@@barneymiller7894 "That's not our problem." "Look outside, what do you see?" "What's that shadow in the skies?" "That's my brother. Now it is your problem. What should I tell him?"
I'm a bit amazed that you forgot the German Mig-29, that German inherited after the reunification. They were used extensively in training exercises with the US, so that pilots could train against a real Mig. Those exercises also showed some of the advantages the Mig had over the F-16 f that time, in close combat the Mig was almost unbeatable while the US planes had a clear advantage at beyond visual range. "Military Aviation History" has a great video about that.
The MiG was unbeatable in close combat because it had the R-73 combined with the helmet mounted sight. In terms of manoeuvrability, the MiG-29 is good, but no match for the F-16.
@Christopher Huxley While your point is techincally correct, DCS pilots are not a factor here. Luftwaffe fulcrum pilots from JG73 had an exchange with VFA-106 in 2000, where the germans realized the inferior ergonomics compared to the NATO-spec aircraft.
Not really true. German and american summarized the test with saying that the MIG-29 is a piece of crap. I don't know were the idea about how the MIG was unbeatable in a turning fight is coming from? The only thing positive about the MIG-29 (from the test results ) was that the close range AAMs (slaved to the helmet mounted sight) was almost invicible. That is why so much resources was put into a new gen AAM, like the AIM-9x, Meteor etc. The MIG-29 does NOT dominate the skys in a turning battle. It is very limited.
@@JohnGaltAustria You are absolutly right. People tend to misinterpret the test result (most likely becouse they never read them...). The Close range AAM slaved to the HMS was groundbreaking. Nothing else was.
In May/June of 1990 we saw the Mig-29 and SU-27 fly at the Will Rogers Airport in OKC. We were told by the announcer that we were among the first "Westerners" to see them fly. First was the Mig-29, it was incredibly agile and did maneuvers that seemed to rely on pure Engine power it seemed, doing Cork-screw turns on its tail as it climbed at times with one Engine turned off. The SU-27 looked a bit like a giant F-15. It was the most impressive of the two planes. It did every maneuver the Mig did, but did seem like a more refined aircraft. The Mig's engines smoked. Both planes did the Cobra right in front of us which was very impressive. Finally the Pilots landed and got out and waved to the crowd. Beautiful aircraft. Both were painted in sky blue and light grey as I remember. For what it's worth I thought I'd put that out there.
Smoke is execes fuel injection, it colls down combustion cases and reduces nitric oxides and prolongs engine life. In air combat mode (flick of swich) its smoke free. Look up of German experience, they were beter than F16 in close combat, off bore helment mounted sight. They were in service in Germany up to 2000s
@@ljubomirculibrk4097 didn't know that the 29 had that "smokeless" switch. Cool! Because smoking engines is being said as a tactical disadvantage during dogfights because it makes the plane more visible and shows its trajectory. Thanks! I hope everyone who is interested in the MiG-29 has read about the joint air training of german MiG-29s against US F-16s in the US and the results. :)
@@hypersonichobo4263 AMRAAM has no sustainer-engine, if you do some manoeuvres after it is shot it is quite likely it does not have enough energy to still reach you... Especially at max distance... And you also have not that many tries... But still F-16 is much better than MIG-29...
The MIG-29 was not designed as an air superiority fighter, it was a tactical fighter, an interceptor that would fly close to the battle lines, the SU-27 was an air superiority fighter.
So what is the reasoning behind cobra maneuver on a non superiority fighter? Also, you lose so much energy on the maneuver you would be shot down by a handgun!
The Su-27 went into service a few years after the Mig-29, but they are both multirole and air superiority fighters. Su-30s and Su-35s are doing air to ground missions in Syria, bombing hospitals. New York TImes has some good videos about it on youtube.
Additional point worth noting, the MIG29 has vents in the top of the wing that allow it to draw air from above the wings for the engines, this enables it to take off from dusty runways and adds to the deployment options.
There's actually one air force that, to this day, uses BOTH the MiG-29 and the F-16. Poland. Going back in time and showing someone in the 1980s a picture of a MiG-29 and F-16 flying side-by side in the same livery would be pretty surreal.
Not unless they know their recent history , in WW 2 US & Russia were “ allies “ where they flew side by side on multiple occasions , also the Soviets bought and used US made equipment such as airplanes , tanks , transport jeeps and rifles
In 2003 22 MiG-29s were sold to the Polish Air Force for a symbolic *1 EUR per Fulcrum*, 14 were taken into service with the 41. elt after an overhauled. Of the remaining two German MiGs, one had crashed after a pilot’s fault, and one (the 29+03) is on display at Laage-Rostock airport. (migflug.com/jetflights/german-luftwaffe-mig-29-fulcrum/)
@@craigmoran893 they were all developed in parallel by two different bureaus with little exchange of information. Mig-29 is also known to perform Kolokol, but not Cobra until recently. While Su's perform Chakra which is even more impressing
Loads of things wrong with this, so many it's difficult where to start the criticisms. Here's a few to begin with: The Mig was a point-defence fighter not an air-superiority fighter, the F-15 entered service in 1975. The Mig 29's original load was 4 tonnes, upped to 6 in later versions (you can find this info everywhere). Nothing is mentioned of the plane's helmet mounted sight & the capability of the R73 in close combat which caused a great deal concern in the west during the early 90s. The Mig's "party piece" was the tail-slide not the Cobra - that honour went to the SU 27. The '29 does not have FBW nor RSS, so although capable of performing a kind of Cobra manoeuvre, it's can only do it fleetingly & not to the same extreme angle that the Sukhoi can achieve. Having said that, a 1950's vintage Saab Draken can achieve the Cobra manoeuvre, & this does not possess a particularly high T/W nor fancy flight control avionics: the Cobra is all about aerodynamics & a "soft" stall-point. Another moot point is you're comparing late model F-16 figures to standard A series Mig 29s. During the cold-war, the F-16 was fitted with the less-powerful & fuel efficient PW F-100 engine & was a far-less capable machine. I suggest you spend more time researching your videos rather than honing your chit-chatty delivery.
I seriously doubt the the “chit-chatty” man is the one doing the research. Can’t be mad at him. He’s basically an actor reading a script. Good on you for the corrections though. 👍
Love the video, but thrust is measured in “lbf” meaning “pounds of force” as opposed to pounds of mass like when weighing oneself. “Pound feet” refers to torque, and is written “lbft”. Easy to misread, but something to clarify for the future
@Eddie Hitler You have an example? Pound feet is torque. It is force multiplied by the distance away from the centre of axis. The definition of torque. (btw... it's not lb/ft because that would be pounds per foot, which is wrong. It's "Lbft" (without the slash) because it's force multiplied by distance) the way you write it, it's the opposite (force divided by distance). In short - no; you're wrong
The MIG 29 was never intended for the "air superiority" role, it was originally designed to be a multi role fighter capable of both ground attack and air to air operations and In that regard the Mig 29 and its successor the mig 35 have fulfilled the multi role fighter job beautifully, the su 27 and its successor the su 35 are the only russian fighters currently in service intended exclusively for the Air superiority role (even though they still can carry out ground attack operations but to a limited extent ), the su 27 was the soviet union's answer to the American F-15 eagle, the soviet union found itself unable to defend against this new aircraft because at the time they didn't possess an air superiority fighter capable of countering the American threat so that's they designed the Su 27.
@@scratchy996 Fair enough, though modern documentaries are not entirely reliable. You should look into the development of the F-16 starting with John Boyd and the Fighter Mafia, but don't take their ideas on what a fighter should be as fact... it was 50 years ago and a lot has changed/
Something that’s super cool is that the Swedish jet fighter j-35 draken (dragon) from 1955 could also perform a cobra, but instead of using thrust vectoring it used a wing with control surfaces, and no extra pure control surface like a canard wing
@@chrispekel5709 Hard disagree. Archer, CV-90, NLAW, Gripen… For a country with only 10.42 million people they make a lot of impressive military tech. Glad to have them on our side (once Erdogan gets his head out of his ass😅). 🇳🇱🇸🇪💪
Denmark had Draken too. Popular among pilots, and a whole lot safer than our Starfighters. The Starfighters had this howl though, cool sound. The Cobra did not impress danish Draken pilots either.
No. The 29 is a pure point defense fighter, meaning it would fight off tactical ground attack aircraft and their escorts, presumably the longer range F-15, in vicinity of tactical targets. Thus the 29 is the answer to that. The F-16 was conceived a cheap air defense fighter for allied nations in Europe. It would replace the F-104 and the underpowered F-5, and it did. The 29 stayed true to it’s role, while the F-16 became wildly successful as a true multi-role platform.
that is so true your right .it was done to test the g force on the whole structure during testing .i have a book on it just is case you can look it up on the net and the test pilot call ed it that
Can someone who is more knowledgeable about dog fighting please tell me what the tactical advantage of a cobra maneuver would be? My understanding is that bleeding velo is a death sentence but I don't fly planes or anything so I should probably solicit advice from keyboard pilots
@@JusticeDutton I did my undergrad in Aerospace engineering so have some idea about it... it is used to suddenly reduce the aircraft speed to virtually zero while in a dog fight. In theory it can help the adversary aircraft overshoot and then the prey becomes the hunter . Also it could help to misguid the adversary radar which now ll think a ' stationary ' object as a clutter or noise ( again theoretically). With the advent of new generation of IR seeking missiles and BVRAAMs the use of such a maneuver in an actual fight is unlikely to provide any real benefit. However its jaw dropping good if you watch it live in an airshow
Cheap on purchase, but it failed per hour cost and is failing even as a Mig-35, painting new emblems and pasting new stickers will not solve its problems, unless if it decides to auger into the dirt as 50% of the mig-29 ever built have done.
@@Grumpy_old_Boot It's not quite like that for military jets. EG the typhoon production lines were still open for 5 years after the plane stopped being made just too build up a stock of spares. There are a lot of spares that have never been out of the box for the MIC-21 and of course hundreds in "boneyard". There were nearly 12,000 of them made. Spares will not be an issue for a long time yet.
@@gordonlawrence1448 That's true. I still think the MiG-29 will edge it on buying price (especially in the second hand market), and since it's still in production, spare parts is even less of a hassle. But yes, you are correct, the MiG-21 is indeed a very attractive jet plane as well, if you want to go Mach 2+ Of course, both are essentially toys for the super wealthy, if you want an affordable jet, the civilian jet planes beat them in both price and running costs - But I don't think any of them can go Mach 2+ ... though I could be wrong.
Whoa whoa whoa now, Simon, my dude @11:00 A: The Cobra Maneuver was made famous by he Sukhoi Su-27 when it was first performed for the public at the 1989 Paris Airshow. The Mig-29 really isn't known for the maneuver. B: That footage you show of the Cobra? Is of an Su-33/37, not a Mig-29
LOLs, ur right. I didn't clock that first time around but now I see ur comment I skipped to the time-sig & ur right about the Su-33/37. Well-spotted, dude.
