F-16 would still be more logistically friendly, there is a good reason why there aren’t many MiG operators left
Yeah, with the F-16 and F-15 combination the F-16 had much lower costs being a single engine fighter but I doubt there is a huge cost difference with the MiG and Su-27
because most of them werent on friendly terms with russia after the collapse of the soviet union
so they were unable to get spare parts for maintanence
Yeah that’s what I thought to, if they had the funding they probably would have continued development of both but su 27 was seen as a higher priority to develop
That would be the MiG-23, garbage combat record
MiG-29 isn’t that far off though it hardly had a good record
1 Like
price of the Su-27 is estimated to be ~40 million USD
the price of the Mig-29 is estimated to be ~20 million USD
i would say the Su-27 costing double is a meaningful price difference (with infaltion)
What about maintenance and cost per hour
Well
For price of 2 flankers you can take single F-35… sounds expensive
the website i found says that it is ~11.000 USD per flight hour for both
1 Like
This is what I mean, although the unit cost is different in wartime situation they will cost about the same to keep going while being overall worse
ok I wanna keep it short (it`ll probablly be still a textwall)
Its popular in mainstream culture because its the 2nd most produced 4th gen jet in the world (shortly behind the F16)
And sorry, but you dont really seem to understand any history and intended purpose of the MiG-29 at all - wich makes sense when considering you jsut said this:
The MiG-29 was the cheap export “variant” of the SU-27 sold to the Soviets puppet states.
As someone who spoken to old GDR generals and even 1 pilot the design of the Fulcrum makes total sense.
This plane was never meant to dominate the skies - let alone achieve air superiority.
It was a cheap and easy to produce aircraft that countries like the GDR loved because they could:
-take off from EVERYWHERE
-Land literally EVERYWHERE
-Be used effectively at short ranges to intercept CAS (thanks to incredible climb rate and fast startup times)
-Be insanely reliable thanks to the Analog-Digital Hybrid control system
The Eastern block really didnt prioritize air superiority - they essentially would be a buffer zone in case of war.
A former GDR pilot even told me that they trained to not even engage enemy fighters in BVR - but retreat instead.
Their only mission was to get the skies as clear of CAS as possible - air superiority wasnt a goal for their Doctrine.
So yes - in the modern battlefield this 1970 conceptionalized jet for the Warsaw pact countries wouldnt hold up at all.
The MiG-29s main clutch was the R73 wich was by far the most advanced and effective A2A IR missile at the time - ofc it suffers in Warthunder if gaijin gives it a missile that it never used instead
1 Like
the Mig-29 cost half of the Su-27
you can buy 2 Migs for the price of one Flanker
And then spend twice as much to keep the 2 inferior MiG’s going when you could’ve invested in the flankers which are much more capable aircraft
If you have a squadron made out of 20 pilots and all need a jet
you could spend 800 million on buying Flankers or you buy Mig-29’s for 400 million and are able to invest the other 400 million somewhere else, or strengthen your airforce even more by buying another batch of 20 Migs
you have no clue on how military procurment works
3 Likes
and what aircraft do the Warsaw pact states operate?
They werent given the best stuff the soviets had (wich was a bad decision by them - cause a SU-27G would be funny)
Semi offtopic but if you look at the MiG-23s record and remove things like the MiG-23BN and MS from the equation and just look at the M/ML/MLA ect… its service record comes out as being decidedly average for what it is.
And yes i would say removing the MiG-23BN from the equation is fair here since its a dedicated attacker with no actual method of self defense let alone a radar.
MiG-23MS is kinda in an odd spot since while it is still technically a fighter its also substantially different (and worse) from normal 23s. If anything its a MiG-21 wearing a MiG-23 skin suit.
1 Like
If they already have the flankers during peacetime, then it would cost a lot less to keep them operational than 40 MiG’s not to mention the range of the flanker is much greater
Yeah sure let’s cherry pick stuff to paint a bad jet in the best light possible.
1 Like
Also Im not really getting what MiG-29 you speaking about?
MiG-29A?
Yeah no shit, thats a 1970 jet with 60km max missile engagement range
Would a F16A compete with F22s and Eurofighters on a modern battlefield?
MiG-29M?
That thing is an absolute unit for the 1990s and id like you to mention a US 1990 plane with the same capabilities.
MiG-35?
The only real issue I see with it is Russias usage of it as well as Russia being incredibly poor.
The airframe itself is great - it has awesome Speed and good ECM for a small fighter platform.
Its CAS is also pretty decent.
What exact variant are you talking about?
the 23bn isnt a fighter
it is a ground attack platform
please go educate yourself before you make comments
2 Likes