MiG News

[nevidimka]

Thanks harryriedl
Doesn't seem like the right location for such a huge investment in time and money on India's part.

I am a Fulcrum fan but question why it takes MIG five years to build 16 fighters and a few two seat models, I don't want to start coming down on India's military choice on where to put their bases, a matter I know nothing about. I must assume India's Navy knows what their doing or they wouldn't pick this location. I hope India's pilots get the best training they can get and wish them all the luck in the world.

In a positive way I can't wait until India's Navy starts releasing information on the new K model Fulcrums on what it can do.

ROCK45, I think your worries are unfounded. Sure its delayed, but that doesn't mean its a bad investment. The MIg 29 K is 1 of the worlds best for a carrier aviation. Also we all know Mig is having financial problems, but they also have rolled out the 1st plane for everyone to see that they are uilding the plane, just a delay. So why so much worry? As far as I know, the JSF is delayed, the Airbus A400 is also delayed. But that doesn't mean those planes wont be flying in their customers inventory in the future.


And regarding the capabilities of the Mig 29K, I believe it was already published long before.

 

[ROCK45]

Fulcrum

I just want to see a modern Fulcrum finally get in the air it's something this aircraft deserves. I thought I would be seeing it in June but maybe like wine good things are worth waiting for.

 

[nevidimka]

I was wondering, Mig has always followed odd numbers in naming their planes, but after Mig 29, they have Mig 35. What happened to 31 and 33?

I dont believe drawing block designs are reasons enough to not have a proper 31, and 33.

 

[Todjaeger]

I was wondering, Mig has always followed odd numbers in naming their planes, but after Mig 29, they have Mig 35. What happened to 31 and 33?

I dont believe drawing block designs are reasons enough to not have a proper 31, and 33.

There was a MiG-31, NATO codename 'Foxhound'. Also, the MiG-33 IIRC was used in the early 90's as an alternate name for the export version of the MiG-29M. This was in turn an upgraded & multirole version of earlier MiG-29 'Fulcrum' versions.

-Cheers

 

[Feanor]

I was wondering, Mig has always followed odd numbers in naming their planes, but after Mig 29, they have Mig 35. What happened to 31 and 33?

I dont believe drawing block designs are reasons enough to not have a proper 31, and 33.

 

[kato]

Also, MiG-33 (Mikojan-internal) was first the R-33 project (single-engine MiG-29), then later conceptionally applied to MiG-29ME and finally MiG-29K (Indian MiG-29K were actually sold to them under the name "MiG-33"). Much like the MiG-35 is a rebranded MiG-29M2.

 

[nevidimka]

Sorry guys, my mind probably passed near a Black hole. The Mig 31 completely escaped my mind. But its kinds pity the MiG 33 is not officially used.

 

[harryriedl]

a little to add according to flight global MIg and Sukuio are to merge
http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-combat-aircraft-makers-to-form-one-unit.html

 

[ROCK45]

Mig/Sukuio Merge

I saw this to but wish more information was released on possible projects or future joint ventures. Very little details were given I'm interested on how the MIG side of this venture will make out? Maybe Mikhail Pogosyan can convince Russia government to purchase or upgrade some of Russia's Air Forces Mig-29s?

 

[nevidimka]

I hope Mig doesnt lose its name or continuing to build light fighters. The MiG name is a world famous name with a huge legacy. it would be awful to kill this world famous name.

 

[Salty Dog]

I hope Mig doesnt lose its name or continuing to build light fighters. The MiG name is a world famous name with a huge legacy. it would be awful to kill this world famous name.

I think we can live with a name change. When the F-16 first came out it was General Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin) and when the F/A-18 first came out it was McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing). The Harriers have gone through several company name changes as well.

Cheers

 

[Feanor]

It's not just MiG and Sukhoi. All major Russian aviation producers are merging into the United Aircraft Corporation. It's an attempt to consolidate the reasources, and bail out the less successful companies like Ilyushin, MiG, and Yakovlev, by merging them with the more successful Sukhoi.

 

[nevidimka]

I think we can live with a name change. When the F-16 first came out it was General Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin) and when the F/A-18 first came out it was McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing). The Harriers have gone through several company name changes as well.

