chỉ cung cấp phi công cho Eritrea.
Copy được đoạn này từ www.acig.org, trong đó có nói về nữ phi công bắn rơi thày dạy cũ của mình, nhưng không nói rõ cô này là người Nga hay Ethitopian (theo tên thì có lẽ không phải người Nga)
Sukhoi Contra MiG
With the re-appearance of the EtAF fighters over the battlefield, it became clear to the Eritreans and their Ukrainian instructors, that they would have to fight down the newly-arrived Ethiopian Su-27s, or the ErAF would not be able to effectively support the war effort. Therefore, on the morning of 25 February four MiG-29s were sent to intercept two Su-27s which were patrolling along the front-lines at Badme. Both Sukhois, flown by Russian pilots, detected the appearance of their opponents in time and attempted to disengage, when - all of a sudden - they came under an attack by several R-27/AA-10 missiles. None of the weapons fired by the Eritreans hit, but after evading them, the Russians decided to turn back and fight. The lead acquired the enemy and fired what was reported as a "salvo" of R-27s, targeting one MiG-29 after the other. However, all the missiles missed and the only result was that the Eritreans were forced to break their attack - only to be pounced by the faster Su-27s. The result of following dog-fight was one Eritrean MiG-29 shot down, probably by an R-73/AA-11 IR-homing, short range air-to-air missile. The fate of the pilot, rumoured to have been the commander of the Eritrean Air Force, was not reported by either side.
Only 24 hours later, a new - but highly interesting - engagement developed over the Badme area. This time, a lonesome Su-27S, flown by female pilot Capt. Aster Tolossa, was escorting several MiG-21s on a strike mission, when a single aircraft was detected, closing from the direction of Asmara. Capt. Tolossa turned to intercept and identified the target as an - apparently unarmed - Eritrean MiG-29UB. After some maneuvering, during which there was some kind of communications exchange between the crew of the MiG and the Sukhoi, the Ethiopian was high at enemy's 6 o'clock, when she realized that the pilot of the aircraft in front of her was her former instructor. Capt. Tolossa immediately warned him that she was about to shot him down, and requested the Eritrean to land at Debre Zeit. He disobeyed, and Tolossa pulled the trigger. Exactly which weapon was used this time remains unknown, but it is highly likely that the Ethiopian used at least two air-to-air missiles, both of which were evaded, and then finished the target with 30mm gunfire. The Eritrean pilot was certainly experienced enough to evade two missiles, and he also knew who and where was the enemy. While it remains unknown if anybody ejected from that MiG-29UB, it is certain that Capt. Tolossa was given a hero's wellcome back at her base; with right, then she was the first female fighter-pilot to show down an enemy fighter-jet in the history of air warfare.

Các đời MIG sau hình như không phổ biến lắm không thấy xuất khẩu ra nước ngoài nhỉ!

lâu lắm rồi không nghiên cứu về máy bay, nhưng thực ra thì MiG-31 có xuất khẩu. MiG-31 được sản xuất ban đầu chỉ với mục đích là máy bay đánh chặn (interceptor) từ xa (tên lửa không đối không của nó thuộc diện mạnh nhất và xa nhất thế giới), và đặc biệt có khẳ năng lock được tới 8 mục tiêu một lúc. MiG-31 loại này hiện chỉ được dùng để bảo vệ vùng trời Moscow và một số trọng điểm khác của Nga. Nhược điểm của MiG-31 là rất khó bảo trì, khả năng xuống cấp rất nhanh.
Hình như phiên bản xuất khẩu là MiG-31BM thì phải, loại này cực kì phê, có khả năng tấn công mặt đất, xác định được một lúc 24 mục tiêu (tiêu diệt được đồng thời8 mục tiêu, radar của nó rất mạnh). Tốc độ thì vẫn là loại nhanh nhất thế giới (Mach 2.8)
Còn MiG-35 hay MFI hay MiG1.41, 1.44 gì đó thì là phiên bản dựa trên nền của MiG-29, là loại máy bay tàng hình, cánh tam giác, cánh vịt ở phía trước (dáng giống như EF2000 nhưng to hơn nhiều). Loại này mới thấy trưng bày, chưa sản xuất rộng rãi thì phải.
MiG29M và MiG-29K thì chưa thấy đề cập đến xuất khẩu, tuy nhiên có các hợp đồng nâng cấp các MiG-29 cũ lên hai loại này. Nhưng thực chất là gần như mông má lại toàn bộ, vì MiG-29M/K có vỏ khác, động cơ khác, cánh to hơn, chỉ có mỗi cái dáng cũ.

