MiG-29 and its modifications


Btw, the romanian site link does not work now, i know the site though as i'm romanian myself. I am relatively familiar with the fate of the moldavian MiG-29s, but perhaps there might be some interesting details there.
I put the link again, because for me it still works.
Have you ever seen pictures of Moldavian MiG-29 (9-12) ? For my part I did not find any.
Yeah, it does for me too now, it was a temporary hiccup.
And i am familiar with mariwoj.pl, great site that is.
 
Does anyone know what this early production MiG-29 (32 blue) (note the ventral fins) does in the USA, and where it comes from ? Kyrgyzstan, or one of the Moldavian (9-12) ?
And with this, I found an answer to my question :
These MiGs would come from Kyrgyzstan and would have been bought by Don Kirlin in the years 90.
They belong to "Air assets inc" based in Quincy IL.
- 32 blue is a MiG-29 (9-12 early) with sn : 2960507662, and is registered as N6394K.
- 09 red is a Mig-29 (9-12), sn 2960520155 and registered as N6394G.
It seems that it has been planned to put them back in flying condition.
 
Last edited:
On Wiki, we can read that 10 Mig-29M2 are in service with the RuAF. Is that true ?
23px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png
Russia
 
Last edited:
The surviving MiG-29s of the "Ukrainian Falcon" are dwindling, it seems that one of them has been shot down. Contrary to what this article says they had been taken out of storage as early as 2014.
It seems that the colored Ukrainian MiG-29 are not the old "Falcons" :
 
Last edited:
Only 4 Slovak MiG-29A will be transferred to Ukraine by air. Maybe this means that out of the 13 MiG-29s given, 9 are not in flying condition ?
What I find extraordinary is that the Ukrainian Air Force withdrew its last MiG-29s (9-12) in the early 2010s, almost 10 years ago !
Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-12) (24 white, 2960518763) at Belbek - Sevastopol (5 September 2007).jpeg
 
Last edited:
I just remembered that a Slovakian MiG-29A, "6930" had been wired to carry French Magics missiles. Unfortunately, it was lost in a crash in the early 2000s.
Many MiGs have been modified for Magics : Iraqi and Indian MiG-21s, a Czech MiG-23.....
Maybe the Ukrainian "Fulcrums" fleet could also be wired with French IR missiles ? This would allow to compensate a possible lack of R-73.
Maybe even IR MICAs ?
Slovak MiG-29A (6930) fitted with Magic.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (72 white) firing R-73 over his land (10 Novembre 2017).jpeg
    Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (72 white) firing R-73 over his land (10 Novembre 2017).jpeg
    762.3 KB · Views: 44
  • Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (07 blue, 2960728502) firing R-73 over his land (25 Septembre 2012).jpeg
    Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (07 blue, 2960728502) firing R-73 over his land (25 Septembre 2012).jpeg
    921 KB · Views: 47
  • Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (20  blue, 2960728165) firing R-73 over his land (25 septembre 2012).jpeg
    Ukrainian MiG-29 (9-13) (20 blue, 2960728165) firing R-73 over his land (25 septembre 2012).jpeg
    1 MB · Views: 53
I see mica as being a plausible upgrade. Don't forget that Rafale used also for long their Mica optical sensor as their primary. The same could be done here for a quick/cheap upgrade on the Mig.
 
I see mica as being a plausible upgrade. Don't forget that Rafale used also for long their Mica optical sensor as their primary. The same could be done here for a quick/cheap upgrade on the Mig.
If you are looking for a direct almost plug-and-play replacement for the R-74/AA-11 then something like the IRIS-T would likely be much more straightforward to integrate (no need for integration of datalinks that the MICA IR requires for its full range and capabilities).

If you want the MIG-29 to use the MICA IR with anything close to its full performance then you need to do some significant surgery to the MIG-29s systems (adding a MICA compatible datalink that is also compatible with and can provide data from the MIG-29s existing targeting systems - radar & electro-optical sensor).
 
You won't use the electro optical set of the Mig. Mica does it.
No radar either is needed. Mica sensor range will be good enough to nearly match the small radar that the Mig has, with the advantage of emcom control.
At the end, it's just (nearly) fiber optics cables and a cockpit display...
 
