Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/15/2005 7:37:20 PM EDT
Why does the U.S. Mil. not buy Russian and European fighters for our pilots to train against and fly.
If 2 Mig 29s can be had for the price of an FA-18 or F-15 why not just buy and fly the enemy planes for aggressor/training squadrons to fly against? If the planes cost 1/2 as much maintanance can not be to much different costwise. Also Russian Migs and Sukhois have been spotted by trained observers flying out of Area 51.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:39:01 PM EDT
IIRC, we have done this previously with the German air force.

When the wall came down, the East German air force became the property of the German air force - including it's MIG-29s.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:41:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Johnny_Reno:
IIRC, we have done this previously with the German air force.

When the wall came down, the East German air force became the property of the German air force - including it's MIG-29s.




That German Squadron was recently disbanded. Plus they say our pilots are the best, why not diversify.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:47:01 PM EDT
The US does do this to some extent. The US Army is supposedly the world's largest operator of Hind helicopters. They also have an extensive fleet of Russian tanks. In the case of fighters, its a lot more complicated. Every $50M airplane requires billions in local and national infrastructure: Ground Support Equipment (GSE) at the flight line and depot level, thousands of ground crew training hours, a supply pipeline, etc. Whether you have 5 aircraft or 500, you still need the same level of support. So, it simply doesn't make sense to buy a couple aircraft that are completely incompatible with the existing infrastructure. I'm sure you are going to say, "but what about that guy with the Mig I saw at the airshow." Well, you'll note that the aircraft flown my civilians are almost exclusively pre-1960's designs (F-86, F-104, Hunters, Mig-17,-19-21 etc). Anything after that uses integrated circuit boards, which are difficult to procure spares for, as well as complex diagnostic and support equipment.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:49:00 PM EDT
Besides, if you can defeat an American fighter being flown by an American Aggressor pilot, you can certainly whip the shit out of any MIG being flown by some third-world asshole.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:49:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
The US does do this to some extent. The US Army is supposedly the world's largest operator of Hind helicopters. They also have an extensive fleet of Russian tanks. In the case of fighters, its a lot more complicated. Every $50M airplane requires billions in local and national infrastructure: Ground Support Equipment (GSE) at the flight line and depot level, thousands of ground crew training hours, a supply pipeline, etc. Whether you have 5 aircraft or 500, you still need the same level of support. So, it simply doesn't make sense to buy a couple aircraft that are completely incompatible with the existing infrastructure. I'm sure you are going to say, "but what about that guy with the Mig I saw at the airshow." Well, you'll note that the aircraft flown my civilians are almost exclusively pre-1960's designs (F-86, F-104, Hunters, Mig-17,-19-21 etc). Anything after that uses integrated circuit boards, which are difficult to procure spares for, as well as complex diagnostic and support equipment.



So we would need an operational squadron essentially to make it cost effective. Also is training for the groundcrews that different?
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 7:51:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Besides, if you can defeat an American fighter being flown by an American Aggressor pilot, you can certainly whip the shit out of any MIG being flown by some third-world asshole.



Might not always be 3rd world. Chinese AF has expansive numbers and I imagine more capable pilots than any arab country. I am not trying to get into a discussion of weapons platforms though.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:03:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/15/2005 8:05:33 PM EDT by eddiein1984]
US crews are trained to work on stuff made by the General Dynam McBoeheed mafia, not by the Sukhoi design bureau. Whether you are talking helos, cargo planes, fighters, tanks, rod control, it was all designed by the same commitees who generally seem to come to the same conclusions. If you are talking about something designed independent of that, the philosophys, materials and maintenance standards may be completely different. It would be far cheaper to lease an entire russian squadron including all the personnel than it would be to buy just the planes.

