By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization (Washington D.C.) As a well-known and somewhat famous Cold War Soviet platform, the MiG-29 was likely designed and built in the 1970s as a counter to the then emerging US Air Force F-15 [https://warriormaven.com/air/us-air-force-f-15-chinese-j-10] and F-16 [https://warriormaven.com/china/chinese-j-10-vs-us-air-force-f-16]. The aircraft, which can hit high-speeds of Mach 2.3 comparable to an F-22, evolved into what could be called a high-speed bomb truck. First emerging in 1983, the MiG-29 traveled with 8,800 pounds of ordnance with seven hard points. Specs on the MiG-29, published in 2011 by Airforce-technology [https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/mig29/], show it primarily carries rockets and surface-to-air weapons with some air-to-air possibilities as well. Alongside this payload, the specs also say that the MiG-29 c [https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-the-us-military-purchased-21-mig-29-fighters/ar-AA18ZzqF?li=BBnb7Kz]an carry six 1,400 pound-bombs to attack from the sky. Perhaps upgrades in subsequent years enabled this 1980’s-era fighter jet to drop precision-guided bombs, however that option may not have been available when the aircraft first took off in 1977. The MiG-29’s seven hard points are actually considerably less than the Su-27 fighter which operates with 10-hardpoints and flies at a Mach 2.3 a speed roughly equivalent between the aircraft. Both the Su-27 and MiG-29 aircraft are also comparable with a thrust-to-weight ratio of 1.09. Air Force Breaksthrough with manned-unmanned teaming Video Above: Air Force 6th-Gen Stealth Fighters Control Attack Drones Given these statistics, it appears the much heavier payload capacity of the Su-27 might make it the favored aircraft, something which would make sense given that the Su-27 was introduced two years after the MiG-29 in 1983. The largest margin of difference between the two fighters, however, may be in the realm of radar cross section given the configurations shown by each of the images. The Su-27 has a much [https://news.yahoo.com/russia-gives-awards-su-27-145013254.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall] more rounded and horizontal fuselage with the exhaust vents not protruding, something which increases the stealth properties of the aircraft. Electromagnetic pings from radar do not, in this case, offer a high-fidelity return rendering. Radar signals cannot “bounce off” flat surfaces to effectively determine the size, shaper and speed of the aircraft. The MiG-29, by contrast has several rectangular-like protruding structures on the back of the aircraft, something much more likely to give radar “pings” something to bounce off of and return to deliver a “rendering” of the aircraft. These differences in external configuration might explain why the Su-27 fuselage [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/breaking-russian-fighter-jets-force-185400371.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall] wound up evolving into the Su-35, as they are airframes which do appear to succeed in lowering the fighter-jet's radar signature with sloped, slightly blended wing-body configurations. As for the MiG-29s ability to rival the F-15 and F-16 [https://warriormaven.com/russia-ukraine/russia-ukraine-war-nato-f-16-f-15-ukraine-pentagon] today, that would seem unlikely unless Russia has been able to sustain the air frame, and to an even greater extent, upgrade the weapons, computing and avionics. The F-15, for example, now has an ultra high speed Advanced Display Core Processor II able to perform billions of calculations per second, AESA radar and new generations of avionics, communications and weapons technology. Sustainment and modernization are similar with the F-16, which has not only received a Service Life Extension Program but also been configured into a newer, more-advanced “v” variant for allied customers. Lockheed has even built an advanced F-21 for the Indian military, a special new F-16 variant tailored specifically for India. While the F-15 and F-16, including the newly built F-15EX are fourth generation airframes, the US is doing what it can extend their utility and service life given that they could still be effective and relevant in many combat environments and present a counter for China’s J-10 and Russia’s MiG-29 Kris Osborn [https://warriormaven.com/author/krisosborn] is the Military Affairs Editor of 19 FortyFive and President of Warrior Maven - Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.