One of the Mig-29’s designers was asked about its lack of range, he joked that it was “a fighter designed to protect the boundaries of its own airfield”
Honestly that sounds better though. If your tech savvy enough to find IP addresses and someone hacks you, you can find them and drop a KAB-500 on their house!
Nato couldn't get any good intelligence on the Mig-25, all they knew was it was big and it was fast. They didn't realize that the Foxbat couldn't maneuver, and was only designed to be a fast, high-flying, bomber interceptor. The Eagle was developed in 72 and it wasn't until 76 that the US was able to obtain a Foxbat from a defector, which was after the F-15 was put into service. So the F-15 would have been built to respond to what they speculated about the Mig-25 was capable of, luckily for nato, it wasn't that great. The Mig-29 also scared the Americans who were under the impression that the Fulcrum had a really advanced radar as well as its other characteristics like the helmet-mounted display and the ability to fire high-off-boresight IR missiles. Once the Soviet Union collapsed and the German reunification the Germans inherited Mig-29s which they flew as adversaries for Nato pilots in exercises. Turns out that it had a fairly mediocre radar and the high-off-boresight fox-2 capability wasn't as horrifying as it sounded (they were afraid that they might not have any ability to compete in a dogfight but they were wrong) Which obviously the US has since developed their own helmet-mounted displays.
You make great videos and provide mostly accurate information. Some of the videos of the “mig 29s” you showed doing the the wild maneuvers were actually SU-27 flankers.
Back when Germany still had a few Mig29 there were regular combat simulations with other NATO nations and from what I've read the US pilots were always very impressed of the Mig's capabilities.
Yep. The German Air Force/Luftwaffe acquired quite a few MiG 29’s from East Germany when the wall fell. I was a Combat Medic with a Patriot Missile battalion in Germany from ‘95-‘98, during that time we did a NATO TACEVAL (we were evaluated in combat operations by the Germans, Brits, and pretty much everyone who has either had their asses kicked or saved by us). When we had the actual eval after 6 straight months of train up, one of the aggressor aircraft was a MiG 29 (along with some Hinds, and other Soviet aircraft). Considering the fact that I originally joined the Army in early 1989 when the Cold War was still in full swing, and we were trained in basic training about fighting the Soviets and Soviet doctrine, I definitely made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up to look up and see an actual, real deal MiG 29 “strafing” us. First time I ever saw one, although I had seen real Mi-24 Hind D’s at Ft Bliss during Roving Sands in ‘92 right after we came back from the Gulf.
Stefan Misch were they impressed with the mig's or with proper pilots using mig's? even if avionics differences between NATO and USSR planes are huge, as we are even more away each day
Yea I listened to an interview with a british test pilote who flew one after the fall of the eastern block. It was apparebtöy very easy to fly. Alot of automatic controle for the engine.
Competing against F-35 and the two canceled European designs. Also a question if those things will all be outdated by remote controlled drones unconstrained by the need to keep the pilot alive.
@@johndododoe1411 fighter jet drones would be scary as fuck . With the pilot controlling it safely from a cozy base , the drones would be able to maneuver, reach speeds and withstand g forces piloted aircraft couldn't even dream of
Did he almost say "You can protect yourself online with a MIG-29" during the promo at the start? xD Sure, you can try to hack his computer, but there's a Russian fighter jet screaming towards your house at a couple of machs if you do.
IDF did that during the beginning of may 2019. A cyber attack was launched out of Gaza and was traced back to a specific building in Gaza. So the IDF bombed the building and destroyed the computers
If he is going to do the Mig-31 he should just do a double feature of the Mig-25 and Mig-31 seeing as the 31 only really exists to fill the gap that the aging Mig 25 left.
Great video as always. If you're after ideas for other aircraft, I'd love to see one on the Su-47 "Berkut". Another fascinating project that fell victim to budget cuts and (apparently) issues with its forward swept wing design.
Нет, просто управляемый вектор тяги открыл новые перспективы для самолетов с крылом нормальной стреловидности. Но Беркут дал ооочень много материала для дальнейшего развития аэродинамики и восприятия нагрузок. И да, Беркут достоин отдельной истории. Ну а для меня Беркут - бессменный аватар уже лет 10))
Yeah, an unfortunate side-effect of the forward-swept wing is it's tendency to undergo significantly more wing-loading at transonic speeds compared to a regular aft-swept wing. This would mean that the wing could potentially fail catastrophically at much lower speeds during high-G (or high angle of attack) maneuvers. Based on these limitations it was decided that further development would be discontinued. The lessons learned about super-maneuverability were valuable though.
@@Karl-Benny That's one big problem of Scandinavians (I'm including Finns here, though I know the "Scandinavian" title kinda not completely applies to them) in general and Swedes in particular: you guys are WAY TOO POLITE AND WAY TOO HUMBLE!!! So much so that sometimes you yourselves forget what your country is about (really SAS? Nothing is really Swedish?). Sweden is an awesome country. For your own good, you should brag a bit more
@@SomePeopleCallMe I think the radio telescope in Battlefield 4 is set in China and is based on the real, extremely large, telescope referred to as "FAST," which is located in China's Guizhou Province. A MegaProject video comparing the two, along with how they may have influenced the game, would be a great suggestion.
I absolutely enjoyed your video, however, please allow my humble correction; the imperial unit lbf, used to rate the impulse force of jet engines stands for Pound Force, not Pound Foot. Pound Foot (lb.ft) is the imperial unit for torque, commonly used to rate the rotating force output of a piston engine or electric motor’s shaft. This unit is also not to be confused with Foot Pound, ft.lb, which is the imperial unit for work or energy, used to rate the impact energy of a moving object, as a bullet for example. This is a lot less confusing in the Metric system.
the official story or the real one that the hubble was never meant to look away from earth that it was originally designed for the cia and was surplus this perfectly explains why it didnt function properly and needed to be altered as the lens that it was launched with was designed for viewing closer objects
@@megaprojects9649 I think what they're trying to say is that it was built on a surplus spy satellite chassis (which IIRC it was, though heavily modified); though I don't think the focus issues have to do with poor conversion into a telescope [I'm pretty sure there wasn't anything left of the 'original' optics in it], I always heard it was a problem with calibration of the (new) computerised measuring equipment used by the company producing the telescope optics -- luckily when debugging the issue after the fact they could figure out exactly by what factor the calibration was off and produce a corrective lens to compensate, and at the time the Shuttle could do a mission to install it. Fun stuff to learn about, I'd also like to see a video on it!
Side-note: At 5:57 of the video there's an image of four F-16 fighter jets in formation over water. I spied, with my little eye, a building on the shoreline that appears just above the blue tail of the lead plane. That building is the "Monona Terrace", a Frank Lloyd Wright-designed building in Madison, Wisconsin, USA...some 150 miles from where I live. Wright never saw the building, construction having begun 34 years after his passing...and opening in 1997, some 59 years after it was first proposed. The occasion for the photograph was the 60th anniversary of the Wisconsin Air National Guard. 115th fighter wing, in 2007-8 and the 10th anniversary of the opening of Monona Terrace. Following the street directly behind the Monona Terrace, away from the lake, will have you at our lovely State Capitol (just out of frame) in two city blocks.
im from baraboo myself.when i was younger,i used to see them fly over rhythm and booms at warner park,it was the highlight for me seeing them pass over just above the trees
How about doing one of these on the USS Nautilus, the first nuclear-powered submarine. Should be an interesting one given all of the engineering challenges they needed to overcome.
I'd like to see more videos like this, I mean the raptor and su-37 or su-47 and so on. Mig-35 sounds like a fun video too! Also, does Russia have some stealth bombers like the B-2?
@Против Глобал everything you claim could be true then again it could also be propaganda used by your country to garner more support for the war from its people
I think the closes they got to a stealth bomber was the Tu160, but there are rumors of a new generation stealth bomber project in the works called PAK DA.
I swear to God I clicked the link for "Bathyscaphe Triest: The Quest to Actually Dive 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" but some how ended up on the MIG-29 video... RUclips is a fickle mistress.
The mig-29 is an interceptor that can dogfight if needed, when it came out it had several advantages over the f-16, helmet-mounted sight, r-73, and medium-range missiles. It heavily depended on ground control to point it in the right direction and turn its radar just before shooting the target. Pilots didn't even have a battleground picture in a display like the su-27, instead, it just has a HUD repeater. It was demonstrated to pilots before Mikoyan even finished the manual and more advanced features, like fly-by-wire were to be implemented later but then the soviet union ended. The Mig was stuck with the same old tech for a while. The f-16 on the other hand kept getting upgrades and ended up being one of the most popular multifunctional jets ever with superior avionics.
@Vulcan Logix ______ "but the soviet plane was far- far more Maintenance friendly" It wasn't so much more maintenance friendly as that the Soviets (and later Russians) had no where near the safety margins and maintenance requirements for their aircraft that most western Air Forces have. Likely, given no maintenance whatsoever and most things being equal, a MiG-29 will lawn dart into the earth due to maintenance issues long before an F-16. It's just that the United States Air Force has the money to spend on maintenance and thus spends it to make sure that doesn't happen. "as well as far more fuel efficient" I would be absolutely shocked if the MiG-29's RD-33 engines were more fuel efficient. Especially since the F-16 has had multiple engine upgrades over the years. Even so, the original Pratt & Whitney F100 which has since been upgraded was probably a much more efficient engine. If the Indian and former East Germany MiG-29s have taught us anything, it's that the Soviets/Russians weren't nearly as good at making engines as the west. Even now with the Su-30MKIs that the Indians are primarily using, the engines are much more fragile than western counterparts. The Indian Air Force has to be super duper careful about foreign object debris being sucked into the engine and when something does happen to the engine it has to be shipped back to Russia for an overhaul/repair.
@Vulcan Logix ______ "Going to flexible afterburners the Soviets were thinking of Maintenance downtime whereas the Rapter requires 20,000 hours of maintenance after every flight" Only a fool would compare a late 1970s fighter to a 5th gen stealth aircraft fighter in the first place. If you knew anything, you'd know that the stealth aircraft in the American fleet need extensive maintenance due to their RAM coatings. The B-2 even has a *_CLIMATE CONTROLLED HANGAR_* to safeguard it when it's parked. Try again. "Whereas vector nozzles require maintenance due to temperature affecting the hydraulics of the engine's." Truly a fool, you can't even tell the difference between variable exhaust nozzles (which the MiG-29 has, just as with most modern military jet aircraft with afterburner-capable engines) and thrust vectoring. And, again - *_I was comparing the MiG-29 to the F-16. Why the hell are you bringing in stealth fighters and thrust vectoring?_* "Fuel efficiency is becoming equal to the west only after latest power thrust engine design overhaul." Nah. "And dont forget the Soviets have latest cockpit ejection technology" The Soviets have the latest technology when they haven't existed for 30 years? ...Okay. "also radar upgrades" ...You're kidding yourself if you think Russian avionics and AESA radar are on the same level as the west, specifically America. America has been developing AESA radar for longer. And they've been doing a better job of it. If you knew anything (you don't), you'd at least have been wise enough to cite Russian IRST systems where they did/maybe do have an advantage over America and the west on. But you didn't. Because you're a fool. "The su-29 stands alone and has been in service for a longer time than the F-15." The Su-29? The single engine propeller trainer from the 1990s? ...Okay. You're high. "And even before it. American planes have always been behind soviet planes as far as quality but soviet planes have certainly been around much longer due to their build." Yep. You've definitely been inhaling paint fumes or something.