You won't use the electro optical set of the Mig. Mica does it.
To properly set up IR shots(especially off-bore), you need cueing and ranging. It comes either from the radar, or from LRF within IRST.

No radar either is needed. Mica sensor range will be good enough to nearly match the small radar that the Mig has, with the advantage of emcom control.
Calling Zhuk small is a stretch. It is smaller than in platforms optimized for radar size (for example - smaller than Mig-23s sapphire-23), but it is still ~captor sized.
 
Last edited:
I see mica as being a plausible upgrade. Don't forget that Rafale used also for long their Mica optical sensor as their primary. The same could be done here for a quick/cheap upgrade on the Mig.
If you are looking for a direct almost plug-and-play replacement for the R-74/AA-11 then something like the IRIS-T would likely be much more straightforward to integrate (no need for integration of datalinks that the MICA IR requires for its full range and capabilities).

If you want the MIG-29 to use the MICA IR with anything close to its full performance then you need to do some significant surgery to the MIG-29s systems (adding a MICA compatible datalink that is also compatible with and can provide data from the MIG-29s existing targeting systems - radar & electro-optical sensor).

The IRIS-T also requires proper integration through a compatible weapon bus, at least if you want to exploit its full potential. An analogue interface still exists and everything capable of using a Sidewinder can theoretically also use the IRIS-T. There might be several limitations however.
 
I see mica as being a plausible upgrade. Don't forget that Rafale used also for long their Mica optical sensor as their primary. The same could be done here for a quick/cheap upgrade on the Mig.
If you are looking for a direct almost plug-and-play replacement for the R-74/AA-11 then something like the IRIS-T would likely be much more straightforward to integrate (no need for integration of datalinks that the MICA IR requires for its full range and capabilities).

If you want the MIG-29 to use the MICA IR with anything close to its full performance then you need to do some significant surgery to the MIG-29s systems (adding a MICA compatible datalink that is also compatible with and can provide data from the MIG-29s existing targeting systems - radar & electro-optical sensor).

The IRIS-T also requires proper integration through a compatible weapon bus, at least if you want to exploit its full potential. An analogue interface still exists and everything capable of using a Sidewinder can theoretically also use the IRIS-T. There might be several limitations however.
I agree, but that is certainly less work (and less complicated work re: other systems) required than would be the case for the MICA IR.

Not to disparage the MICA IR which is arguably the better (and certainly longer range) missile when fully integrated with and working in conjunction with compatible capable systems on the launching aircraft.

But if we are talking about something that is a quicker more improvised integration effort that would need at least as possible done to the launching aircraft of USSR origin and then the IRIS-T sounds like a better bet.

If someone with more in depth knowledge than I on what would be required for a relatively quick lash-up of, say, the AIM-9X can confirm that’s the better way to go than I’m open to that too :)
 
I see mica as being a plausible upgrade. Don't forget that Rafale used also for long their Mica optical sensor as their primary. The same could be done here for a quick/cheap upgrade on the Mig.
If you are looking for a direct almost plug-and-play replacement for the R-74/AA-11 then something like the IRIS-T would likely be much more straightforward to integrate (no need for integration of datalinks that the MICA IR requires for its full range and capabilities).

If you want the MIG-29 to use the MICA IR with anything close to its full performance then you need to do some significant surgery to the MIG-29s systems (adding a MICA compatible datalink that is also compatible with and can provide data from the MIG-29s existing targeting systems - radar & electro-optical sensor).

The IRIS-T also requires proper integration through a compatible weapon bus, at least if you want to exploit its full potential. An analogue interface still exists and everything capable of using a Sidewinder can theoretically also use the IRIS-T. There might be several limitations however.
I agree, but that is certainly less work (and less complicated work re: other systems) required than would be the case for the MICA IR.

Not to disparage the MICA IR which is arguably the better (and certainly longer range) missile when fully integrated with and working in conjunction with compatible capable systems on the launching aircraft.