Flanker

Cách đây khoảng 1 or 2 năm (không nhớ rỏ lắm) Nga đồng ý bán cho NC từ 6 - 8 Mig-31 loại multirole, không biết việc này đến đâu rồi? Có bác nào biết không?

Mấy chú cong chưa phân biệt được thế nào cương kích cơ thế nào tiêm kích cơ nữa mà nói cái nào tốt hơn. Su hay Mig? ngốc tệ

HÃY ĐỂ TÔI CHẾT ĐI........​

--------------------------------
To : liemdng
You được bao nhiêu tuổi mà gọi người khác là chú, lại còn tự cao nói người khác là ngốc tệ, thông minh thế thì sao you không giải thích sự hiểu biết hơn người của you ra đi cho người khác học hỏi .......
To: các bạn khác
thông tin về Mig 29 có rất nhiều ở đây:
http://www.ttvnol.com/forum/t_135100/?0.3369863
các bạn cũng sẽ tìm thấy câu trả lời thế nào cường kích, tiêm kích.......
[pink]Còn nếu muốn đọc nguyên bản thì đây nè[/pink]
Introduction: Mig 29 came as a 'shock to the system' for the West. Being completely sure of the air-superiority F-16s and F-15s could provide, NATO at first did not take Fulcrum seriously - some said its just a Soviet attempt to copy F-15 Eagle, even though Fulcrum approximated F-15s and F-16s in the basic flight characteristics. The incredible aerobatic manouvers performed by Mig pilots at various international air shows came as a cause for concern, while testing German Mig 29 A revealed the hidden potential of the aircraft. Helmet mounted targeting system, extreme agility combined with lethal and yet unbeaten R-73 short range heat seeking missiles, gave outdated early versions of Mig 29s considerable superiority over US F-18 Hornets in the short range fights. US built aircraft still had advantage in long range fight, both due to their enhanced avionics and much higher combat radius. If you are interested you can read an article on German Mig 29 test here. The page will go through the history of Mig 29 development: from Mig 29 A and UB to Mig 29 SMT and Mig 35, supplementing it with numerous images and a number of articles.
Mig 29A:


The MiG-29A front-line fighter is designed to destroy air targets mainly within radar coverage limits and also defeat ground targets by unguided weapons in visual flight con***ions.
The fixed wing, with large wing leading-edge root extensions, ensures the aircraft's high takeoff and landing characteristics, maneuverability and controllability at subsonic speeds, including large angles of attack. The MiG-29 was the world's first aircraft to be fitted with engine air intakes, operating in two functional modes. In flight, air is fed to the engines through open air intakes, while moving on the ground, with the closed air intakes, air is then fed through louvres located on the upper surface of the wingroot leading-edge extensions to prevent ingestion of foreign objects, while the aircraft moves along the runway, particularly when operating from poorly prepared airfields.
The aircraft is powered by two RD-33 turbofans. The MiG-29 is the first series front-line fighter equipped with turbofan engines, ensuring a thrust-to-weight ratio of over one and high maneuvering characteristics throughout a wide range of flight altitudes and speeds.
The fighter is equipped with a engagement radar system, comprising:
airborne radar N-019 developed by Phazotron company;
optical locator intended to search, detect, lock on and automatically track air targets. The optical locator comprises an infra-red search/track sensor, a laser rangefinder and a helmet-mounted target designator.
The information and algorithmic integration of the airborne radar with the optical locator into a unified system enabled the designers to develop the system, boasting unique capabilities and having no analog on domestic and foreign fighters. An information exchange between the optical locator and the airborne radar significantly enhanced the jamproofness of the aircraft's sighting system as a whole.
The helmet-mounted target designator, used on the MiG-29 fighter to rapidly lock on air targets visually detected through the ****pit glazing, makes it possible within 1 s to deliver a target designation command to the infra-red search/track sensor or directly to a missile homing head with an accuracy sufficient to effectively use the weapon.
The MiG-29 fighter destroys air targets by air-to-air missiles, while ground targets are defeated by air bombs and unguided rockets.
Missiles R-27 with different guidance system modules are used to deliver long-range air combat.
As a whole, the MiG-29 front-line fighter's armament system is arranged on seven external hardpoints and comprises:
air-to-air medium-range missiles R-27 (up to 2 pcs);
air-to-air short-range missiles R-73, R-60 (up to 6 pcs);
unguided rockets S-5, S-8, S-24 (up to 4 pods);
air bombs weighing up to 3,000 kg;
one 30mm built-in aircraft gun with an ammunition load of 150 rounds.
The optimally matched characteristics of the aircraft, its equipment and armament, successful aircraft design and high engine characteristics enabled the designers to develop a fighter, outperforming existing analogs in terms of a number of indices.
In terms of close air combat, the MiG-29 has some superiority over the USAF F-15C fighter, outperforms the USAF F-16 fighter by 15%, and French Mirage-2000 by 40%.
In terms of long-range air combat, the MiG-29 outperforms the Mirage-2000 fighter by approximately 20% and enjoys overwhelming superiority over the USAF F-16A aircraft (without medium-range missiles).
As a whole, in terms of combat effectiveness, when used against air targets, the MiG-29 fourth-generation front-line fighter meets the standards of the world's best analogs and considerably outperforms the MiG-23M fighter, the most mass-produced domestic third-generation aircraft.
Crew 1 man
Weight take off normal: 14 750 kg; maximum 17,720 kg; maximum combat load 3,000 kg; Fuel 4,300 kg
Speed maximum: near the groud 1,500 km/h; at height 2,400 km/h
Ceiling/climb service ceiling 18,000 m,
Range near ground 700 km; at height 1, 500 km
Take off thrust to weight ration 1.12
G 9.0
Air target detection Range 60 km
Dimensions length, 17.32 m; height 4.73 m; wing span 11.36 m.
Mig 29 UB:

The MiG-29UB two-seat combat trainer is designed to train pilots in flight technique, air target interception and delivery of ground target attacks within the entire range of flight altitudes and speeds of the MiG-29 fighter. The MiG-29UB can also be used to accomplish combat missions both independently and as part of a group of the MiG-29 fighters. The MiG-29UB differs from the combat aircraft owing to the two-seat ****pit and lack of the fire control radar and R-27 missiles. In terms of design, trainee pilot's ****pit layout, type and characteristics of powerplant, scope and methods used to solve fire control and navigation tasks, flight characteristics, maintainability, monitoring and ground servicing facilities, the MiG-29UB largely resembles its combat counterpart, the MiG-29. The two-seat ****pit covered by a common canopy accommodates the trainee pilot (the front seat) and the instructor (the rear seat). Control of the aircraft and engine, as well as the flight-control and navigation equipment, armament, communications facilities and inter****pit warning and indication systems may be accomplished from either seat. The instructor's seat is provided with simulators to reproduce the failures of the automatic flight control and navigation systems, and a simulator of the fire control radar used to practice air target interception with simulated launches of the R-27R missiles.
The armament of the MiG-29UB, suspended from six hardpoints, comprises:
six air-to-air IR homing missiles R-73 and R-60;
unguided rockets (four S-24 rockets and up to four S-8, S-5 rocket pods);
up to 500-kg size aerial bombs with a total mass of up to 2,000 kg;
30mm built-in aircraft gun with 50 rounds of ammunition.
Owing to its integrated optronic fire control and navigation equipment, guided and unguided weapon systems, the MiG-29UB is capable of executing the following missions:
interception of non-maneuvering air targets from the aft hemisphere;
delivery of close maneuvering air combat;
engagement of area and pinpoint ground targets;
training and drills of flight personnel in intelligent use of the fire control radar to intercept air targets with simulated launches of R-27R missiles.
In terms of its overall combat efficiency, the MiG-29UB combat trainer has about the same potential as the MiG-29 fighter, when used against ground targets, and proves 30 - 35% less effective as an air target interceptor.