I almost forgot, the Navy has a few modified Kfir (Isreali) aircraft used by the test pilot school. These are themselves a modification of a Mirage design. Not to contradict myself or anything.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:09:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mattl:

Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
The US does do this to some extent. The US Army is supposedly the world's largest operator of Hind helicopters. They also have an extensive fleet of Russian tanks. In the case of fighters, its a lot more complicated. Every $50M airplane requires billions in local and national infrastructure: Ground Support Equipment (GSE) at the flight line and depot level, thousands of ground crew training hours, a supply pipeline, etc. Whether you have 5 aircraft or 500, you still need the same level of support. So, it simply doesn't make sense to buy a couple aircraft that are completely incompatible with the existing infrastructure. I'm sure you are going to say, "but what about that guy with the Mig I saw at the airshow." Well, you'll note that the aircraft flown my civilians are almost exclusively pre-1960's designs (F-86, F-104, Hunters, Mig-17,-19-21 etc). Anything after that uses integrated circuit boards, which are difficult to procure spares for, as well as complex diagnostic and support equipment.



So we would need an operational squadron essentially to make it cost effective. Also is training for the groundcrews that different?



It goes way beyond an operational squadron. Russian planes are completely different than ours. Their radars, engines, ecm pods, avionics, etc. Their engines are also pieces of crap that need to be replaced ALOT. In order to have have an operational squadron of agressors, we'd have to have the ability to get parts, know how to maintain the aircraft, etc. Russia would not just sell us the parts and train our people to maintain the aircraft. So yes, we could get the aircraft from other countries but the parts and training would have to come from Russia and that's not going to happen. Even if we could some how do that, it would not come even close to being cost effective. We've exploited their airplanes (especially the MIG-29) know alot about the capabilites and can simulate it in our training with our own airplanes more or less. Does that explain a little? Good question though. If you've got anything else you'd like to know I'll tell you as much as I know or can. I fly Vipers so these are things I also think about.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:12:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mattl:

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Besides, if you can defeat an American fighter being flown by an American Aggressor pilot, you can certainly whip the shit out of any MIG being flown by some third-world asshole.



Might not always be 3rd world. Chinese AF has expansive numbers and I imagine more capable pilots than any arab country. I am not trying to get into a discussion of weapons platforms though.



They rank above a third world country but below India or Pakistan.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:36:52 PM EDT
We had a small fleet of MiG-29's for a few years.

"Rumor" has it that they were based in some remote southwestern airbase, flown by US Contractors, "real" MiG pilots and USAF pilots and were used for ACM/DACM and showed up for Red Flag once in a while.
Most are in various air museums around the country.


U.S. Buys Moldovan MiG-29 Fighters
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov1997/n11101997_9711102.html

By Linda D. Kozaryn
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON -- The United States recently bought 21 nuclear-
capable MiG-29 fighter jets from the Republic of Moldova to keep them
out of the hands of potential enemies, Defense Secretary William S.
Cohen announced Nov. 4.

"We have credible information that a number of rogue states,
including Iran, are attempting to buy available Russian high-tech
equipment and weapons in the aftermath of the breakup of the Soviet
Union," Cohen said. "These aircraft were on their shopping list."

Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction, including
chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities, Cohen said. "It's in
our overall interest to see to it that this kind of aircraft doesn't
fall into their hands, if we can prevent it."

The Soviet-designed fighters were dismantled and moved from the
Eastern European republic to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Air Force officials will study the aircraft's capabilities and ways to
counter them, Cohen said.

The jets were purchased under the Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program aimed at reducing, controlling and eliminating the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction from the former Soviet
Union.

The program, also known as the Nunn-Lugar program, has helped
draw down nuclear capabilities in Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
U.S. officials also arranged to store weapons-grade uranium from
Kazakhstan in the United States and helping enhance the security,
control and accounting of nuclear weapons and fissile materials in
Russia.



A Real MiG Deal

http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0598/mig2.htm

Although Iran already flies the less-capable Fulcrum A, it doesn't own any of the more advanced C-models. Of the 21 Fulcrums the United States bought, 14 are the frontline Fulcrum C's, which contain an active radar jammer in its spine, six older A's and one B-model two-seat trainer.

Along with the Fulcrums, aircraft test equipment and a supply of spare parts, the United States also received 507 air-to-air missiles, including 344 AA-8 Aphids, 112 AA-11 Archers and 51 AA-10 Alamos.

