There are a lot of Myths in this thread. I don't even know where to begin. Anyway, I'll just list some which I read.
Myth: RD-33 is a smoky engine while RD-93 is not.
Reality: RD-93 and RD-33 are the same engines. The initial RD-33 smoked a lot, but the RD-33 series 2 & RD-33 Series 3 don't smoke very much. They are more or less comparable to Al-31 engines in the smoke department. No one knows whether RD-93 is a RD-33 series 2 or series 3. But it's definitely one of these 2 variants with re-positioned gear boxes.
Myth: RD-93 has higher thrust.
Reality: The thrust of RD-93 is the same as the RD-33, which is 8300kgf or 18,300lbf. The often published figure of 8700kgf or 19200 lbf is just emergency thrust during take-off. It can be used only during take-off(Extremely useful in Scramble Missions). However technically, it is still the maximum thrust. But one has to read the fine print to know this maximum thrust is not the normal AB thrust. The only engine which has a new thrust is the brand new RD-33MK engine with close to 19,900 lbf ~ 9000kgf.
Myth: JF-17 has a TWR of 1.1.
Reality: JF-17, well, it can have a TWR of 1.1, but if that's the case then a Mig-21 will have a Thrust to Weight ratio of 1.08. We all know that is not the case. Mig-29 is the first soviet fighter to have a TWR(thrust to weight ratio) more than 1. The only possibility of JF-17 having TWR of 1.1 is when it is loaded with around 950kgs of fuel with no weapons. That is well below the half of fuel capacity!! So whoever said JF-17 has 1.1 TWR is either smoking weed or the JF-17 has additional thrust in the form of Klingon anti-gravity engines.
Having said that, there is no standard rule of calculating TWR. Some take, full fuel weight, others take half fuel with some weapons, and some add a constant weight, while others even take MTOW of the aircraft!! So technically JF-17 having a TWR of 1.1 isn't wrong, it's just that, no one uses such a method. If PAC uses such a method, then by that method a Mig-21 will have a TWR of 1.08 and Mig-29 will have a TWR of a Rocket!
And calculating TWR isn't rocket science. Be it a Lockheed Martin Engineer or a Mikoyan engineer, all of them use only one instrument- $2 calculator! There is no specialized instrument to calculate TWR, all you need to know are 2 things- weight and thrust, and do a simple calculation using a calc.
Myth: Mig-29 is accurately evaluated by USAF pilots without bias.
Reality: This is like saying, if IAF had a chance to evaluate the JF-17, it will be accurately evaluated by IAF pilots without bias.
Seriously, if any one is falling for it then I have nothing more to say. Not to mention, the supposed publication which started it all, the "code one magazine", is a magazine owned by Lockheed Martin! Lets see, a magazine owned by the maker of F-16 publishes an Article about the Mig-29 vs F-16 exercise. Hmm.. Am I the only one who is finding something wrong with this picture?
BTW, unfortunately, apart from USAF pilots, the other western pilots who have flown the Mig-29 are the West German pilots, who are still erst-while enemies of the Warsaw pact. So in the end it's like asking the enemy to complement the Mig-29. But hey, still it offers another insight other than Soviets complimenting their own machines.
The Mig-29 the Germans had was downgraded export models with very poor radar, no data link, and with lower thrust engines with heavy fuel consumption, than when compared to Standard Mig-29s. Even the IAF had the same Mig-29 package(except the Mig-29S which was received in the 1990s), except on the engine department where it was not downgraded.
During the West German vs USAF evaluation, Mig-29 lost out on BVR fighters due to its export Radar, but kicked F-16s a$$ in close combat. And how did the USAF pilots react to this? In the words of the West German pilots:
"But when all that is said and done, the MiG-29 is a superb fighter for close-in combat, even compared with aircraft like the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. This is due to the aircraft’s superb aerodynamics and helmet mounted sight. Inside ten nautical miles I’m hard to defeat, and with the IRST, helmet sight and ‘Archer’ I can’t be beaten. Period. Even against the latest Block 50 F-16s the MiG-29 is virtually invulnerable in the close-in scenario. On one occasion I remember the F-16s did score some kills eventually, but only after taking 18 ‘Archers’. We didn’t operate kill removal (forcing ‘killed’ aircraft to leave the fight) since they’d have got no training value,
we killed them too quickly. (Just as we might seldom have got close-in if they used their AMRAAMs BVR!)
They couldn’t believe it at the debrief, they got up and left the room! They might not like it, but with a 28deg/sec instantaneous turn rate (compared to the Block 50 F-16's 26deg) we can out-turn them."
Luftwaffe MiG-29 experience - positives and negatives
Hmm.. "Got up and left the room". That's the mentality of the USAF pilots who are writing reviews on the F-16 vs Mig-29 on Forums or Magazines. Some would call it being sore losers, but I'd say its the same everywhere. When LCA completed its test flight, the test pilot said, it handled like a Mirage-2000. But we all know the truth now don't we. LCA cannot even pull 9Gs and has a speed less than that of the Mirage.
So the lesson here is: Most pilots would not accept their planes are inferior to the enemy's plane.
Myth: JF-17 is extremely close to Mig-29 was said by Pogosyan.
Reality: RIA Novosti didn't quote that sentence. Pogosyan only mentioned it is a threat to Mig-29 in the Market. This thing was reported by Russia's Dork media- Russia Today. They mis-interpreted which was earlier reported in RIA. They even mentioned FC-1 is a copy of the Mig-29. Seems like Russia Today has as much knowledge as India's NewsX.
Some interesting facts on the Mig-29.
Mig-29 is the fastest plane in the Indian inventory. Mach 2.35. MKI top speed is only a mere 1.9 Mach.
Mig-29 has the best TWR in the Indian Inventory. MKI is very heavy. When MKI first arrived, in mock dogfights, Mig-29 won repeatedly against MKI. MKI could only catch up to the Mig-29 when the Sukhoi was on Bingo fuel!!
Some people have repeatedly asked for JF-17s Specs. There is a lot of confusion because PAC Kamra website hasn't been updated in half a decade and Wiki blindly quotes that. But CAC/PAC has put up the most up to date
recent specs in Farnborough(also on IDEAS 2008).
Height: 5.1m
Width: 8.5m
Length: 14m
Empty Weight: 14,520lb
Speed: 1.6 Mach
G's: 8
Maximum Thrust: 8700kgf or 19,200lbf