@Vulcan Logix ______ "I am still laughing about it because the SU - 29 was actually developed to counter the F - 14 Tomcat" ...AGAIN, the Su-29 is a single-engine propeller acrobatic/trainer aircraft developed in the 1990s. You can't even get the designation correct, FFS.
@@matchesburn Actually,Japan is the first country to use AESA radar on their fighter jet.Russia is way behind in AESA tech,their SU-35 is still using PESA radar(which used to be a big thing when most of the western countries still stuck at pulse-doppler radar) and only a handful of Mig-29K,Mig-35 and SU-57 have those AESA radar.Even Chinese already have AESA installed on their newer fighter jets when the Russians still stuck at PESA
I recommend anyone who’s interested in this to search “Interview with Robert Hierl on the Mig 29 Fulcrum” on here. It’s the findings of a Luftwaffe pilot who assessed MiG 29s inherited from the DDR after unification, and may answer some questions.
9 G's is pretty standard. 9 G is close to the limit of fighter pilots. Very dangerous for the pilot to lose consciousness while flying. Unmanned UAVs could out outmaneuver manned fighters. Some later models have more fuel tanks along the spine. ( conformal ? ). Lovely plane. A really beautiful change for Soviet fighters. Best since the Mig-15. Can still be dangerous. To the enemy.
The Mig-29 is an underrate fighter jet quite capable of holding its own; in fact, when it entered service in 1982 it was superior to the F-16 until the 'C' generation of the F-16 was developed. The US did not come to fully appreciate the Mig-29's potential until after the re-unification of Germany when German pilots, from the former West Germany, started flying it and discovered its abilities. Many US pilots flew against it in mock fights only to be shot-down during these exercises by the Mig-29s flown by the German pilots. Germany only began flying it after the re-unification due to inheriting them from former East Germany and deciding to fly them just to see what they could do. The Mig-29 earned the respect of those pilots who have flown it.
Only superior due to it's air to air weapons. In terms of maneuverability the F-16 was better, and the F-16 also had longer range, better situational awareness, a lower IR signature, and was smaller. The MiG-29 was faster, but that doesn't matter at low altitude where most predicted WWIII battles would occur, or in a dogfight. The West German, English, American, French etc pilots found that the MiG-29 was lacking in terms of maneuverability compared to the F-16 and Mirage, while being slightly more maneuverable than the F-15. In guns-only battles it lost more often than it won, even when facing F/A-18s. This was in part because the early MiG-29s had no FBW controls and were much more difficult to fly than anything the West had. And once the West developed their own HMD + IR missile systems by the early 2000s the MiG-29 had no notable advantages. The MiG-29 earned the respect of pilots not because of it's performance, but because it was fun to fly a decently maneuverable fighter that had no computer-enforced restrictions. One German pilot in particular noted that it felt very much like flying an F-4 in terms of cockpit ergonomics and technology.
If you're going to talk about planes then there's a few i'd like to see. English Electric Lightning - One of the first planes with supercruise. F22 Raptor - Believed to be the daddy of the skies. YF23 Black Widow II - Better than the Raptor - (change my mind) AC130 Spectre Gunship - GUNS!!! F14 Tomcat - Dat AIM-54 tho! B29 Superfortress - Dropped the nukes on the Japs.
IMHO, the two most graceful-looking fighters ever are the F-16 and the Mig-29. Aviation Art. Russian engines: Engineer: "How much power do you want?" Pilots: "Yes".
The Indian Air Force used the MiG 29 in the 1999 conflict with Pakistan, flying jets in combat sorties at altitudes above 25,000 ft on craggy mountains. Not a single MiG 29 was lost to enemy fire!
@@anwarma1 Pak airforce chief surrendered after knowing Mig29 heading towards Pak, destroyed military bases. Pak airforce chief was afraid to bring F16 to fight mig29.
samrat julius dowerah that’s was then during kargill. It didn’t surrender dude . PAF during kargill didn’t have BVR hence was venerable . But now they have the BVR punch and many other things in store. On February 27, 2019 , PAF showed what it can do to IAF, you lost an SU30 and MIG21 . After denying loosing an SU30 why India is replacing that SU30 in the 12 aircraft order. 11 IAF SU 30 have been been lost in different training sorties but the 12th was lost on Feb 27, 2019. Cheers
@@anwarma1 haha a su30? really. It's you who lost an F-16 to a meager Mig-21 lol. Your airforce, just like your surrender army, doesn't know how to fly, you are only good bombing your Taliban on Durand line.
@@anwarma1 Also why didn't your airforce intercepted those Su30s and Mirage when they were bombing your terrorists in your territory? Cause you were too dumb and too late, and too afraid.
The swedish, now retired, aircraft J35 Draken could perform a cobra like maneuver as well :) ruclips.net/video/jqiDEcfSnXs/видео.html check around 1:55 to 2:10.
A MIG-29 cannot perform a cobra, it's close but it can't do it. A cobra requires an AOA exceeding 90° the MIG-29 is just short of that. The SU-27 can do a whopping 120° of AOA
Great video Simon. I would like to hear about the F-14 Tomcat and the MIG-25 Foxbat. If you haven't done the F-4 Phantom, that would be a good one. It's lack of a gun in the design was a glaring failure in the Air Force's lack of understanding of how future battles would be fought, which I believe continues to this day. As far as the F-16 versus the MIG-29, they would engage with very different tactics. The F-16s advantage is not its maneuverability. It would lose in a turning fight so it would come in fast, take its shot, and bug out. The MIG-29 would want to engage in close and turn and burn with the F-16.
top skilled pilots, comparably ground support and the MiG29 would kick the shit out of the F16 later back in the days. All that counts in a dog fight are the 2-5 minutes. Not the fuel range, or 2500 vs 6000 hours.. its just about agility, power, weapons, radar system and climb.
"lbf" is not "poundfoot", nor "poundfeet" which would be TORQUE units. The actual intended meaning is pound-force. Actually the foot or feet in the torque expressed lbft or lb-ft.
@@TheChemixInc Yes but it's dimensionally wrong. Call it newton meters of pound feet, it's still a force by a distance which is either torque or energy. But yes you're right, most people probably won't catch that, and tbh most Americans as well. We aren't known for our quality education......
13:37 is a picture of a mig 29 outside of the air museum in Oregon at The Evergreen Aviation And Space Museum In McMinnville it's a really amazing place and I highly suggest visiting if you're near there it also houses the Spruce goose which is way bigger than you could think
@@dorsk84 There is? Oh, whenever i searched for documentaries or lengthy videos in general about the Phantom, usually there wasn't a lot coming up. I mean, wikipedia is of course an extensive source for info, but i thought that there was kind of a void of Phantoms in videos.
Surprised no one mentioned the two MIG-29 "features" that western bloc aircrafts don't have: 1. A flap in the main engine intake drops down during takeoff in muddy fields. This was a requirement because they couldn't rely on well built airports (or airstrips). Air is sucked from vents located above the main engine intake in that situation. 2. Laser range finder and targeting for the canon. The Soviets claimed it was deadly accurately and helped them reduce the need to carry more ammo. Pilots who used the ones acquired from East Germany said it didn't work well in real life.
Soviet aircraft need this feature because after the main runways have been cratered by NATO aircraft they will now need to use the debris strewn taxiways and such. Western aircraft have less to worry about this happening.
@@deltacharlieromeo8252 Yes it does. It's called the HMCS or HMDS or something like that. Even gets a special AIM-9X super agile off boresight missile to use with it.
On the invitation to suggest other aircraft, I recommend de Havilland's DH-82 Tiger Moth. Thousands and thousands built. Practically every commonwealth fighter and bomber pilot (and many Americans too) received WW2 elementary flight training in them. But any video on any aircraft is something I'll eventually watch. This was a good one on the Mig 29. Thanks.
The "cobra maneuver" is not (apparently) limited to the MiG-29; Lt. Pete "Maverick" Mitchell executed the maneuver successfully in a F-14 "Tomcat" against a MiG-28 in 1986.
Hi Simon, this just came through my feed in 2022. While I do have a few quibbles with some of the info here, it was VERY well done! FWIW, the people over at Sukhoi were quite displeased with the comparison of the MiG-29 and the Su-27 (a larger and more capable aircraft with an almost identical appearance). The Sukhoi folks claimed the MiG was a copy of their design! As far as the comparison between the American F-16 and the MiG, I note that during the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, various NATO nations have been providing war material to Ukraine. I will specifically mention Poland. Equipped with a number of MiG-29s, the Poles offered to lend/give their fighters to Ukraine (which used the same aircraft), as long as the USA would "backfill" the Polish Air Force with F-16s. Having direct experience with both types, I find it significant that the Poles were willing (anxious?) to replace their MiGs with the American-built competition.
The F-16 was designed as an extremely lightweight, "low cost" and "simple" pure dogfighter. The motto of Col Boyd's fighter mafia who almost pushed the concept through was " not a pound for air to ground " But right at the end the Air Force did some hard bargaining and the aircraft got a secondary air to ground capability, which has expanded over the years to the point where the F-16 really is multi role - much heavier, very complex and much more expensive.
It's like "the pentagon wars", they wanted a cheaper and lighter alternative to the F15, But it wasn't as capable so they pumped it up to become more expensive and heavy and complicated and finally got the F15 they wanted.
@@tomstech4390 Thats a good book. The film is worth a watch too, although it's a comedy rather than a searing indictment of the US military procurement system :)))
@@colderwar I must confess I have only seen the movie but being a comedy is appropriate given the joke most military (and civvy) precurement systems are.
rarely did the helicopter ever carry troops inside of it. most of the time the cargo bay was used to store extra ammo and fuel, and on rare occasions a crew chief would man a pk on the door windows
Even more incredible: Marat Tischenko, head of the Mil design bureau, visited Soviet Hind squadrons in the Afghan front lines in the 1980s. The pilots put on an air show, even pulling off barrel rolls. He was astounded as he thought it was impossible. Tischenko said of the Mi-24, "I thought I knew what my helicopters could do, now I'm not so sure!"
@@metanumia mig 29 have option for thrust vectoring. also su37 is an overated and dead plane since far more advanced aircraft of its family have been introduced.