Crew 2
Weight take off normal: 14 610 kg; maximum 18 2400 kg; maximum combat load 2,000 kg;
Speed maximum: near the groud 1,500 km/h; at height 2,410 km/h
Ceiling/climb service ceiling 17 750 m,
Range near ground 680 km; at height 1, 410 km
Take off thrust to weight ration 1.2
G 9.0
Dimensions length, 17.32 m; height 4.73 m; wing span 11.36 m.
Mig 29 K:
Developed from Mig 29 A as a carrier based fighter.The aircraft features a retractable IFR probe, strengthened landing gear, folding wing, MiG-29M type aileron and increased span wingtip, arrester hook, increased chord double-slotted flap.Mig 29 K is a direct rival ***** 33 Naval Flanker (a Su 27 derivative). Russian Airforce and Navy have officially chosen Su 33 to be the main shipborne fighter. Russian sole aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov carrier for instance carries Su 33 multi-role fighters. However Mig 29 K was not left unnoticed, as it was preferred by Indian Navy, which plans to modernise its aircraft carrier fleet (which includes purchasing one from Russian). Main advantage of Mig 29 K over Su 33 is the former's smaller size and weight, which allows it to operate at a wider range of aircraft carriers when compared to larger Su 33.
Mig 29 S:
The MiG-29S is based on Fulcrum-C model and features a modified flight control system, improved Phazotron N-019M radar, compatibility with the advanced Vympel R-77 (AA-12) radar-guided AAM, and greater weapons load.
Mig 29 SE:
The MiG-29SE is the export version of the MiG-29S.
Mig 29 SD:
MiG-29SD was developed from MiG-29S as the export upgrade for the baseline MiG-29
Mig 29 M:


You can read an article on Mig 29 M fighter, taken from the Military Parade: Article 1 (in pdf format, i.e. requires an Acrobat Reader).
Mig 29 M can be considered the second decisive upgrade of Mig 29 (with Mig 29 S, being the first deep upgrade program). MAPO Mig's engineers and designers had a difficult task of transforming an effectively air superiority fighter into a multi functional fighter. This was achieved through increased internal fuel tank sizeand a number of considerable structural changes, even though the exterior design of the fighter sustained few alterations, including the development of a new multipurpose "Zhuk" radar, an optical radar, compuers, and a weapons control system. The multichannel Doppler pulse radar makes it possible to track up to 10 targets and simultaneously engage up to four targets, as well as carry out terrain mapping.
The number of armament suspension points has been increased to nine, while the total bomb load has reached 4.5 tons. "Stealth" technologies reduce the fighter's radar detectability 10-12 times. Among other steps taken to ensure aircraft's increased survivability are: radiation alarm system, active jamming system, decoy ejection, anti radiation Kh-31P supersonic missiles.
To improve the power-to-weight ratio with somewhat increased take-off weight, the engines also had to be modernized. The improved thrust-to- weight ratio, the new electronic remote flight control system, and the local structural reinforcements improve the fighter's maneuverability and increase permissible g- loading.
Specifications: Standard Take off Weight kg 15 800
Thrust to weight ratio 1.45
Maximum speed km/h 1 500 at sea level; 2 500 at height
Rate of Climb at H=1 km m/sec 310
Flight Range without drop tanks 900 at sea level; 2 200 at altitude
Radar detection range for fighter type targets km 90 in free space; 90 at earth background and 40 in rear hemisphere at earth background
Optical radar detection range for air targets 30 in rear hemisphere; 10 in forward
Suspension points 9
Mig-29ME: new designation - MiG-33 is an export development of the MiG-29M.
Mig 29 SM: The Mig-29SM feature extended ground attack capability and is compatible with a wider range of air-to-surface weapons.
Mig 29 SMT:


You can read two articles on the Mig 29 SMT both taken from Military Parade: Article 1 and Article 2 ( in pdf format).
Mig 29 SMT is a long awaited deep development of Mig 29 which has won the favor of Russian Air Forces, which chose to upgrade its current Mig 29 fleet (of some few hundred aircraft) to SMT configuration. Mig 29 SMT integrates previously available Mig 29 upgrades (for instance wing shape of Mig 29 M) with absolutely new upgrades to create an aircraft capable of performing various missions effectively during next 30-40 years. The main features of a new aircraft are:
Greater range and fuel endurance achieved through increased dorsal tank and possibility of inflight refuelling (maximum range - 2 200 km; with fuel tanks - 3 500 km; with tanks and one inflight refuelling - 6 500 km).
New open avionics architecture and ****pit layout incorporating HOTAS concept and a couple of large multifunctional liquid crystal displays.
Multifunctional radar N-019MPE radar, which in ad***ion to similar air to air characteristics of N-019ME radar, has excellent air-to-ground capabilities including real beam surface surveilance (including in Doppler and phase-array modes), moving target indication and special anti-ship mode.
Wider weapons array allows Mig 29 to carry up to 5000 kg of bombs and missiles including anti-ship KH-31A (with effective launch distance of 70 km), laser and tv guided missiles and bombs.
Considerably lower operating costs are achieved by: transfer to on-con***ion maintenance which eliminates costly overhauls, the introduction of new operating technologies and the optimization of SPTA kits; staged increase of airframe and engine service life; engine modular design with a capability to replace module at tactical airfields;
Already now MAPO Mig announced of a Mig 29 SMT-2 variant, which i guess, indicates that stage 2 of the SMT program is completed. On the other hand it may represent that some new 'gadgets' were added to SMT configuration. Cuirrently SOKOL factory is in charge of modernising Russian Mig 29s which are not more tha 10 years old into SMT configuration.
Mig 29 UBT:

The Mig-29 UBT two-seat combat trainer is designed to train pilots in flight technique, air target interception and delivery of ground target attacks within the entire range of flight altitudes and speeds of the Mig-29 SMT fighter. In ad***ion Mig 29 UBT is almost as capable as Mig 29 SMT to perform various air superiority and strike missions.
Mig-35:

The Aircraft is a highly advanced development of the MiG-29M featuring canard foreplanes, MiG-29K-style folding wing for carrier operations, fuselage plug with extra fuel, more powerful engines shifted aft, thrust-vectoring nozzles, new Phazotron RP-35 phased array radar. The aircraft is not believed to have reached first prototype stage, thus only drawing board images are available
JUST BE COOL!
Được ducsnipper sửa chữa / chuyển vào 11:04 ngày 07/05/2003
Được ducsnipper sửa chữa / chuyển vào 11:05 ngày 07/05/2003

Các bác trong box bình tỉnh lại 1 chút nào để bác liemdng giải thích rỏ về sự thông thái của mình 1 chút đừng gay gắt với bác ấy quá .
Mà bác liemdng này em học thô hiểu thiển có nhiều cái còn chưa hiểu nhờ bác mở mang tầm mắt hộ :
-- Em đọc tài liệu thấy có nhắc đến mấy cái tên : máy bay khu trục ,máy bay tiêm kích ,máy bay đánh chặn ,máy bay chiến đấu ,máy bay bổ trợ ,máy bay cường kích ,máy bay ném bom rồi máy bay ném bom tầng ,máy bay ném bom rải thảm . (nhiều ghê ) mà chưa rỏ công dụng của từng loại khác nhau như thế nào nhờ bác giải thích hộ.
--Khi nhìn sơ về lịch sử hàng không thì em thấy ngày xưa máy bay chỉ cần chừng 32 km/h là cất cánh được nghỉa là tốc độ bình thường của 1 chiếc xe máy trong khi máy bay hiện đại ngày nay cần hơn 160 km/h mới bay lên được.Thế là khi cất cánh trên tàu sân bay nó cần đủ thứ bộ phận đẩy phụ rắc rối quá .Chẳng lẻ máy bay cổ lổ sỉ lại khá hơn máy bay hiện đại như thế
--Lại nói về chuyện này em thấy sao bọn máy bay không người lái chỉ cần chừng 30km/h là cất cánh được và khi em hỏi giáo sử thì ông ta bảo ngày nay các loại máy bay nhỏ bay chậm như máy bay không người lái không thể nào đem các công thức của máy bay hiện đại ra mà tính hay nói cách khác là hiểu biết con người về hàng không khí động học với loại này là vô nghỉa .Rồi ông ta đem hằng số R ,vận tốc V ,độ nhớt của không khí ,năng suất riêng .....ra mà giải thích làm em chả hiểu cái kích thước hình dáng với tốc độ máy bay có liên quan gì .
Trước giờ em cứ tưởng máy bay chỉ cần có hình dáng lưu tuyến và viết đúng phương trình Bernuli cho nó thì ta có thể tính được vận tốc lực cản ... 1 cách dể dàng cần gì quan tâm mấy thứ rắc rối kia.
Nhờ bác giúp em với cảm ơn bác nhiều lắm lắm.

