MiG-29: The Soviet Answer to the F-16 

"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"

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.

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

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 RU-vid

​@@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...

their effect is negligible at best. Don't drink the RT kool-aid

The so-called "gills".

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.

Significant tactical advantage

yea lol

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.

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

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

Thank you

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

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

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.

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 RU-vid 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

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. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hou0lU8WMgo.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

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

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

Haha 😂😂 Love your comment

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....

Aren't you talking about the F-15 instead?

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

@@Britva83 the only time f16s met mig29s were during the kosovowar 1999. The dutch F16 won

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!"

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

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.

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!

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.

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.

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

yet we love it

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?

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...

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.

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.

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/

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

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-uQJ6IMREvz8.html

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

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.

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

Mig 28?

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.

Even the curvature is not there in Mig

@Caп¡s Aпuв¡s As well as their size the 29 is really smol

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...

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.

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

There was encounter between a Dutch F16 and a Serbian MIG 29 during the kosovowar 1999. The F16 won

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!

@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

@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 never heard about this story. If it's true: hats off and respect to this Serbian pilot

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.

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

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.

taking action on video is the thing that counts. It does not matter for youtube, if action is positive or negative.

SU-37 laughing behind it

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.

The swedish, now retired, aircraft J35 Draken could perform a cobra like maneuver as well :) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jqiDEcfSnXs.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

@@dezertfox3681Russia has the edge with what exactly? What plane is giving Russia the edge

is that eye stuff is real? damn,

@@ohexra Real. Avoid a close-quarters dogfight with a MiG-29 at all costs.

@@ohexra Real, and used on basically every fighter in the world, as well as most helicopter gunships. MiG-29 was just the first fighter equipped with such a system.

@@NorceCodine man duing 1999 indian mig29 were able to maintain superiority ove Pak F16

www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34762/this-lecture-by-an-f-22-test-pilot-on-the-raptors-flight-control-system-is-bonkers

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......

Sukhoi*

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!

It was removed while I'm watching it yesterday. Replace by N1 rocket video

I had both of them in my list and watched both of them, then when I refreshed, the Mig-29 one was gone. I think since they were both posted within minutes of each other, that was an error on his behalf.

#cancelsimon

Maybe he forgot to mention something,..........."Allegedly ",........😁

Use your detective skills, people! From Simon's Twitter (@SimonWhistler): "To everyone who will ask where the Mig Megaprojects video went: I had it scheduled for today, but a sponsor came in with a hard date for release today, so I bumped it... except I didn’t. My apologies, esp to those who were halfway through. It’s now coming Wednesday. :)"

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.

Applies to any plane

Totally different strengths for the two aircraft, and its all about which pilot could get the other into their fight plan. A F16 would never get into a slow moving dogfight, its not there strength