The MiG-29 was conceived as a point defence fighter but as with many combat aircraft, it has been continuously upgraded with mission expansion in mind. Today we see the MiG-35, which is a true multi role fighter jet. Pretty much the same story with the F-16, the 🇺🇸 just got to this stage a bit quicker. The MiG-35 does have 3D Thrust vectoring which makes it even more manoeuvrable but I would guess the 🇺🇸 still have the edge in avionics!
It's not the only error, a more glaring one is the claim that both Iran and Iraq used it in the Iran-Iraq War.....when Iran bought it in the nineties, after said war. He also forgot Germany owning it, or the Mig-19 and Mig-21 taking part in the Vietnam war.....or that the F-4 Phantom II being rolled out in 1957......before any US involvement in said war.......
In Peru, in 2009, the American F-16s arrived for military training. My country was chosen because it has several Mig-29s in service, the results were very encouraging for the Peruvian pilots, considering that they were facing a world air power and perhaps the best and most capable pilots.
The best trained, and those who succeed the most in international air exercises are the Israelis (1st) and the Brits (2nd) , the US (3rd). We get more training hours per pilot than anyone else. What's interesting is that the Israeli Air force is based on the RAF and the USAAF. Those who started it were WWII veterans. However, the best pilots in the RAF were the Polish pilots...
"It’s well known most of our jets and helicopters don’t work" Yes, and it's been straight up a myth the entire time. Most jets wouldn't be able to take off right now in this moment, true, but that is the case all around the globe. Germany's way of counting them only in "battle-ready" configuration is not doing them favours.
Nah, the MiG-25 was. The Soviets learned that we were developing a supersonic fighter that could deliver nukes and needed something that could do the same.
@@duncanmcgee13 MiG-25 was developed as a response to SR-71 and XB-70 projects as a super fast interceptor. MiG-29 was supposed to be cheap frontline fighter, with the Su-27 being true air superiority fighter like the F-15.
Nah guys. The Mig-25 came first, then the F-15 countered that, then they created the high-low and the F-16 was made, then the Russians realizing that the high-low thing works, built the Su-27 and Mig-29 to counter the F-15 and F-16 respectively.
@@My_Alchemical_Romance they have been improving the old ones for years and i think the russian air force has ordered a new more advanced version of the tu160. At least thats what i have heard on the internet.
I know I am a little late to this party but as far as American MiG-29, Jared Isaacman has a MiG-29UB that is used to train civilian astronauts. They used it for Inspiration4 and currently on the Polaris Dawn program.
@@dantaylor7344 Not only did I go to school, I teach the class, boy. Sit your ass down and get educated. www.enginelabs.com/news/torque-talk-pound-feet-foot-pounds-one/
you are correct lbs-ft is a measurement of rotational forces like engine torque . aircraft engine power is measured in pounds of thrust . 2 TOTALLY different measurements
@@cyberdroid2300 i go watch videos of jets I want or grind and if you go to comments and sort by newest I Believe you will see your hunch to be correct
"Protect yourself online with a Mig-"
Love to. Threat of a strafing run would probably improve my ISP's customer service.
"Im having buffering issues."
"Thats not our problem."
"Its going to be your problem."
@@barneymiller7894
"That's not our problem."
"Look outside, what do you see?"
"What's that shadow in the skies?"
"That's my brother. Now it is your problem. What should I tell him?"
Laughes in Bbbbrrrrrttttt
I giggled when he said that. :)
"My internet is down again. Don't make me get my mig"
I'm a bit amazed that you forgot the German Mig-29, that German inherited after the reunification. They were used extensively in training exercises with the US, so that pilots could train against a real Mig. Those exercises also showed some of the advantages the Mig had over the F-16 f that time, in close combat the Mig was almost unbeatable while the US planes had a clear advantage at beyond visual range. "Military Aviation History" has a great video about that.
The MiG was unbeatable in close combat because it had the R-73 combined with the helmet mounted sight. In terms of manoeuvrability, the MiG-29 is good, but no match for the F-16.
@@JohnGaltAustria True, this is the reason why the west now also has helmet sights
@Christopher Huxley While your point is techincally correct, DCS pilots are not a factor here. Luftwaffe fulcrum pilots from JG73 had an exchange with VFA-106 in 2000, where the germans realized the inferior ergonomics compared to the NATO-spec aircraft.
Not really true. German and american summarized the test with saying that the MIG-29 is a piece of crap. I don't know were the idea about how the MIG was unbeatable in a turning fight is coming from? The only thing positive about the MIG-29 (from the test results ) was that the close range AAMs (slaved to the helmet mounted sight) was almost invicible. That is why so much resources was put into a new gen AAM, like the AIM-9x, Meteor etc. The MIG-29 does NOT dominate the skys in a turning battle. It is very limited.
@@JohnGaltAustria You are absolutly right. People tend to misinterpret the test result (most likely becouse they never read them...). The Close range AAM slaved to the HMS was groundbreaking. Nothing else was.
In May/June of 1990 we saw the Mig-29 and SU-27 fly at the Will Rogers Airport in OKC.
We were told by the announcer that we were among the first "Westerners" to see them fly.
First was the Mig-29, it was incredibly agile and did maneuvers that seemed to rely on pure Engine power it seemed, doing Cork-screw turns on its tail as it climbed at times with one Engine turned off.
The SU-27 looked a bit like a giant F-15. It was the most impressive of the two planes. It did every maneuver the Mig did, but did seem like a more refined aircraft. The Mig's engines smoked.
Both planes did the Cobra right in front of us which was very impressive. Finally the Pilots landed and got out and waved to the crowd. Beautiful aircraft. Both were painted in sky blue and light grey as I remember.
For what it's worth I thought I'd put that out there.
This is absolutely fascinating, thank you for sharing.
Smoke is execes fuel injection, it colls down combustion cases and reduces nitric oxides and prolongs engine life.
In air combat mode (flick of swich) its smoke free.
Look up of German experience, they were beter than F16 in close combat, off bore helment mounted sight.
They were in service in Germany up to 2000s
Love the Frankenstrat, EVH forever!
@@ljubomirculibrk4097 didn't know that the 29 had that "smokeless" switch. Cool! Because smoking engines is being said as a tactical disadvantage during dogfights because it makes the plane more visible and shows its trajectory. Thanks!
I hope everyone who is interested in the MiG-29 has read about the joint air training of german MiG-29s against US F-16s in the US and the results. :)
OKC represent
"It's a shame that the F-16 and the MiG-29 never fought each other." Vladimir Putin: "Hold my vodka."
Biden; "Holding the vodka and the F-16's, now what?".
The polish air force simulated a dogfight, they have both planes. There's a video of that on RUclips
@@TRATTORE1225 mig couldn't compete 😂. The f16s nuts
@@TRATTORE1225 a dogfight requires the Mig-29 to close from 160km AMRAAM range to 5km
Good luck
@@hypersonichobo4263 AMRAAM has no sustainer-engine, if you do some manoeuvres after it is shot it is quite likely it does not have enough energy to still reach you... Especially at max distance...
And you also have not that many tries...
But still F-16 is much better than MIG-29...
The MIG-29 was not designed as an air superiority fighter, it was a tactical fighter, an interceptor that would fly close to the battle lines, the SU-27 was an air superiority fighter.
Su27 also know an su 30mk,su 34 or T 50
And now j15
So...your sister Su Sow's???... (Si)
So what is the reasoning behind cobra maneuver on a non superiority fighter?
Also, you lose so much energy on the maneuver you would be shot down by a handgun!
The Su-27 went into service a few years after the Mig-29, but they are both multirole and air superiority fighters. Su-30s and Su-35s are doing air to ground missions in Syria, bombing hospitals. New York TImes has some good videos about it on youtube.
Additional point worth noting, the MIG29 has vents in the top of the wing that allow it to draw air from above the wings for the engines, this enables it to take off from dusty runways and adds to the deployment options.
their effect is negligible at best. Don't drink the RT kool-aid
The so-called "gills".
There's actually one air force that, to this day, uses BOTH the MiG-29 and the F-16. Poland.
Going back in time and showing someone in the 1980s a picture of a MiG-29 and F-16 flying side-by side in the same livery would be pretty surreal.
Not unless they know their recent history , in WW 2 US & Russia were “ allies “ where they flew side by side on multiple occasions , also the Soviets bought and used US made equipment such as airplanes , tanks , transport jeeps and rifles
In 2003 22 MiG-29s were sold to the Polish Air Force for a symbolic *1 EUR per Fulcrum*, 14 were taken into service with the 41. elt after an overhauled. Of the remaining two German MiGs, one had crashed after a pilot’s fault, and one (the 29+03) is on display at Laage-Rostock airport. (migflug.com/jetflights/german-luftwaffe-mig-29-fulcrum/)
Poland is throwing the mig 29 away as it now has f35
Soon there's gonna be Bulgaria too cause they ordered some F-16s
@@aabb-zz9uw Poland doesn't hae F-35 yet. 32 have been ordered but still haven't been delivered.
2:10 - Chapter 1 - Background
5:05 - Chapter 2 - Export
6:25 - Mid roll ads
8:05 - Chapter 3 - The aircraft itself
13:00 - Chapter 4 - Armaments
13:40 - Chapter 5 - The americans MiG29s
14:35 - Chapter 6 - Operational history
17:00 - Chapter 7 - Mikoyan 1.44, the failed successor
19:05 - Chapter 8 - The dogfight of the imagination
Thank you
Germany also used the Mig 29's that they inherited from East Germany after rejoining.
This would have been VASTLY better if he talked to any of the Viper dudes that got to fly the Fulcrum on exchange tours.
There's literally a video on RUclips of US Hornet's vs German MiG 29's that they inherited from East Germany when they United. Sigh
It"s the downgraded version
@@bosbanon3452 And the Vipers back then were Block 30s. What was your point?
and they sold it for one dollar each :D
0:28 - I'll take the 29 over shurfshark
Haha 😂😂
Love your comment
Simon speaks about MiG-29 supermaneurability, the entire time it's Su-27 or Su-30 video demonstrating it. Hillarious
yeah but for non aviation enthusiast it can be hard to tell the difference between the sukhoi's and the mig's at a glance. i can understand it
And it also means the Mig29 lives on in these other designs! It's so pretty!
He said in the video around the cobra maneuver that it was a copyright thing. They are fairly similar looking airframes though
@@craigmoran893 they were all developed in parallel by two different bureaus with little exchange of information. Mig-29 is also known to perform Kolokol, but not Cobra until recently. While Su's perform Chakra which is even more impressing
Yeah, I also thought that he is talking about SU30's famous Cobra maneuver
Loads of things wrong with this, so many it's difficult where to start the criticisms. Here's a few to begin with: The Mig was a point-defence fighter not an air-superiority fighter, the F-15 entered service in 1975. The Mig 29's original load was 4 tonnes, upped to 6 in later versions (you can find this info everywhere). Nothing is mentioned of the plane's helmet mounted sight & the capability of the R73 in close combat which caused a great deal concern in the west during the early 90s. The Mig's "party piece" was the tail-slide not the Cobra - that honour went to the SU 27. The '29 does not have FBW nor RSS, so although capable of performing a kind of Cobra manoeuvre, it's can only do it fleetingly & not to the same extreme angle that the Sukhoi can achieve. Having said that, a 1950's vintage Saab Draken can achieve the Cobra manoeuvre, & this does not possess a particularly high T/W nor fancy flight control avionics: the Cobra is all about aerodynamics & a "soft" stall-point. Another moot point is you're comparing late model F-16 figures to standard A series Mig 29s. During the cold-war, the F-16 was fitted with the less-powerful & fuel efficient PW F-100 engine & was a far-less capable machine. I suggest you spend more time researching your videos rather than honing your chit-chatty delivery.