Cheers

No its not the same. All western planes are identified by their type, like F 18/16/14/15 etc. You dont go calling those planes as Mcdonnel douglas's or general dynamic or norhtrop grumman, or BAE's, or Dassault's etc2.

Unlike the Russian MiG planes, the name MiG has been used for all their planes from the korean war up till now. Every historic battle had the name MiG's. So its different. Thats why its important not to lose the name MiG.

When you say a MiG, the 1st thing that comes to mind is a deadly dogfighter, thats how powerfull the name is in history. Its an icon that deserves keeping.

 

[Salty Dog]

No its not the same. All western planes are identified by their type, like F 18/16/14/15 etc. You dont go calling those planes as Mcdonnel douglas's or general dynamic or norhtrop grumman, or BAE's, or Dassault's etc2.

Unlike the Russian MiG planes, the name MiG has been used for all their planes from the korean war up till now. Every historic battle had the name MiG's. So its different. Thats why its important not to lose the name MiG.

When you say a MiG, the 1st thing that comes to mind is a deadly dogfighter, thats how powerfull the name is in history. Its an icon that deserves keeping.

The reason Mig has not changed names is because it is the same company which has not changed unlike western counterparts.

My guess is you feel so strongly about this as US and Russian aircraft designations are different. As you mentioned, the US classifies military aircraft by mission/use, F-14, F-16, A-10, H-60, etc. USSR/Russia classifies by project/manufacturer such as Su-, Mig-, Mi-, An- etc. in much the same way as civilian aircraft in the west; Boeing B-737, B-747, B-767; Airbus A-319, A-320, etc. So I suppose for Russia and Russian aircraft users company name is important. I guess in Europe they fall in between.

Cheers

 

[nevidimka]

Although you got the reasoning correct, I dont think you understand why its important not to let go the name, because you're looking at it from a western pespective.
McDonnel Douglas has a long history of making fighter planes, but since they didn't attach their company name to their planes it wasn't a big deal when F 15's started rolling out of Boeing as it is the same "F 15".
Well that's just the way I see it an my point of view.

 

[Salty Dog]

Although you got the reasoning correct, I dont think you understand why its important not to let go the name, because you're looking at it from a western pespective.

Changing company names is a fact of life. Get use to it.

Let's stay on topic.

Cheers

 

[Salty Dog]

The Peruvian Air Force (FAP) has the Mig-29C (16), Mig-29UB (2), and Mig-29SE (3).

The Mig-29SE with the R-77 was the first BVR aircraft in South America back in the early '90s.

FAP is upgrading (19) of their Mig-29, mainly airframe and motors.

An agreement was made for the upgrade of (8) of the FAP Mig-29 to a standard similar to the Mig-29SMT.

There are rumblings of FAP acquiring the Su-30 or Su-35.

 

[ROCK45]

Peruvian Mig-29s

I to heard of those rumblings for Flankers a while back it would be a big change for Peru's AF to take on. Change is good sometimes and Peru's 1,000 plus miles long so the Flankers good range would be an instant payoff.

I also read of the 19 Mig-29 being service a while back but never heard of (8) Fulcrums being taken up to SMT standards? This poster on a different forum assures me that Peruvian Fulcrum 048 is a SMT type, I just never heard of it before and why only one?

 

[Salty Dog]

I also read of the 19 Mig-29 being service a while back but never heard of (8) Fulcrums being taken up to SMT standards? This poster on a different forum assures me that Peruvian Fulcrum 048 is a SMT type, I just never heard of it before and why only one?

The upgrade contract worth US$106 M for the (19) Mig-29 was closed this past August for airframe and motor upgrades.

The original Mig-29C (16) and Mig-29SE (3), were upgrade back in the late '90's to four versions, Mig-29SM, Mig-29M, Mig-29ST, and (3) Mig-29SMT.

So there should already be SMT versions in the PAF.

 

[Feanor]

The MiG-29C is the MiG-29S with C being the cyrillic S. MiG-29SE is the export version of the MiG-29S. I think that the 16 MiG-29S and 3 MiG-29SE are practically identical, with the two UB variants being trainers.