But if we are talking about something that is a quicker more improvised integration effort that would need at least as possible done to the launching aircraft of USSR origin and then the IRIS-T sounds like a better bet.

If someone with more in depth knowledge than I on what would be required for a relatively quick lash-up of, say, the AIM-9X can confirm that’s the better way to go than I’m open to that too :)

You could similarly use a MICA IR without datalink.
 
The MICA IR is a substantially larger heavier and more expensive missile than the IRIS-T.

Which is potentially/ probably justified if you can in real-world circumstances make use of its superior range etc. but which is all much harder to justify if you can’t.

Again I’m a fan of the MICA IR, no skin in the game re: the IRIS-T, etc. My point is more around being realistic about what can be more readily made to work in practice and has real-world value (MICA IR without datalinks etc. would be extra heavy and expensive close in weapons only and not give the Ukrainians a weapon to challenge Russian jets with fully integrated longer range active-radar missiles).
 
It is quite true, and all the more so as the IRIS-T is already in service in Ukraine.
But coming back to the MiG-29, the IRIS-T is much lighter than R-73.
This might improve the performance of the MiG-29 when fully armed.
The weight of 4 R-73 is 420kg, while that of 4 IRIS-T is only 349.6kg.
That is 70kg less.
 
That is 70kg less.
Mig-29 isn't gripen or even f-16, that's negligible.
And either way, without integration with FCS, it'll be Vietnam-level front lock only.

Main problem with Ukrainian mig-29s is that Ukraine wasted decades without doing anything useful with them. And all useful mig-29 upgrades are on the other side of the fence.
 
That is 70kg less.
Mig-29 isn't gripen or even f-16, that's negligible.
And either way, without integration with FCS, it'll be Vietnam-level front lock only.

Main problem with Ukrainian mig-29s is that Ukraine wasted decades without doing anything useful with them. And all useful mig-29 upgrades are on the other side of the fence.
My understanding is that there are few (1 squadron in Armenia facing Turkey?) front line MIG-29s left in Russian service.

And there are literally only a handful of MIG-35s in quasi-service with the Russian airforce (apparently not in actual front line service, not seen in combat in Ukraine).

As such the relatively modest pre-war updates of Ukrainian MIG-29s and further war-time improvisations (as HARM launchers etc.) comfortably outstrip what the Russian airforce had actually seen in service from their MIG-29s and developments.
 
That is 70kg less.
Mig-29 isn't gripen or even f-16, that's negligible.
And either way, without integration with FCS, it'll be Vietnam-level front lock only.

Main problem with Ukrainian mig-29s is that Ukraine wasted decades without doing anything useful with them. And all useful mig-29 upgrades are on the other side of the fence.
My understanding is that there are few (1 squadron in Armenia facing Turkey?) front line MIG-29s left in Russian service.

And there are literally only a handful of MIG-35s in quasi-service with the Russian airforce (apparently not in actual front line service, not seen in combat in Ukraine).

As such the relatively modest pre-war updates of Ukrainian MIG-29s and further war-time improvisations (as HARM launchers etc.) comfortably outstrip what the Russian airforce had actually seen in service from their MIG-29s and developments.
I don't think that comparing Russian and Ukrainian Fulcrums is useful !
And moreover, all Fulcrum capable of using R-77 are superior to those of UkrAF.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that there are few (1 squadron in Armenia facing Turkey?) front line MIG-29s left in Russian service.

And there are literally only a handful of MIG-35s in quasi-service with the Russian airforce (apparently not in actual front line service, not seen in combat in Ukraine).
Yes, RuAF has abandoned the Fulcrum - in this conflict, it's purely Ukrainian aircraft. This is funny - because this war is an ideal fulcrum war, and for the large part is the opposite of that flankers are good at.

As such the relatively modest pre-war updates of Ukrainian MIG-29s and further war-time improvisations (as HARM launchers etc.) comfortably outstrip what the Russian airforce had actually seen in service from their MIG-29s and developments.
...but that doesn't changes that all the relevant fulcrum upgrades (Mig-29UPG), multirole 4+ (mig-29m/m2), and advanced offspring developments (mig-35) happened in Russia.

