The day Israel learned the MiG-29 is a match for their F-15s and F-16s

In 1997, three MiG-29s landed in secret at a classified Israeli air base. A group of Israeli test pilots flew the aircraft for several weeks, and were surprised at the results of the tests. The Chief experimental pilot said that the Fulcrum was the equal to their F-15s and F-16s, and in some ways surpassed them.

Two of the systems that impressed them were a system that recovered the aircraft if the pilot suffered vertigo, and a system that automatically flew the aircraft to a programmed airfield and landed. Pilots would program the destination before takeoff, and in the event of bad weather or pilot incapacitation, all they had to do was push a button and it would land.

By the end of the tests, it was determined that the aircraft was a very serious threat in the hands of a trained professional pilot. They had very few mechanical problems compared to their aircraft, and the biggest problem they had was the human engineering aspect.

. Last year, Russia negotiated the sale of MIG-29 fighter jets to Syria. This is a good time to recall that in 1997, under a heavy cloud of secrecy, three MIG-29 “Fulcrum” (“Sting” in Russian) landed in Israel. For several weeks, Israeli test pilots learned the plane and its weapon systems inside and out, flown numerous hours, and tested the jet’s abilities when facing Israeli fighter jets

“In terms of its abilities, the MIG-29 equals those of the F-15 and F-16 jets. In some respects it even surpasses the two”, said Major N, Chief Experimental Pilot of the MIG.

Three single seat MIG-29s stayed at one of the Israeli Air Force bases for a few weeks. The MIGs were secretly brought to Israel, and it was a rare opportunity for the air force to study up close what of the main interception jets used by Iran and Syria.

Lieut. Col. M was in charge of the test centre of the air force, and one of the few Israeli pilots to fly the MIG: “We are used to test foreign aircraft, as part of our purchasing procedure, but the MIG-29 was an out of the ordinary kind of test flight”, he said. “Not even for a moment did we forget that this aircraft is the most advanced strategic threat that exists at the arena today”.

In order to fly the MIG-29s, the test-pilots had to undergo a special course. At the first stage, the crew learned of the special structure and systems of the jet. The language barrier was the main difficulty: the study material was all written in Russian, forcing the Israeli pilots to use a translator, and at times to improvise.

globalaviationreport.com...

How does Syria even still have airbases? I mean between Israel's random sorties, NATO helping "moderate" rebels, moderate rebels themselves and ISIS, you'd think all that remains by now is a camel.

I wonder if they have camel bases?

Ivan built their planes for rough conditions. If I remember correctly, they could take off and land on non conventional airfields. Such as flat, open, relatively rough ground. Not sure if modifications were needed on the landing gear. The steppes of the Rodinia could be one huge airfield.

a reply to: Spader

If you look at the intakes when the aircraft is on the ground, there's a screen that drops down to block the intake and prevent damage from things like rocks going through the engine. Something that's a big problem for Western aircraft. We used to have to have sweepers go over the ramp when F-16s were coming in and out, because the suction on them was so bad it would pick anything on the ramp up, and damage the engine.

Thanks for the article Zaph but its only fair to point out that for all of the Mig 29's potential, in the real world as a system it has been at best a mediocre performer.

Here is another article regarding the Moldovan Migs the U.S. got a hold of in the 90's...

The Truth About the MiG-29/How U.S. intelligence services solved the mystery of a cold war killer.

a reply to: Zaphod58
Yes, I have noticed those screens. I have also seen a video of a Viper idling on a wet humid tarmac and the suction from the scoop intake was so strong that it created a vortex of vapor that went from the ground that swirled up into the scoop. I know a screen wouldn't work on a 16 but why not on any others like the 14,15,18,?

a reply to: Spader

They're all designed to fly out of prepared airfields where FOD isn't a major problem. If you look at the landing gear of any of our fighters (US or NATO), except the F-14 and F-18, which were designed for basically a controlled crash onto a carrier deck, they're all pretty flimsy compared to the MiG-29 or Su-27, both of which were designed for rough field and literal grass field operations.

a reply to: Drunkenparrot

Yes, but the key to all the analysis is that they were that good in the hands of professional trained pilots. All the uses we've seen to date have been fairly poorly trained pilots, and fairly poorly trained militaries.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The premise of this article holds no surprise for me. Almost all aspects of warfare come down to training versus weapon System.

Source article

From that source, the Mig 29 is a failure.

It lacked pilot situational awareness theater wide, and only briefly sported a better missile and aim system that has since been outdone. The article states the Germans were not invited to the dance in Kosovo in them because they would be more in the way than do any good.

It is a dogfighter that stays near its airbase.

Peter Steiniger runs a website that enthusiastically chronicles the German MiG experience, and is replete with stunning photos and heartfelt tributes to the Fulcrum. And yet Steiniger says: “Would I want to go to war with it? No. Except for the [AA-11 Archer system], the cockpit was terribly labor-intensive. Our overall [situational awareness in beyond visual range] setups was in the map case.” In other words, the pilot had to put his head down, break out the paper, and figure out where he was.


Read more: www.airspacemag.com...
Save 47% when you subscribe to Air & Space magazine http://(link tracking not allowed)/NaSX4X
Follow us: @AirSpaceMag on Twitter

“The MiG-29 really got exposed with the fall of the Iron Curtain,” Clifton says. “You don’t see further foreign sales. Who’s bought it? Nobody.” As to the wisdom of upgrading the Fulcrum into a modern, data-linked, multi-role fighter, Clifton says, “Go buy an F-16. It would be more economical, and it’s a better airplane.”


Read more: www.airspacemag.com...
Save 47% when you subscribe to Air & Space magazine http://(link tracking not allowed)/NaSX4X
Follow us: @AirSpaceMag on Twitter

Article mentions newer T 50's, but their analysis is that,

According to Lambeth, it will still lag 10 years behind the Raptor

A dog fighter that never makes it to the fight is what the plane is today.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Give our pilots a few weeks training in Michigan this time of year. Our grass fields make things... Interesting? I'll send you a pm when I'm not using the phone to browse. And yes, disregard all the necessary (and expensive) modifications that would be needed to get our birds out of wet, mushy grass fields. We cannot have a grass field capable fighter gap!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Spader

If you look at the intakes when the aircraft is on the ground, there's a screen that drops down to block the intake and prevent damage from things like rocks going through the engine. Something that's a big problem for Western aircraft. We used to have to have sweepers go over the ramp when F-16s were coming in and out, because the suction on them was so bad it would pick anything on the ramp up, and damage the engine.

Im amazed that most jets dont have a screen like that on the intake. PLus it would stop hapless ground crew being sucked in

Still not sure how that guy survived..

originally posted by: Spader
a reply to: Zaphod58
Yes, I have noticed those screens. I have also seen a video of a Viper idling on a wet humid tarmac and the suction from the scoop intake was so strong that it created a vortex of vapor that went from the ground that swirled up into the scoop. I know a screen wouldn't work on a 16 but why not on any others like the 14,15,18,?

Surely water vapour like that is no biggie. You can see them all the time on passenger planes.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

No, it's not a problem. It just gives you an idea of just how much suction there is going into that engine though.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
How does Syria even still have airbases? I mean between Israel's random sorties, NATO helping "moderate" rebels, moderate rebels themselves and ISIS, you'd think all that remains by now is a camel.

I wonder if they have camel bases?

Israel is restrained in there sorty's in part by the US as the US know that Syria is a new/old power game arena, during the cold war Syria was the Soviet proxy in the area and after the cold war retained strong ties to Moscow, they are of course supported by the Russian federation and the new cold war that is smoldering could only become hotter if the western interest's take more aggressive action such as direct attack's on the Syrian government and this could force the Russians to directly provide open military support to the Syrian government, remember also the Russians have an active naval base in Syria and let's be fair the real threat is Iran and not Syria who are also now also cosying up to the Russian's and chinese.

It is a not an open and shut case, Israel can get away with limited strike's but too much and the US would have to back them up taking them into a real war while currently they are willing to let the evil of Isis burn Syria despite the long term threat Isis will then represent.

It is a power game and the stakes are Oil, Regional alliance and Corporate interests the latter being the real driving force behind the second Iraq war and all following regional conflict's in the middle east.

If these war's were Moral we would be backing up the Syrian government despite there appalling track record on human right's as under them minority's were safe and protected, well relatively speaking that is and they never posed a threat to us but they do sit on some large oil field's, russia more or less controls them (when Isis does not) through it's syrian governmant proxy and the western corporations want there slice, politic's, corrupt intelligence activity's and greed from all party's as well as initially useful but now growing too large and out of control extremist's have all playes there part.

They do not want the country totally destroyed, just the people and the national security so that there corporate owned peace keepers and international corporation's can then rebuild the country (Rape it of it's oil).

It all come's down the the money at the end of the day.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Russia has openly said and at attack on Iran would be an attack on Moscow. I wonder if there is a silent policy about Syria...they are obviously tight with Russia and i don't think Moscow would tolerate NATO and all the stuff(missile defense , bases, troop build up and increased espionage) that does along with it in Syria.

the US and Israel need to stay the f out of the middle east before it get out of control.

a reply to: penroc3

As anti war as I am, it is sometime's necessary, I think it could actually be far more dangerous to not get involved but the problem is are we in the right or are we being used by those that seek to capitalize on the chaos that conflict cause's.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I find autonomous systems that "save the day" despite human or equipment plight so interesting. Was the vertigo recovery/automatic landing something like the neural network control around now, or a different thing all together?

Surprised that the article doesn't highlight where Israel got the MiG-29s from. Not hard to work out as they just grayed out the Polish Air Force checkerboard markings. You can still see the 'square' on the tailfins.

2004.uploaded.fresh.co.il...

2004.uploaded.fresh.co.il...

2004.uploaded.fresh.co.il...

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: TinfoilTP

yeah try to go against Mig-29 SMT with F-18 and F-16 and see if it's a failure .

what are you talking about . if officials of USAF were as ignorant as some people , F-22 program would have never been launched in the first place due to excessive costs .