ImMiGrating to America

Funding for the sale came from the Defense Department's Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which removes weapons of mass destruction from former Soviet states, hence stemming their flow to rogue states.

Moldova made the deal because they could no longer afford to fly the jets, which guzzle gas like a 1966 Cadillac Coupe DeVille.

"Not only couldn't the Moldovans afford the fuel bill, they couldn't keep up with the maintenance costs either," said Capt. Michael Davison, who led the team recovering the MiGs. "Their aircrews and maintainers hadn't been paid for almost six months."

Davison and a team of 40 airmen, including engineers, aerial port personnel and security forces, spent 24 days last October and November at Markuleshti Air Base in Moldova, packing up and shipping the jets, missiles and equipment. Enlisted members composed a majority of the team, representing several commands and agencies like the Air Intelligence Agency, Air Mobility Command, and U.S. Air Forces in Europe.

"The Moldovans were shocked that we allowed enlisted technicians, especially women, to put their hands on the aircraft," Davison said. "They just don't do that there."

Moldova rests on the Black Sea, wedged between Romania and Ukraine. The cash-strapped former Soviet state - about the size of Maryland - relies on agriculture as its chief resource, and has fallen on hard times.

"Things we took for granted, they didn't have, like running water or heat in their buildings. I was cold the whole time I was there," said Davison, who hails from Mansfield, Mass. "Despite the conditions and their circumstances, the Moldovans bent over backwards for us; they were very gracious."

From Oct. 20 to Nov. 2, 1997, loadmasters and aerial port experts squeezed two MiGs apiece, sans wings and tails, into the cargo holds of C-17 Globemaster III transports from Charleston Air Force Base, S.C. The Charleston airlifters delivered the MiGs to the National Air Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson AFB near Dayton, Ohio.



"When the last MiG was loaded in Moldova, the base commander there, who was this bear of man, turned his head away and cried," Davison said. "It was tough to watch. The MiG pilots knew it was best for their country, but they were sad to see them go."



Behind the Iron Canopy

Now, the Fulcrums sit grounded, in various stages of disassembly in hangars scattered across Wright-Patterson. In one hangar, formerly occupied by the 906th Fighter Group, eight MiG-29s, which are about the same size as the Navy's F-18, look as worn and weather-beaten as a New Mexico windmill. If you swiped your hand across the fuselage of one of the jets, it'd come away green. The Moldovans touched up the planes with spray paint.

"They weren't too concerned about looks," Davison said, "but how they flew."

NAIC engineers will comb over the Fulcrums, literally putting the jet under the microscope.

Huddled around one of the Fulcrum cockpits, two Air Force sergeants dissected the jet's avionics, shaking down its electronic innards.

If the NAIC can discover how the Fulcrum works, Air Force pilots might gain an edge if they face the Fulcrum in future combat. The MiG-29 is a widely exported aircraft, flown by the usual suspects like Iraq, Iran, North Korea and Cuba. According to Davison, it's one of the leading threats to U.S. air operations challenging our F-15s and F-16s.

"Getting the Fulcrum C was huge," said Davison, an aeronautical engineer by trade. "These are the first indigenous Fulcrums we've seen up close and personal.
"Now we get to see things we haven't seen before. We get to put our fingers on them and thoroughly evaluate them," he said. "It's a unique opportunity. We can find out its weaknesses and limitations, and pass that on to the warfighter so they can defeat them."

The NAIC is the Air Force's single, integrated intelligence production center, and the DOD's primary producer of foreign air and space intelligence. Its mission, dating back to 1917 and the Army Signal Corps' Foreign Data Section at McCook Field in Dayton, is to assess and evaluate the air and space threat from potential enemies, ensuring American troops aren't surprised on the battlefield.

Davison works as the chief engineer in the center's foreign materiel exploitation facility: a 35,000 square-foot building boasting a 50-ton crane, where teams of techno-investigators reverse engineer, test and analyze captured or purchased foreign high-tech air and space gadgets and gizmos.

On the Fulcrum, engineers and technicians will scour the plane and study every subsystem, searching for the best way to beat the MiG in combat.

"We'll find out how [the avionics] work and what frequencies they use," Davison said. "We'll learn everything we can about the airplane."

According to Gen. Michael E. Ryan, Air Force chief of staff, the service will fly a "few" of the jets to learn more about their aerial capabilities. He denied reports, however, that the Air Force might use the jets to form a Red aggressor squadron, pitting the MiGs against American fighters in mock dogfights.

So what's next? Davison wouldn't elaborate on what's on his wishlist, saying, "We're interested in all foreign hardware." However, he wouldn't mind running his magnifying glass over the Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker, flown by the Russian home defense interceptor force, Kazakhstan, several other former Soviet states and China.

Anybody want to make a deal?



Moldovan MiG-29 Purchase
www.wpafb.af.mil/naic/mig29s.html
www.wpafb.af.mil/naic/blue62.html


Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:41:29 PM EDT
Their is a Mig 29K now as well as Mig33 navy model I dont think C's are advanced anymore.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:45:53 PM EDT
The US Navy and Marine Corps leased 25 Israel Aircraft Industries Kfir C.1 fighters for ACM/DCAM training in the mid to late 80's.

The USAF and US Navy leased two in 2002 to provide dissimilar and electronic attack training called Joint Airborne Tactical Electronic Combat Training (JATEC).


In 1985, the US Navy leased 12 Kfir C.1s from Israel for use as dissimilar air combat trainers. The Kfir C.1 in US Navy service was assigned the designation F-21A. They received the Bureau of Aeronautics serial numbers 163298/163309. The twelve F-21As went to VF-43 at NAS Oceana in 1985, where they were painted in a two-tone grey scheme. They were replaced by F-16Ns in early 1988, and were all returned to Israel in March of 1988.

The Marine Corps established its own dissimilar air combat training unit, VFMT-401, at Yuma, Arizona in August of 1987. VFMT-401 received 13 F-21As leased from Israel in 1987. These were given a non-standard serial number derived from the aircraft's three-digit construction number prefixed by 999 for bookkeeping purposes to make them compatible with Navy computer systems. Some USMC F-21As were painted in a two-tone grey scheme, whereas others retained Israeli camouflage. USMC F-21As were operated by VFMT-401 for a couple of years until being replaced in late 1989 by F-5E Tiger IIs obtained from the USAF. These F-21As were then returned to Israel, bringing the era of the F-21A in US service to an end.






Link Posted: 9/15/2005 8:47:52 PM EDT
In 1997 the C model was advanced.


Originally Posted By Mattl:
Their is a Mig 29K now as well as Mig33 navy model I dont think C's are advanced anymore.

Link Posted: 9/15/2005 9:02:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/15/2005 9:06:54 PM EDT by Mattl]
The Kifir was a Mirage III with an F-16 engine. Israeli adaptation to a parts embargo if memory serves me correct. Needless to say the American engine made a superior plane. The Israeli version of the
F-16I (with their mods) is superior to any F-16s we currently fly. It has a stronger engine, as well as radar and avionics.



Link to Info
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 9:15:43 PM EDT
Your aircraft ignorance is showing.
The Kifr is an Israeli copy of the French Mirage V with a General Electric J79 jet engine amongst other things.

Whatever website you got your information from is dead-assed wrong.


IAI decided to develop the Arie based on the technological knowhow acquired from the Kfir project, particularly from the Kfir-Canard program – Its improved version. In fact, the first proposal which was put on hold by the air force, was to develop an aircraft to be be named “Super Kfir” – a regular Kfir whose original J79 engine was replaced by an F100 model, same as in earlier F-15/F-16s versions.


Never made it into production.


Originally Posted By Mattl:
The Kifir was a Mirage III with an F-16 engine.

Link Posted: 9/15/2005 9:17:55 PM EDT

Looks like TAPCOs' version of the F-16....
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 9:26:30 PM EDT


It's safe to say they are still using them in some aspect as I saw one of these flying around about 3 months ago. Thought it was a Saab Viggen.

Top Top