Ukrainian upgrades were a waste of time - the only relevant part of the upgrade was Satnav. Which is still worse than dirt-cheap commercial solutions anyways. Everything else was either completely off the point (useless capabilities), or managed to make aircraft worse than it was 30 years ago (radar "upgrade" with more sourceable components).

Unlike in George Lucas's Star Wars, here the evil Empire was sneaky enough to not leave any abandoned starfighter production to the rebels. :)
 
Are there any AA-12 armed/ capable MIG-29s in front line service with the Russian airforce?

And are there “useful” or otherwise significantly updated MIG-29s in front line service with the Russian airforce?

And what what do the domestic and export orders for these more advanced MIG-29 variants look like? Rather bleak?

Hence it appears that the significantly “more useful” MIG-29s are those in front line service with the Ukrainian airforce.
 
Are there any AA-12 armed/ capable MIG-29s in front line service with the Russian airforce?
Yes, 70-something with navy. Just not in the conflict zone. Probably precisely to avoid unnecessary FoF complications.
A couple weeks ago, Norway:
xiaomige.jpg
And what what do the domestic and export orders for these more advanced MIG-29 variants look like? Rather bleak?
29M2/K ~150 exported overall, +several dozens failed orders(Syria - war, Algiers SMT - quality issues);
29SMTr/29K/35 - 70-something - RuAF/RFN;
29UPG/29SM - ~100 upgrades (India, Syria)

Overall - something around 350 fulcrums since the mid-2000s.
Your sarcasm is misplaced.

Hence it appears that the significantly “more useful” MIG-29s are those in front line service with the Ukrainian airforce.
They're useful because the original concept - frontline fighter-interceptor, - is perfect for the type of conflict they're in (large-scale European war). It allows them to operate and regularly perform sorties in conditions no NATO aircraft (or flanker) would allow - and even achieve some success.
However, the fact still stands, their threat as fighters is nil (not a single confirmed success so far). The best results we saw from them - making Russian bombers to retreat.
 
Last edited:
It seems that some MiG-29M2 are in service with the Russian Air Force, but I am not sure.
Are there any AA-12 armed/ capable MiG-29s in front line service with the Russian airforce ?
The Russian MiG-29SMT are capable of using the R-77.
Hence it appears that the significantly “more useful” MiG-29s are those in front line service with the Ukrainian airforce.
Any MiG-29 capable of using the R-77 is superior to the Ukrainian Fulcrums, and that makes a lot !
Sudanese, Peruvian, Indians, Egyptians, Algerians, Russians, Bielorussians, Yemeni and more and more...,
 
Last edited:
I believe that the Yemeni MiG-29SMT (9-12) are among the most advanced Fulcrums, with Kh-31, R-77, air-to-air refueling capability.
Far in front of the MiG-29MU1/2.
(as HARM launchers etc.) comfortably outstrip what the Russian airforce had actually seen in service from their MIG-29s and developments
It must be remembered that HARM's capacity is extremely austere and limited.
 
And yet all my actual comments appear to remain correct;

No apparent MIG-29 variant in front line service with the Russian airforce (I very intentionally didn’t say Navy) equipped with the AA-12.

Updated existing Indian MIG-29 aside a lot appears to rest with Syria (whom literally no one else will export to, everything paid for by Russian state, not an export “win” to be especially proud of).

Those relatively few more advanced export MIG-29 variants in service with a small number of export customers are more capable than Ukrainian MIG-29s.
I never said the weren’t.
But the Russian airforce doesn’t appear to have any in front line service so not any more “useful” to the Russian airforce (indeed appears clearly less useful to the Russian airforce that have very intentionally ditched or sidelined them, while the Ukraine airforce still “use” their MIG-29 in combat as I type this).

Why is one country supposed to be so much more proud (of what?) in this scenario? Or does that end up being a rhetorical question….
 
Last edited:
No apparent MIG-29 variant in front line service with the Russian airforce (I very intentionally didn’t say Navy) equipped with the AA-12.
MiG-35 in limited service (~6)
In front-line service, as I specified?
Any likelihood of deployment/ use in Ukraine conflict?
 
o_O !!! What difference does it make. :)
I think that the MiG-35 may not have reached its full operational status.
 