Roasted
I seriously doubt the the “chit-chatty” man is the one doing the research.
Can’t be mad at him. He’s basically an actor reading a script.
Good on you for the corrections though. 👍
Do you know my dad?
He also got it wrong that it was Poland and Bulgaria that purchased MIG-29s. Romania (also part of NATO) has some aswell.
@@yopappy6599 he's the face of the channel which means its his credibility on the line.
No excuses.
Love the video, but thrust is measured in “lbf” meaning “pounds of force” as opposed to pounds of mass like when weighing oneself. “Pound feet” refers to torque, and is written “lbft”. Easy to misread, but something to clarify for the future
Haha Yes well said
Thank you or that clarification - I did wonder when he said it. I was like "but pound feet is torque so how does that translate??"
Yeah, I'm dumb. It's correct in the script.
COME ON SIMON. YOU HAVE ONE JOB.
Megaprojects you’re not dumb Simon, you were just distracted ;)
@Eddie Hitler You have an example? Pound feet is torque. It is force multiplied by the distance away from the centre of axis. The definition of torque. (btw... it's not lb/ft because that would be pounds per foot, which is wrong. It's "Lbft" (without the slash) because it's force multiplied by distance) the way you write it, it's the opposite (force divided by distance). In short - no; you're wrong
The MIG 29 was never intended for the "air superiority" role, it was originally designed to be a multi role fighter capable of both ground attack and air to air operations and In that regard the Mig 29 and its successor the mig 35 have fulfilled the multi role fighter job beautifully, the su 27 and its successor the su 35 are the only russian fighters currently in service intended exclusively for the Air superiority role (even though they still can carry out ground attack operations but to a limited extent ), the su 27 was the soviet union's answer to the American F-15 eagle, the soviet union found itself unable to defend against this new aircraft because at the time they didn't possess an air superiority fighter capable of countering the American threat so that's they designed the Su 27.
And the F16 was an answer to the Mig23. The Americans got worried about the Soviet numbers advantage, so they decided to build a cheap fighter.
@@scratchy996 And the F-16 (Block 70/72) has now become an expensive plane as well. Funny how that works.
@@scratchy996 No the F-16 was an answer to the high cost of the F-15. It had nothing to do with Soviet fighters of any type.
@@dumdumbinks274 That's very much possible. I'm just saying what I saw on a documentary about the F-16.
@@scratchy996 Fair enough, though modern documentaries are not entirely reliable. You should look into the development of the F-16 starting with John Boyd and the Fighter Mafia, but don't take their ideas on what a fighter should be as fact... it was 50 years ago and a lot has changed/
Something that’s super cool is that the Swedish jet fighter j-35 draken (dragon) from 1955 could also perform a cobra, but instead of using thrust vectoring it used a wing with control surfaces, and no extra pure control surface like a canard wing
Nothing Swedish is cool
Sorry bro
@@chrispekel5709 Everyone is entitled to their own opinion
@@chrispekel5709 Hard disagree. Archer, CV-90, NLAW, Gripen… For a country with only 10.42 million people they make a lot of impressive military tech. Glad to have them on our side (once Erdogan gets his head out of his ass😅). 🇳🇱🇸🇪💪
Denmark had Draken too. Popular among pilots, and a whole lot safer than our Starfighters. The Starfighters had this howl though, cool sound. The Cobra did not impress danish Draken pilots either.
Neither the mig 29 nor the su27 had thrust vectoring either
No. The 29 is a pure point defense fighter, meaning it would fight off tactical ground attack aircraft and their escorts, presumably the longer range F-15, in vicinity of tactical targets. Thus the 29 is the answer to that.
The F-16 was conceived a cheap air defense fighter for allied nations in Europe. It would replace the F-104 and the underpowered F-5, and it did. The 29 stayed true to it’s role, while the F-16 became wildly successful as a true multi-role platform.
Being multi role or not is not a extremely good point, even more when you have one of the best bombers and ground attackers
@@St.Matthew422 The F-16 isn’t as good of a fighter as the 29, but it does much more. To small nations this is important.
I would agree, mr crafts are more economical for smaller nations, especially ones where developing an af cadre!
Amen on the point defense issue. The rest can be debated, which i ain't going to :D
@@bigbdawg83 the only time f16s met mig29s were during the kosovowar 1999.
The dutch F16 won
Simon every time you uttered the word the 'Cobra Manoeuvre' you have managed to show an Su-30 doing that never a Mig 29
And there are actually plenty of Videos of an Mig-29 doing them. Especially from the Mig-29 you can fly on if you have the money for it xD
that is so true your right .it was done to test the g force on the whole structure during testing .i have a book on it just is case you can look it up on the net and the test pilot call
ed it that
Plenty of planes can do the maneuver, originally it was even called the “Dracen Super-Stall”, most Su-27 variants can do it, and so can the MiG-29.
Can someone who is more knowledgeable about dog fighting please tell me what the tactical advantage of a cobra maneuver would be? My understanding is that bleeding velo is a death sentence but I don't fly planes or anything so I should probably solicit advice from keyboard pilots
@@JusticeDutton I did my undergrad in Aerospace engineering so have some idea about it... it is used to suddenly reduce the aircraft speed to virtually zero while in a dog fight. In theory it can help the adversary aircraft overshoot and then the prey becomes the hunter . Also it could help to misguid the adversary radar which now ll think a ' stationary ' object as a clutter or noise ( again theoretically). With the advent of new generation of IR seeking missiles and BVRAAMs the use of such a maneuver in an actual fight is unlikely to provide any real benefit. However its jaw dropping good if you watch it live in an airshow
If you want to buy an aircraft that can go over Mach 2, the demilitarized MIG-29 is the cheapest one you can buy - Even to this day!
Cheap on purchase, but it failed per hour cost and is failing even as a Mig-35, painting new emblems and pasting new stickers will not solve its problems, unless if it decides to auger into the dirt as 50% of the mig-29 ever built have done.
Not true you can still buy a MIG-21-BIS second hand. Mach 2.05 at 13,000 meters.
@@gordonlawrence1448
I don't think the Mig-21 is in production anymore though ? Which makes spare parts an iffy proposition.
@@Grumpy_old_Boot It's not quite like that for military jets. EG the typhoon production lines were still open for 5 years after the plane stopped being made just too build up a stock of spares. There are a lot of spares that have never been out of the box for the MIC-21 and of course hundreds in "boneyard". There were nearly 12,000 of them made. Spares will not be an issue for a long time yet.
@@gordonlawrence1448
That's true.
I still think the MiG-29 will edge it on buying price (especially in the second hand market), and since it's still in production, spare parts is even less of a hassle.
But yes, you are correct, the MiG-21 is indeed a very attractive jet plane as well, if you want to go Mach 2+
Of course, both are essentially toys for the super wealthy, if you want an affordable jet, the civilian jet planes beat them in both price and running costs - But I don't think any of them can go Mach 2+ ... though I could be wrong.
Whoa whoa whoa now, Simon, my dude
@11:00
A: The Cobra Maneuver was made famous by he Sukhoi Su-27 when it was first performed for the public at the 1989 Paris Airshow. The Mig-29 really isn't known for the maneuver.
B: That footage you show of the Cobra? Is of an Su-33/37, not a Mig-29
Could do a whole aviation channel for all those planes,
hmmm....
LOLs, ur right. I didn't clock that first time around but now I see ur comment I skipped to the time-sig & ur right about the Su-33/37. Well-spotted, dude.
MFW seeing this comment.
ruclips.net/video/hou0lU8WMgo/видео.html
Correct. Not sure why this channel cannot discern SU-27 from MiG 29, but whatever. Different airplanes.
@@StsFiveOneLima To be fair, in grainy ass old airshow footage from the 90's their silhouettes are kinda similar
One of the Mig-29’s designers was asked about its lack of range, he joked that it was “a fighter designed to protect the boundaries of its own airfield”
Oh good its back
India: How many MiG-29 should we order?
Indian Government: Order 66
What?
@@vivekkaushik9508 StarWars Reference. Order 66
Nice one lol
"I'm not sure that's a practical amount..."
"Dew it."
hi M B...
'
what reason india want 66 ussr russia mig-29s for...
name of country want to war anti india
Why was it removed yesterday? And could you do one on the F14 Tomcat as this is the TOP GUN beast you mentioned in your video
Lol. That was the first thing that came to my mind as well.
Yes please!
It was mentioned in his twitter why he removed it: twitter.com/SimonWhistler/status/1290307338641973248?s=20
@@Asianxiety Thank you for linking :)
The f14 kinda sucks tho....
How the heck do we still not have a video on the Su-27 and all of it variants?!?!?
"You can protect yourself online with a MiG-29"... even Simon's promotional comments are entertaining!
Honestly that sounds better though. If your tech savvy enough to find IP addresses and someone hacks you, you can find them and drop a KAB-500 on their house!
3:34 the F-15 was a response to the MiG-25. or at least what the US thought the MiG-25 was going to be, which it turned out not to be at all.
Ironically enough it ended up being a pretty good response to the Mig-29 and Mig-35 though
@@todo9633 a respond to the future lmao
@@todo9633 Mig-35 is still not in service with any operator, including Russia, so this makes ZERO sense.
@@2005OEFArmy ehh, he probably meant the SU-27.
Nato couldn't get any good intelligence on the Mig-25, all they knew was it was big and it was fast. They didn't realize that the Foxbat couldn't maneuver, and was only designed to be a fast, high-flying, bomber interceptor. The Eagle was developed in 72 and it wasn't until 76 that the US was able to obtain a Foxbat from a defector, which was after the F-15 was put into service. So the F-15 would have been built to respond to what they speculated about the Mig-25 was capable of, luckily for nato, it wasn't that great.
The Mig-29 also scared the Americans who were under the impression that the Fulcrum had a really advanced radar as well as its other characteristics like the helmet-mounted display and the ability to fire high-off-boresight IR missiles. Once the Soviet Union collapsed and the German reunification the Germans inherited Mig-29s which they flew as adversaries for Nato pilots in exercises. Turns out that it had a fairly mediocre radar and the high-off-boresight fox-2 capability wasn't as horrifying as it sounded (they were afraid that they might not have any ability to compete in a dogfight but they were wrong) Which obviously the US has since developed their own helmet-mounted displays.
You make great videos and provide mostly accurate information. Some of the videos of the “mig 29s” you showed doing the the wild maneuvers were actually SU-27 flankers.
To be fair, it's just demonstrating supermanoeuvrability. It doesn't really matter which plane it's showing.
And he said he cant find any that are not copyrighted
Back when Germany still had a few Mig29 there were regular combat simulations with other NATO nations and from what I've read the US pilots were always very impressed of the Mig's capabilities.
Yep. The German Air Force/Luftwaffe acquired quite a few MiG 29’s from East Germany when the wall fell. I was a Combat Medic with a Patriot Missile battalion in Germany from ‘95-‘98, during that time we did a NATO TACEVAL (we were evaluated in combat operations by the Germans, Brits, and pretty much everyone who has either had their asses kicked or saved by us). When we had the actual eval after 6 straight months of train up, one of the aggressor aircraft was a MiG 29 (along with some Hinds, and other Soviet aircraft). Considering the fact that I originally joined the Army in early 1989 when the Cold War was still in full swing, and we were trained in basic training about fighting the Soviets and Soviet doctrine, I definitely made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up to look up and see an actual, real deal MiG 29 “strafing” us. First time I ever saw one, although I had seen real Mi-24 Hind D’s at Ft Bliss during Roving Sands in ‘92 right after we came back from the Gulf.
Stefan Misch
were they impressed with the mig's or with proper pilots using mig's? even if avionics differences between NATO and USSR planes are huge, as we are even more away each day
Yea I listened to an interview with a british test pilote who flew one after the fall of the eastern block. It was apparebtöy very easy to fly. Alot of automatic controle for the engine.
Would love to hear of the Mig 35.
Competing against F-35 and the two canceled European designs. Also a question if those things will all be outdated by remote controlled drones unconstrained by the need to keep the pilot alive.
@@johndododoe1411
fighter jet drones would be scary as fuck .
With the pilot controlling it safely from a cozy base , the drones would be able to maneuver, reach speeds and withstand g forces piloted aircraft couldn't even dream of
@@constantinethecataphract5949 replace 'drone' with 'missile' and you have modern air warfare lol
Did he almost say "You can protect yourself online with a MIG-29" during the promo at the start? xD
Sure, you can try to hack his computer, but there's a Russian fighter jet screaming towards your house at a couple of machs if you do.
IDF did that during the beginning of may 2019. A cyber attack was launched out of Gaza and was traced back to a specific building in Gaza. So the IDF bombed the building and destroyed the computers
;D
LOLs
I hate myself for this already but.....couple of mach* ...yup taste like bile
Hell yeah! I will buy a MiG-29 for that purpose!
Now where is the ad code for buying?
Mig-29's speciality is flawless high altitude (low density atmosphere) operation .
More jets would be great - F35, A10 warthog, AC-130 "spooky" gunship, etc
A10 first please 😃
Spooky isnt a jet but hells yeah i get ur point
I think he already has an episode of the A10
Shark
I think that was Real Engineering that did one recently.
@@negativeindustrial oops, sorru
how about the F-14 Tomcat from the actual movie Top Gun, it had it's issues but computer-controlled delta wing! Still used by Iran, although rarely
All of those issue were worked out by the time they introduced the F-14B.
And is also utilized by SDF1.
It IS and I will NOT HEAR OTHERWISE! 😉🔫
@@seanbrazell6147 The what?
@@OrdinaryDude Robotech dude, Robotech - Marcross Saga.
@@viperswhip Uh, ok...
Please do MiG-31, the fastest aircraft flying today (and the Soviets' answer to Blackbird).
Yes do on mig-31
If he is going to do the Mig-31 he should just do a double feature of the Mig-25 and Mig-31 seeing as the 31 only really exists to fill the gap that the aging Mig 25 left.
@Ruturaj Shiralkar lol, sure mate, sure
@Ruturaj Shiralkar It isn't like the government that developed the majority of those planes collapsed or anything.......
@Ruturaj Shiralkar yep
Great video as always. If you're after ideas for other aircraft, I'd love to see one on the Su-47 "Berkut". Another fascinating project that fell victim to budget cuts and (apparently) issues with its forward swept wing design.
Нет, просто управляемый вектор тяги открыл новые перспективы для самолетов с крылом нормальной стреловидности. Но Беркут дал ооочень много материала для дальнейшего развития аэродинамики и восприятия нагрузок. И да, Беркут достоин отдельной истории. Ну а для меня Беркут - бессменный аватар уже лет 10))
Yeah, an unfortunate side-effect of the forward-swept wing is it's tendency to undergo significantly more wing-loading at transonic speeds compared to a regular aft-swept wing. This would mean that the wing could potentially fail catastrophically at much lower speeds during high-G (or high angle of attack) maneuvers. Based on these limitations it was decided that further development would be discontinued. The lessons learned about super-maneuverability were valuable though.
Raising of the Kursk would be a fantastic Mega Project.
ruclips.net/video/uQJ6IMREvz8/видео.html
The cobra maneouver was first performed by the su-27 (shown in the video) and not the mig-29.
The first one was the J35 Draken
Actually, it was the Swedes who performed it first - though for some reason the Russians got more fame for it
@@JosePineda-cy6om probably because of the Russian jet which were the first to be able to make complex
maneuvers
@@JosePineda-cy6om The Cobra was complexed its years before Russia did it and Sweden don`t tend to Brag
@@Karl-Benny That's one big problem of Scandinavians (I'm including Finns here, though I know the "Scandinavian" title kinda not completely applies to them) in general and Swedes in particular: you guys are WAY TOO POLITE AND WAY TOO HUMBLE!!! So much so that sometimes you yourselves forget what your country is about (really SAS? Nothing is really Swedish?). Sweden is an awesome country. For your own good, you should brag a bit more
Suggestion: The Arecibo Observatory radio telescope in Puerto Rico
Trick ooh, good one
You mean Rogue Transmission?
@@SomePeopleCallMe I think the radio telescope in Battlefield 4 is set in China and is based on the real, extremely large, telescope referred to as "FAST," which is located in China's Guizhou Province. A MegaProject video comparing the two, along with how they may have influenced the game, would be a great suggestion.
You mean Alec Trevelyan's last stand?
Yeah, good idea champ
I absolutely enjoyed your video, however, please allow my humble correction; the imperial unit lbf, used to rate the impulse force of jet engines stands for Pound Force, not Pound Foot. Pound Foot (lb.ft) is the imperial unit for torque, commonly used to rate the rotating force output of a piston engine or electric motor’s shaft. This unit is also not to be confused with Foot Pound, ft.lb, which is the imperial unit for work or energy, used to rate the impact energy of a moving object, as a bullet for example. This is a lot less confusing in the Metric system.
Let’s get a video on The Hubble Space Telescope 🔭
the official story or the real one that the hubble was never meant to look away from earth that it was originally designed for the cia and was surplus this perfectly explains why it didnt function properly and needed to be altered as the lens that it was launched with was designed for viewing closer objects
@@paktahn And show that the earth was flat. Finally.
@@megaprojects9649 I think what they're trying to say is that it was built on a surplus spy satellite chassis (which IIRC it was, though heavily modified); though I don't think the focus issues have to do with poor conversion into a telescope [I'm pretty sure there wasn't anything left of the 'original' optics in it], I always heard it was a problem with calibration of the (new) computerised measuring equipment used by the company producing the telescope optics -- luckily when debugging the issue after the fact they could figure out exactly by what factor the calibration was off and produce a corrective lens to compensate, and at the time the Shuttle could do a mission to install it. Fun stuff to learn about, I'd also like to see a video on it!
@@megaprojects9649 We have been over this for years now! The earth isn't round... Nor is it flat, that would be just silly.
No the Earth is a CUBE!
@@CMDRSweeper Resting on cubic turtles, all the way down.
Side-note:
At 5:57 of the video there's an image of four F-16 fighter jets in formation over water. I spied, with my little eye, a building on the shoreline that appears just above the blue tail of the lead plane. That building is the "Monona Terrace", a Frank Lloyd Wright-designed building in Madison, Wisconsin, USA...some 150 miles from where I live. Wright never saw the building, construction having begun 34 years after his passing...and opening in 1997, some 59 years after it was first proposed.
The occasion for the photograph was the 60th anniversary of the Wisconsin Air National Guard. 115th fighter wing, in 2007-8 and the 10th anniversary of the opening of Monona Terrace. Following the street directly behind the Monona Terrace, away from the lake, will have you at our lovely State Capitol (just out of frame) in two city blocks.
On Wisconsin!
im from baraboo myself.when i was younger,i used to see them fly over rhythm and booms at warner park,it was the highlight for me seeing them pass over just above the trees
19:52 is a Sukhoi, the Mig29 doesn't have a tail-boom
Even the curvature is not there in Mig
@Caп¡s Aпuв¡s As well as their size the 29 is really smol
The F-16 wasn't initially designed to be a multi-role fighter, but gradually evolved into one over time.
Aren't you talking about the F-15 instead?
Same with the F-15 and F-16,I think being a multirole fighter has more to do with avionics and armaments rather than design alone.
Simon: 'there are scarier places out there'
Me: 'Business Blaze?'
Love the content as always
BB is a silly place
Im still waiting on Charles to take over, and crown himself "Charles the 1st, King of the Machines."
@@rucker69 but that's why we love it right?
@@Texassince1836 Charles the 1st, Heater of the Blaze, teller of conspiracies and King of the machines
Simon: *says "smash that dislike button" on megaprojects*
Everyone from Business blaze: *"You weren't supposed to do that"*
taking action on video is the thing that counts. It does not matter for youtube, if action is positive or negative.
How about doing one of these on the USS Nautilus, the first nuclear-powered submarine. Should be an interesting one given all of the engineering challenges they needed to overcome.
0:10: Gen. Radek’s MIGs in Air Force One:
Are we a joke to you?
I'd like to see more videos like this, I mean the raptor and su-37 or su-47 and so on. Mig-35 sounds like a fun video too! Also, does Russia have some stealth bombers like the B-2?
Not officially, but they most likely have analyzed the F-117 nighthawk that was shot down in Serbia and maybe in China right now.
Yes to a mig-35 video please.
@Против Глобал everything you claim could be true then again it could also be propaganda used by your country to garner more support for the war from its people
Против Глобал the us acknowledged they were shot down. That’s basic information, nothing was covered up
I think the closes they got to a stealth bomber was the Tu160, but there are rumors of a new generation stealth bomber project in the works called PAK DA.
Why am I watching this? I don't even own a fighter jet.
Good point I never even thought of that.
Myself included
Like, we do??🙄
@@Ari-cd3sn you haven't got yours yet? I'd contact your local representative forthwith!
@@ollieb9875 😂😂
Well yeah me either so I gotta watch all these vids to decide!
I always thought the F-18 was similar. Seen together at 89 Abbotsford Airshow they looked really similar.
Sorry for the necro, but in many ways the MiG-29 is a closer analogue to the F-18 (or rather the YF-17) than to the F-16.
I swear to God I clicked the link for "Bathyscaphe Triest: The Quest to Actually Dive 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" but some how ended up on the MIG-29 video... RUclips is a fickle mistress.
yet we love it
Protect yourself online with a Mig LMAO this joke is gold
Yes lets see a *MiG-35* video please.
The mig-29 is an interceptor that can dogfight if needed, when it came out it had several advantages over the f-16, helmet-mounted sight, r-73, and medium-range missiles. It heavily depended on ground control to point it in the right direction and turn its radar just before shooting the target. Pilots didn't even have a battleground picture in a display like the su-27, instead, it just has a HUD repeater. It was demonstrated to pilots before Mikoyan even finished the manual and more advanced features, like fly-by-wire were to be implemented later but then the soviet union ended. The Mig was stuck with the same old tech for a while. The f-16 on the other hand kept getting upgrades and ended up being one of the most popular multifunctional jets ever with superior avionics.
@Vulcan Logix ______
"but the soviet plane was far- far more Maintenance friendly"
It wasn't so much more maintenance friendly as that the Soviets (and later Russians) had no where near the safety margins and maintenance requirements for their aircraft that most western Air Forces have. Likely, given no maintenance whatsoever and most things being equal, a MiG-29 will lawn dart into the earth due to maintenance issues long before an F-16. It's just that the United States Air Force has the money to spend on maintenance and thus spends it to make sure that doesn't happen.
"as well as far more fuel efficient"
I would be absolutely shocked if the MiG-29's RD-33 engines were more fuel efficient. Especially since the F-16 has had multiple engine upgrades over the years. Even so, the original Pratt & Whitney F100 which has since been upgraded was probably a much more efficient engine. If the Indian and former East Germany MiG-29s have taught us anything, it's that the Soviets/Russians weren't nearly as good at making engines as the west. Even now with the Su-30MKIs that the Indians are primarily using, the engines are much more fragile than western counterparts. The Indian Air Force has to be super duper careful about foreign object debris being sucked into the engine and when something does happen to the engine it has to be shipped back to Russia for an overhaul/repair.
@Vulcan Logix ______
"Going to flexible afterburners the Soviets were thinking of Maintenance downtime whereas the Rapter requires 20,000 hours of maintenance after every flight"
Only a fool would compare a late 1970s fighter to a 5th gen stealth aircraft fighter in the first place. If you knew anything, you'd know that the stealth aircraft in the American fleet need extensive maintenance due to their RAM coatings. The B-2 even has a *_CLIMATE CONTROLLED HANGAR_* to safeguard it when it's parked. Try again.
"Whereas vector nozzles require maintenance due to temperature affecting the hydraulics of the engine's."
Truly a fool, you can't even tell the difference between variable exhaust nozzles (which the MiG-29 has, just as with most modern military jet aircraft with afterburner-capable engines) and thrust vectoring.
And, again - *_I was comparing the MiG-29 to the F-16. Why the hell are you bringing in stealth fighters and thrust vectoring?_*
"Fuel efficiency is becoming equal to the west only after latest power thrust engine design overhaul."
Nah.
"And dont forget the Soviets have latest cockpit ejection technology"
The Soviets have the latest technology when they haven't existed for 30 years? ...Okay.
"also radar upgrades"
...You're kidding yourself if you think Russian avionics and AESA radar are on the same level as the west, specifically America. America has been developing AESA radar for longer. And they've been doing a better job of it.
If you knew anything (you don't), you'd at least have been wise enough to cite Russian IRST systems where they did/maybe do have an advantage over America and the west on. But you didn't. Because you're a fool.
"The su-29 stands alone and has been in service for a longer time than the F-15."
The Su-29? The single engine propeller trainer from the 1990s? ...Okay. You're high.
"And even before it. American planes have always been behind soviet planes as far as quality but soviet planes have certainly been around much longer due to their build."
Yep. You've definitely been inhaling paint fumes or something.
@Vulcan Logix ______ It is like an ak47, not a sniper rifle I guess. Still deadly.
@Vulcan Logix ______
"I am still laughing about it because the SU - 29 was actually developed to counter the F - 14 Tomcat"
...AGAIN, the Su-29 is a single-engine propeller acrobatic/trainer aircraft developed in the 1990s. You can't even get the designation correct, FFS.
@@matchesburn Actually,Japan is the first country to use AESA radar on their fighter jet.Russia is way behind in AESA tech,their SU-35 is still using PESA radar(which used to be a big thing when most of the western countries still stuck at pulse-doppler radar) and only a handful of Mig-29K,Mig-35 and SU-57 have those AESA radar.Even Chinese already have AESA installed on their newer fighter jets when the Russians still stuck at PESA
I recommend anyone who’s interested in this to search “Interview with Robert Hierl on the Mig 29 Fulcrum” on here. It’s the findings of a Luftwaffe pilot who assessed MiG 29s inherited from the DDR after unification, and may answer some questions.
"...there are scarier people outthere..." - WRONG!
Noone is scarier than Simon without his beard.
Great video! Just one correction, the Cobra maneuver shown is done by a Sukhoi Su-30 and not Mig-29
9 G's is pretty standard. 9 G is close to the limit of fighter pilots. Very dangerous for the pilot to lose consciousness while flying. Unmanned UAVs could out outmaneuver manned fighters. Some later models have more fuel tanks along the spine. ( conformal ? ). Lovely plane. A really beautiful change for Soviet fighters. Best since the Mig-15. Can still be dangerous. To the enemy.
The Mig-29 is an underrate fighter jet quite capable of holding its own; in fact, when it entered service in 1982 it was superior to the F-16 until the 'C' generation of the F-16 was developed. The US did not come to fully appreciate the Mig-29's potential until after the re-unification of Germany when German pilots, from the former West Germany, started flying it and discovered its abilities. Many US pilots flew against it in mock fights only to be shot-down during these exercises by the Mig-29s flown by the German pilots. Germany only began flying it after the re-unification due to inheriting them from former East Germany and deciding to fly them just to see what they could do. The Mig-29 earned the respect of those pilots who have flown it.
Only superior due to it's air to air weapons. In terms of maneuverability the F-16 was better, and the F-16 also had longer range, better situational awareness, a lower IR signature, and was smaller. The MiG-29 was faster, but that doesn't matter at low altitude where most predicted WWIII battles would occur, or in a dogfight.
The West German, English, American, French etc pilots found that the MiG-29 was lacking in terms of maneuverability compared to the F-16 and Mirage, while being slightly more maneuverable than the F-15. In guns-only battles it lost more often than it won, even when facing F/A-18s. This was in part because the early MiG-29s had no FBW controls and were much more difficult to fly than anything the West had. And once the West developed their own HMD + IR missile systems by the early 2000s the MiG-29 had no notable advantages.
The MiG-29 earned the respect of pilots not because of it's performance, but because it was fun to fly a decently maneuverable fighter that had no computer-enforced restrictions. One German pilot in particular noted that it felt very much like flying an F-4 in terms of cockpit ergonomics and technology.
If you're going to talk about planes then there's a few i'd like to see.
English Electric Lightning - One of the first planes with supercruise.
F22 Raptor - Believed to be the daddy of the skies.
YF23 Black Widow II - Better than the Raptor - (change my mind)
AC130 Spectre Gunship - GUNS!!!
F14 Tomcat - Dat AIM-54 tho!
B29 Superfortress - Dropped the nukes on the Japs.
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34762/this-lecture-by-an-f-22-test-pilot-on-the-raptors-flight-control-system-is-bonkers
Mig-29 is one of my favorite jets in Ace Combat.
A episode about the Suchoi SU 27/35 would be amazing.
Sukhoi*
IMHO, the two most graceful-looking fighters ever are the F-16 and the Mig-29. Aviation Art. Russian engines: Engineer: "How much power do you want?" Pilots: "Yes".
The Indian Air Force used the MiG 29 in the 1999 conflict with Pakistan, flying jets in combat sorties at altitudes above 25,000 ft on craggy mountains.
Not a single MiG 29 was lost to enemy fire!
Because MIg29 never crossed the LOC to the Pakistani side.
@@anwarma1 Pak airforce chief surrendered after knowing Mig29 heading towards Pak, destroyed military bases. Pak airforce chief was afraid to bring F16 to fight mig29.
samrat julius dowerah that’s was then during kargill. It didn’t surrender dude . PAF during kargill didn’t have BVR hence was venerable . But now they have the BVR punch and many other things in store. On February 27, 2019 , PAF showed what it can do to IAF, you lost an SU30 and MIG21 . After denying loosing an SU30 why India is replacing that SU30 in the 12 aircraft order. 11 IAF SU 30 have been been lost in different training sorties but the 12th was lost on Feb 27, 2019. Cheers
@@anwarma1 haha a su30? really. It's you who lost an F-16 to a meager Mig-21 lol. Your airforce, just like your surrender army, doesn't know how to fly, you are only good bombing your Taliban on Durand line.
@@anwarma1 Also why didn't your airforce intercepted those Su30s and Mirage when they were bombing your terrorists in your territory? Cause you were too dumb and too late, and too afraid.
Every video clip of the “cobra” maneuver is an SU 27 or SU 35... the MiG 29 can perform it.. but it’s far less visually striking.
The swedish, now retired, aircraft J35 Draken could perform a cobra like maneuver as well :) ruclips.net/video/jqiDEcfSnXs/видео.html check around 1:55 to 2:10.
@@climbingsnufkin actually Draken and MiG-21 can perform cobra and bell like su-27/35 and MiG-29/35 so you are bot wrong and correct at the same time
A MIG-29 cannot perform a cobra, it's close but it can't do it. A cobra requires an AOA exceeding 90° the MIG-29 is just short of that.
The SU-27 can do a whopping 120° of AOA
Although its only for show.
@@duck_that_quacks mig 29 ovt version can performe cobra
MiG 21 smiling in the background
SU-37 laughing behind it
Great video Simon. I would like to hear about the F-14 Tomcat and the MIG-25 Foxbat. If you haven't done the F-4 Phantom, that would be a good one. It's lack of a gun in the design was a glaring failure in the Air Force's lack of understanding of how future battles would be fought, which I believe continues to this day. As far as the F-16 versus the MIG-29, they would engage with very different tactics. The F-16s advantage is not its maneuverability. It would lose in a turning fight so it would come in fast, take its shot, and bug out. The MIG-29 would want to engage in close and turn and burn with the F-16.
There was encounter between a Dutch F16 and a Serbian MIG 29 during the kosovowar 1999.
The F16 won
Wow, those jet engines sure do put out a lot of TORQUE don't they. :P
It doesn’t matter the plane or has little to to with it. The vast majority of it has to do with pilot training and skills.
top skilled pilots, comparably ground support and the MiG29 would kick the shit out of the F16 later back in the days. All that counts in a dog fight are the 2-5 minutes. Not the fuel range, or 2500 vs 6000 hours.. its just about agility, power, weapons, radar system and climb.
"lbf" is not "poundfoot", nor "poundfeet" which would be TORQUE units. The actual intended meaning is pound-force. Actually the foot or feet in the torque expressed lbft or lb-ft.
Scince nobody outside the US knows (76 % of all humans) what eighter foot or pound is supposed to be: nobody cares.
@@TheChemixInc Yes but it's dimensionally wrong. Call it newton meters of pound feet, it's still a force by a distance which is either torque or energy. But yes you're right, most people probably won't catch that, and tbh most Americans as well. We aren't known for our quality education......
13:37 is a picture of a mig 29 outside of the air museum in Oregon at The Evergreen Aviation And Space Museum In McMinnville it's a really amazing place and I highly suggest visiting if you're near there it also houses the Spruce goose which is way bigger than you could think
3:25 My favorite Nam era fighter, the F-4 Phantom, hope to see a video on those some day, there isn't a whole lot about them on the web.
I would love to see him do a vid on the F-4 (First modern miltirole joint strike fighter), but there is a ton of info about the F-4 out there.
@@dorsk84 There is? Oh, whenever i searched for documentaries or lengthy videos in general about the Phantom, usually there wasn't a lot coming up.
I mean, wikipedia is of course an extensive source for info, but i thought that there was kind of a void of Phantoms in videos.
Surprised no one mentioned the two MIG-29 "features" that western bloc aircrafts don't have:
1. A flap in the main engine intake drops down during takeoff in muddy fields. This was a requirement because they couldn't rely on well built airports (or airstrips). Air is sucked from vents located above the main engine intake in that situation.
2. Laser range finder and targeting for the canon. The Soviets claimed it was deadly accurately and helped them reduce the need to carry more ammo. Pilots who used the ones acquired from East Germany said it didn't work well in real life.
Thanks for the info on the laser targeter / rangefinder. I always wondered how well it work in real life.
Soviet aircraft need this feature because after the main runways have been cratered by NATO aircraft they will now need to use the debris strewn taxiways and such. Western aircraft have less to worry about this happening.
@@johnknapp952 let´s wait and see !
MiG 29 also has helmet- mounted sight, which the F 16 doesn't have.
@@deltacharlieromeo8252 Yes it does. It's called the HMCS or HMDS or something like that. Even gets a special AIM-9X super agile off boresight missile to use with it.
Mig-29: Haha I win!
F-16: shut up.
F-15: Am I a joke to you?
no US crews......
Su35: better than all three and cheaper, just don't call the raptor on me.
@@KenNakajima07 f15ex
@@QwertyQwerty-tp1pd Yes!!!! now that is an awesome pick!
On the invitation to suggest other aircraft, I recommend de Havilland's DH-82 Tiger Moth. Thousands and thousands built. Practically every commonwealth fighter and bomber pilot (and many Americans too) received WW2 elementary flight training in them.
But any video on any aircraft is something I'll eventually watch. This was a good one on the Mig 29. Thanks.
Hang on a minute, it's not "Pounds Feet of thrust", it's just "Pounds"!
He misread lbf - with the f being force.
to clear things up, pound feet is a unit of energy right?
@@harrymu148 Torque, so a force.
The "cobra maneuver" is not (apparently) limited to the MiG-29; Lt. Pete "Maverick" Mitchell executed the maneuver successfully in a F-14 "Tomcat" against a MiG-28 in 1986.
Mig 28?
Every time I try to learn about a jet, it just goes straight over my head.
Woooooosh
Hi Simon, this just came through my feed in 2022. While I do have a few quibbles with some of the info here, it was VERY well done! FWIW, the people over at Sukhoi were quite displeased with the comparison of the MiG-29 and the Su-27 (a larger and more capable aircraft with an almost identical appearance). The Sukhoi folks claimed the MiG was a copy of their design! As far as the comparison between the American F-16 and the MiG, I note that during the current Russian invasion of Ukraine, various NATO nations have been providing war material to Ukraine. I will specifically mention Poland. Equipped with a number of MiG-29s, the Poles offered to lend/give their fighters to Ukraine (which used the same aircraft), as long as the USA would "backfill" the Polish Air Force with F-16s. Having direct experience with both types, I find it significant that the Poles were willing (anxious?) to replace their MiGs with the American-built competition.
The F-16 was designed as an extremely lightweight, "low cost" and "simple" pure dogfighter. The motto of Col Boyd's fighter mafia who almost pushed the concept through was " not a pound for air to ground "
But right at the end the Air Force did some hard bargaining and the aircraft got a secondary air to ground capability, which has expanded over the years to the point where the F-16 really is multi role - much heavier, very complex and much more expensive.
It's like "the pentagon wars", they wanted a cheaper and lighter alternative to the F15, But it wasn't as capable so they pumped it up to become more expensive and heavy and complicated and finally got the F15 they wanted.
@@tomstech4390 Thats a good book. The film is worth a watch too, although it's a comedy rather than a searing indictment of the US military procurement system :)))
@@colderwar I must confess I have only seen the movie but being a comedy is appropriate given the joke most military (and civvy) precurement systems are.
they liked the flying qualities of Northrop F-5 , but demands more firepower, radar, range, etc.
And the original F-16 design would have failed like the F-20 Tigershark while the multirole F-16 is one of the most succesful aircraft ever.
4:26 shows slovak MIG -member of NATO, still flying 29s in military... 5:41 - says only Poland and Bulgaria use the aircraft in NATO.
Kind of brand new 😂
:D true
Well now you have to do the Soviet Hind helicopter. A attack chopper that could carry 8 troops as well.
We used to call it an airborne tank.
A truly magnificent thing. I have had a privilege to sit in a cockpit of one.
@@ts14a269 It is an airborne tank 🤣
rarely did the helicopter ever carry troops inside of it. most of the time the cargo bay was used to store extra ammo and fuel, and on rare occasions a crew chief would man a pk on the door windows
Even more incredible: Marat Tischenko, head of the Mil design bureau, visited Soviet Hind squadrons in the Afghan front lines in the 1980s. The pilots put on an air show, even pulling off barrel rolls. He was astounded as he thought it was impossible. Tischenko said of the Mi-24, "I thought I knew what my helicopters could do, now I'm not so sure!"
Think you're confusing the Mig-29 with the Su-27 for some of your comments.
@@metanumia mig 29 have option for thrust vectoring. also su37 is an overated and dead plane since far more advanced aircraft of its family have been introduced.
The MiG-29 was conceived as a point defence fighter but as with many combat aircraft, it has been continuously upgraded with mission expansion in mind. Today we see the MiG-35, which is a true multi role fighter jet. Pretty much the same story with the F-16, the 🇺🇸 just got to this stage a bit quicker. The MiG-35 does have 3D Thrust vectoring which makes it even more manoeuvrable but I would guess the 🇺🇸 still have the edge in avionics!
@@dezertfox3681Russia has the edge with what exactly? What plane is giving Russia the edge
Slovakia: Also member of NATO with Mig-29 still in use. Check your sources and surfshark my Mig-29! :-P
It's not the only error, a more glaring one is the claim that both Iran and Iraq used it in the Iran-Iraq War.....when Iran bought it in the nineties, after said war.
He also forgot Germany owning it, or the Mig-19 and Mig-21 taking part in the Vietnam war.....or that the F-4 Phantom II being rolled out in 1957......before any US involvement in said war.......
tie naše dve pokazené asi neráta :D
4:33 even with Slovak emblems on the wings
The Poles are still flying them too. Simon makes some of these mistakes :P
In Peru, in 2009, the American F-16s arrived for military training. My country was chosen because it has several Mig-29s in service, the results were very encouraging for the Peruvian pilots, considering that they were facing a world air power and perhaps the best and most capable pilots.
The best trained, and those who succeed the most in international air exercises are the Israelis (1st) and the Brits (2nd) , the US (3rd). We get more training hours per pilot than anyone else. What's interesting is that the Israeli Air force is based on the RAF and the USAAF. Those who started it were WWII veterans. However, the best pilots in the RAF were the Polish pilots...
The German airforce is more of a ground force 😂😂
It’s well known most of our jets and helicopters don’t work or does not have the required crew etc.
@super spade by that logic never give Germany any army or they might invade everyone.
"It’s well known most of our jets and helicopters don’t work"
Yes, and it's been straight up a myth the entire time. Most jets wouldn't be able to take off right now in this moment, true, but that is the case all around the globe. Germany's way of counting them only in "battle-ready" configuration is not doing them favours.
I would says the Mig-29 was to counter the f-15 rather than f-16
Nah, the MiG-25 was. The Soviets learned that we were developing a supersonic fighter that could deliver nukes and needed something that could do the same.
What about Su-27?
@@duncanmcgee13 MiG-25 was developed as a response to SR-71 and XB-70 projects as a super fast interceptor. MiG-29 was supposed to be cheap frontline fighter, with the Su-27 being true air superiority fighter like the F-15.
Isn't there a new air superiority us fighter?
Nah guys. The Mig-25 came first, then the F-15 countered that, then they created the high-low and the F-16 was made, then the Russians realizing that the high-low thing works, built the Su-27 and Mig-29 to counter the F-15 and F-16 respectively.
Next the tu160 "the white swan" A large supersonic bomber, its still in service.
Dank_Obama 69 wow is it really? Didn’t know that!
@@My_Alchemical_Romance they have been improving the old ones for years and i think the russian air force has ordered a new more advanced version of the tu160. At least thats what i have heard on the internet.
The Cobra maneuver, yeah. It is good for air shows and movies but not much else.
Physics: *Exist*
Mig-29: We don't do that here
Great video. As far as I'm concerned, you can just focus on military gear until the second coming.
“lbf” means pounds-force, not pound-feet (lb-ft)
I know I am a little late to this party but as far as American MiG-29, Jared Isaacman has a MiG-29UB that is used to train civilian astronauts. They used it for Inspiration4 and currently on the Polaris Dawn program.
9:40 Pound-feet is a measure of a mechanical torque. It cannot be used as a measure of thrust. Simply drop the feet component.
lbf.ft pound force feet please. What planet are you living on. (That is what makes the difference!)
Or just use Kilonewtons, the superiour unit force.
What the hell are pound feet? Get back to school
@@dantaylor7344 Not only did I go to school, I teach the class, boy. Sit your ass down and get educated.
www.enginelabs.com/news/torque-talk-pound-feet-foot-pounds-one/
you are correct lbs-ft is a measurement of rotational forces like engine torque . aircraft engine power is measured in pounds of thrust . 2 TOTALLY different measurements
Do one about the SpaceX Starship/Mars base
War Thunder saw this and was like hmmmmmmm🧐
I wouldn't be surprised if viewership on this video increases significantly when the update goes live.
Yep and now currently dominants
@@cyberdroid2300 i go watch videos of jets I want or grind and if you go to comments and sort by newest I Believe you will see your hunch to be correct
Please make a show on the MIG-35 big-time and thank you a lot, my friend!