With these advanced weapon the WW3 will be fought ,but in the WW4 they will fight with sticks and stones (Albert Einstein)

Thêm một số nhận xét về MIG 29 từ cả hai phía:
Is fighter X better than fighter Y?
by Ross Smith (avfaq@meanmach.actrix.gen.nz)
This is the kind of question that gets discussed all the time, but doesn't really have an answer.
First, best for what? Every fighter is designed with a particular set of requirements in mind. "Fighter" is a fairly general term that covers a multitude of missions. A Tornado F.3 or a MiG-31 is an excellent long-range interceptor, but you wouldn't want to send one of them up against an F-16 or an Su-27 in a dogfight.
Second, the aircraft itself isn't the only factor involved, or even the most important one. Put two aircraft of similar (or even somewhat different) capabilities up against each other, and by far the most important factor is the relative skills of the two pilots. It's widely believed that superior pilot training was the main reason why American F-86 Sabres consistently gained air superiority over technically superior Russian MiG-15s in the Korean War.
Third, even apparently identical fighters can differ enormously in their electronics fit; and in modern fighters, the electronics is at least as important (not to mention expensive) as the airframe. Export versions of fighters are normally much less capable in the electronic sphere than the equivalent models for the home air force, even when the aircraft have the same designation; does anyone expect the F-16Cs exported to, say, Egypt to be anywhere near the capability of the F-16Cs in USAF service? Older aircraft can be upgraded to modern electronic standards at a fraction of the cost of new fighters, an option increasingly popular in these days of tightened defence budgets (for example, the RNZAF recently upgraded its Skyhawk fleet with a radar and avionics suite equivalent to that of the F-16A).
Most of the modern generation of fighters are fairly similar in performance. Leaving out specialised interceptors such as the Tornado and MiG-31 mentioned above, if almost any two modern fighters came up against each other in a dogfight, pilot skill would certainly be the main deciding factor. We can (and certainly will) argue endlessly about the relative merits of, say, F-16 vs Sea Harrier, or F-22 vs Su-35 (both the subject of recent discussion on this newsgroup; Harriers versus conventional fighters is a particularly hardy perennial), and there are real differences there; but such technical details are not the most important thing in combat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gneral Dynamics concluded in 1992 in their F-16/MiG-29 comparison:
Performance
- Good Aerodynamics - But Compromised by Construction
- Inferior to F-16 Supersonically, Parity at Subsonic Speeds, Slight Superiority at Very Slow Speeds
Flight Controls
- Manual System Limits Use of Full Capabilities But Allows for Superior Pilot Individualized Capabilities
****pit
- Head-Down Concept and Poor PVI Integration Decreases Effectiveness
Avionics
- Look-Down, Shoot-Down Radar. Flexibility, Modes Limited by Controls & Displays
- State-of-the-Art INS
- Radar Warning Receiver - Low Technology But Good Coverage
- HUD: Limited Capability - Augmented by Helmet Mounted Sight
- IRST: A-A, Slavable to Radar and Helmet Mounted Sight
- Helmet-Mounted Sight System - Slow, Yet Capable
- Further Advancements Expected With Appearance of New MiG-29 Versions
Lot's of "buts", don't you think?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luftwaffe MiG-29s flew on several ocations against Falcons. One such experience described by a USAF pilot in Aviano Vigileer's article which might give you some idea about how it went.
There is also an article in Air & Space Smithsonian April-May, 1995 which describes the problems Luftwaffe has to deal with after unification and incorporation of MiG-29s in their active units.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steven Vincent (steven@unipalm.pipex.com)
Subject: Re: MiG29 vs F16?
This has just been written up in Air Forces Monthly. The F-16C wing based in Spain sent a group down to the ACM range in Sardinia (which I am not going to attempt to spell Decmommm..) at the same time as the Luftwaffe Mig-29/F4 wing had slots. Seems the German pilots are good enough but the Avionics on the Migs are still a real pain. Comments like 11 seperate switches to launch a missile vs 1 for the F-16! The Radar is not as good as that in the F-4s (so the Luftwaffe uses mixed formations). The Head mounted AA-11 site system is great, giving a 45 degree cone of engagement and the Mig-29 can out point the F-16C at most speeds but the F-16C can maintain energy better.
From the ACM reports the Luftwaffe's Mig-29s are better than an F-16A and not as good as the F-16C. So far the Luftwaffe does not have a very high level of experience flying the type, comments were than non of the Luftwaffe pilots have more than 400 hours on type only 2 or 3 more than 300 and most only about 200. Not having equivalent figures I don't know how that compares with USAF norms for an operational squadron.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: topwop@magicnet.net (Mark Bovankovich)
Alexei Gretchikhine (agretch@opie.bgsu.edu) wrote:
"Could you possibly give me some numbers, references etc. whith would have comparison of AIRFRAMES of F-16 and MiG-29. Untill now from the literature I have got an idea (perhaps uncorrect one) that at least airframe of MiG-29 is better than one of F-16. That is how many Gs it can pull, aerodynamic properties. MiG-29 may lag in avionics, FBW, engines but NOT airframe. I believe that there are no G-limiter on MiG-29, because pilot will pass away at much lower Gs than would harm the airframe. There was at least one ocasion when MiG-29's arframe was deformed after pulling some large Gs (12?) but a/c was capable of coming back to the base. Being later design (and more progressive lifting/blended body design) than F-16, Mig-29's airframe at my opinion is superior to F-16's."
If I remember correctly, the MiG-29 does not have a g-limiter but does have a alpha limiter.
As far as an airframe comparison goes, both aircraft have their advantages. The MiG is better below about 325 KEAS. If it can suck the F-16 into a slow-speed turning fight, the MiG will easily best the Viper. The Viper, on the other hand, holds the edge in the high speed fight. It also has superior control characteristics due to its FBW. As far as airframes go, both aircraft are very close; the pilots would probably decide the fight.
In weapons systems, there is a gulf. Despite the attempts to paint a rosy picture of F-16s hosing multiple AMRAAMs off into a furball of Fulcrums in a "real-life fight," this is just wishful thinking. Getting a target sort on multiple bogies is rough, and the chances of dropping multiple Fulcrums with AMRAAMs before they can answer with an R-27 or R-73 is pretty slim. Quite bluntly, the US has been caught sleeping. Due to delays in acquisition, unrealistic performance requirements, budgetary constraints, and just plain arrogance, Russian aircraft have the ability to field better missiles than ours.
The other gulf is in sensors. Although the F-16 has a superior radar, the MiG has an IRSTS. With this, the MiG can _passively_ track the Falcon from surprisingly long range. I have read many US authors belittling the capabilities of IRSTSs, remembering the old AN/AAR-4 used on Century-Series fighters, but the new IRSTS are a different breed. Blazing away with a radar not only makes you a hunter, but it makes you a target. You can't always run silent and rely on AWACS, either. With the advent and fielding of aerial-ARMs like the R-27P, R-24P, Kh-31P and KS-172, anything with a radar running--especially an AWACS--is being set up for a surprise attack. For those who are uninitiated, Russian missiles can outrange AMRAAMs if they are not limited by the requirement to home on a radar return off of an F-15 and F-16.
I don't want to come off as critical of US equipment, which I believe is still superior to any other nation's. I just want to point out that the US can't afford to deny its equipment's shortcomings. The US should take the results of the F-16 vs. MiG-29 training as a warning. Imagine if they had been facing Su-35s!
"BTW article in AW&ST states something like this: "F-16 can get on tail of MiG-29 after all, blah blah..... .....But we should remember that MiG-29 were carrying underbelly tanks(!) and six pilons and two mock/training AA missiles (as opposite to clean F-16(?))" I wonder how things would look if MiG's driver will jettison the fuel tank. (I don't think you can even use the cannon on MiG-29 with underbelly fuel tank, so no one with get into phone booth dogfight with one)"
The underbelly tanks were undoubtedly empty, and therefore had a minimal impact on flight performance. The MiGs were carrying six pylons because they _always_ carry six pylons. F-16s can jettison their pylons, and their fuel tanks have a built-in pylon. The MiGs needed that fuel tank because of their very short range. In marked contrast to the F-16--which has surprisingly long legs (longer than the F-15, surprise!)--the MiG can't go far without fuel tanks. To my knowledge, none of the Luftwaffe's MiGs have been modified to carry underwing fuel tanks, so they went into battle carrying their max fuel load. Later MiGs were modified to carry underwing tanks, and to fire their cannon with the belly tank in place. All Fulcrum engines smoke like locomotives, and have a disturbingly short TBO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TZ (TWZ101@psuvm.psu.edu)
Scout (75774.2011@CompuServe.COM) says:
"I just can't recall the Fulcrum being employed in combat in large numbers. Other than the ones that ran away from the USAF during Desert Storm."
MiG-29s have seen limited combat on at least four occasions:
(1) Syrian Air Force MiG-29s were the first to see combat, against the F-15s and F-16s of the Israelis during 1990-91 in a number of small air battles over the Golan region and/or southwestern Lebanon. Rumor has it (unconfirmed) that at least one MiG-29 was shot down, probably by an F-15C.
(2) Iraqi Air Force MiG-29s were, of course, involved in Operation Desert Storm, when 5 of their number were shot down in aerial combat during the first 3 days of the war. A sixth crashed itself during an air-to-air engage- ment against an F-15E strike package (in the process, managing to shoot down its own wingman, a MiG-23 "Flogger," and the only confirmed "kill" by a MiG-29 to date. At least five or six others were destroyed on the ground, and four flew to Iran (including one MiG-29UB "Fulcrum-B."
(3) Yugoslavian Air Force MiG-29s saw combat as ground-support fighters during the early stages of the war in Croatia and Bosnia. At least one was shot down by ground fire, and the others have all gone to seed in Serbia. None were involved in air-to-air engagements.
(4) A dozen ex-Moldovan MiG-29s were sold to secessionist rebels in southern Yemen in 1994, and piloted by Moldovan mercenary pilots. One of these was shot down on a ground support mission, and six others were destroyed on the ground when government forces recaptured the Southern capital of Aden. The remaining five are now in storage, and will probably be re-sold.
Iraq took delivery of its first 18 "Fulcrums" in 1987, the year before the Iran-Iraq War ended, so it's possible that some Iraqi MiG-29s saw limited ser- vice in the war, but given the time necessary to train pilots and ground crew, and make new aircraft operational, it's likely that the war ended before the MiGs saw any serious fighting. Also, by that time, the Iranian Air Force was almost non-operational due to a lack of spares and a conservative use doctrine, and so air-to-air engagements were fleeting and usually not decisive.
MiG-29s may also have seen limited combat in the Chechnya operation last year in Russia, although it seems that Su-27s and MiG-31s were used in the CAP role, while Su-24s and Su-25s were the main ground attack machines. If any "Fulcrums" saw combat, their numbers were extremely small.
There are NO confirmed or unconfirmed reports of any MiG-29 kills in any theater of conflict, while at least 6 have been shot down by other fighters.*
Kiên

Cái vụ ở Lybie là phét đấy!
Vụ Mỹ không kích Tripolie làm chết con nuôi của Kadafi, sau đó để trả thù mới có vụ Lockeubie!
Trong vụ đó phía Mỹ chỉ thiệt hại 2 máy bay, hình như 1 cái F111( do tên lửa LB bắn và 1 cái F14 thui)
..
j''adore la solitude quand même je suis seul
Được antey2500 sửa chữa / chuyển vào 19:27 ngày 16/08/2003