SM/SMT variety
MiG-29SMP/ MiG-29UBP :
The SMP/UBP are upgrades for the FAP MiG-29S (9-13SE) & MiG-29UB fleet. In August 2008 a contract of US$106 million was signed with RAC MiG for this custom SM upgrade of an initial batch of eight MiG-29, with a provision for upgrading all of Peru's MiG-29s. The single-seat version is designated SMP, whereas the twin-seat version is designated UBP.
It features an improved ECM suite, avionics, sensors, pilot interface, and a MIL-STD-1553 databus. The interfaces include improved IRST capabilities for enhanced passive detection and tracking as well as better off-boresight launch capabilities, one MFCD and HOTAS. The N019M1 radar, a heavily modified and upgraded digital version of the N019 radar, replaces the standard N010 Zhuk-M of the MiG-29SMT. The upgrade also includes a structural life-extension program (SLEP), overhauled and upgraded engines, and the addition of an in-flight refuelling probe.
 
In front-line service, as I specified?
It is an overly stringent requirement in this case - Russian activity isn't limited by Ukraine in the first place.
Russia can't just abandon all the space from Iceland to Aleutian islands.
But both kinds of modern Migs in Ruaf service did rotational bombing in Syria.
I think that the MiG-35 may not have reached its full operational status.
Yes - it's in an intermediate state (same with, say, Gripen E).
The plane is very new after all.
 
Btw, some (now) historical analogies.

In early 1990s, now Russian VVS(later VKS) and USN found themselves in a somewhat similar situation - they had mix of medium and heavy fighters, which ultimately couldn't be supported: services had to choose either Su-27/F-14 or F-18/Mig-29, not both.
The former two were better in all the numbers; the latter were more reasonable and sustainable all-rounders.

They made two separate choices - and suffered the opposite consequences.
Until entering a big war against a weaker(but strong enough) opponent, day-to-day inefficiency of flankers didn't matter much; but they gave VKS, together with its powerful SAM force, an incredibly powerful DEFCA/Deterrent force.
Yet then - Russia started Ukrainian war, where VKS simply failed. They literally failed to produce anything near the corresponding effect on a weaker Ukraine - nor even were designed to really do so.
One can argue, that a larger, more a2g-oriented fighter-bomber force centered on advanced mig variations could do order of magnitude more damage: migs are cheaper to procure and operate, they're much faster and simpler to service, they have a targeting pod for more than a decade (something Russian flankers don't have even now).

USN did the opposite choice - and went for a reasonable multirole force at expense of ambitions. Those did marvelous job of bombing the (...) out of everyone - leaving no doubts to any non-peer adversary(read - Iran) they could do the same with them. They still can, and likely will be able to do that as long as they're in service.
The problem is that a peer opponent did appear for the US - and now the navy is on a crush course to get an actual Tomcat replacement. Because USN ultimately is a carrier navy, and its carriers are as good as their airwings are.
Yet against China - all bugs' numbers from the first paragraph just don't work out.

Opposite choices, opposite problems - ironically, showing at the approximately same time.
The question in the air - will USNs' bet end up being a gross miscalculation, too.
 
I don't think these comparisons can hold up.
The F-14, equivalent to the Flanker, was a terribly effective and deadly aircraft during the Iran-Iraq conflict, where I think that an F-18/F-16, equivalents to the MiG-29, might not have been so deadly for one reason : they did not have the Phoeinx, equivalent to the R-37.
Currently, in the sky of Ukraine, the story is repeated. The Su-35 armed with R-37 imposes its law against the MiG-29 which for the moment has not scored a single confirmed victory against Russian piloted aircraft. While about 15 MiG-29s were lost to the enemy.
During the Iran-Iraq conflict, the F-14 scored 144 confirmed victories for less than 10 losses. Currently, only one Su-35 has been confirmed as shot down and its number of victories is still unknown.
Well, these are just some considerations.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom