>>>Nope these are not the coffins we are talking about. I dont blame you for not noticing the difference cause they share the same names. The ones crashing are not the Mig-21bison but the Mig21M/MF versions. The bisons are not the so called coffins.
The F104 was called a widowmaker. F16 in Europe has its records in crashing. Just count how many peace losses Belgium and Holland has. Still, I used that negative remark of the Indian press and there are big numbers of this plane responsible for pilot losses in the IAF. I do not think we can blaim pilots for the bigger numbers. As far as I know upgraded mig21 bis is called mig21 Bison. Mig21 Bis was the ultimate mig21 after it gor a bigger radar and more fuel storage in the spine. Negative impact was less agility. But it had a better engine. Here ACIG:
[One of the latest entrants is the MiG-21 Bison (formerly known as the MiG-21-93/UPG), the ultimate upgrade to the ageing MiG-21bis in order to bring it up to modern standards. The upgrade mainly revolves around the Phazotron Kopyo-M radar and integrated BVR attack capability with R-77 BVRAAMs. Other features include a SURA HMS, a semi-glass cockpit and a Sextant Totem-3000 Ring laser gyro nav. system with GPS, to mention a few. Note the conformal countermeasure dispensers, the new Tarang RWR's antennae on the tailfin and the single piece windshield.]
Hindunet
[India started procuring MiG-21s from the erstwhile Soviet Union's MiG-MAPO after the Chinese attack of 1962. Today, the IAF has over 300 MiG-21s (16 operational squadrons) - MiG-21 FLs (interceptors, inducted into the IAF between 1996 and 1970), which are nearing the end of their lives and whose squadrons are being number-plated, MiG-21Ms (ground attack planes, inducted during 1970-73) and the MiG-21 Bis variant (multi-role, inducted between 1977 and 1985). Although the MiG-21 has evolved since its early days and upgrades - such as the $626-million contract that India signed with Russia in March 1996 to upgrade 125 MiG-21 Bis fighters - are being pursued, they are fast ceasing to be state-of-the-art. The MiG-21 Bis upgrade programme (the plane will be called MiG-21 Bison after upgradation) is limping along, after suffering two crashes - one in September 2002 and the other in April 2003. So far eight aircraft have been upgraded, but optimists aver that it would take at least four years before HAL is able to upgrade 125 MiG-21 Bis fighters, which are expected to stay in squadron service until 2015.]
The youngest mig21 bison is 23 years old... The oldest could be 31 years old. I don not think that upgading this difficult to fly plane is making it lot safer. And please do provide data to show that it is not the Bis that crashed but the other. Mig21 plane is essentiel a small body around the Tumansky engine... There is not much to improve.
>>>No doubt the plane lacks in some quarters. But, what it lacks in mobility it compensates with firepower. As the USAF pilot mentioned, the Mig-21 gets to shoot the first shot. No matter what platform they are shot from, the R-73 and R-77 are no pushovers. The mig-21 bison is a 2nd generation platform with 4th generation avionics and firepower. It would be stupid to underestimate 4th gen weapon systems. The R-73 is more potent than the AIM-9X.
If the Mig21 Bison has good ECM hen I surely think that the Americans have that for their planes. I think in certain actions they might get a sting of the mig21 but in a normal war the Mig21 will not have a impact. They just avoid getting near airfields. And added firepower decreased range more and it had to give away agility. The fact is that a plane with almost no range and just 2 BVR has no real value besides point defence (airfields). In that respect the JF17 is in the same corner. You cannot do a lot with jus 2 BVR. So they have probably rails for double launching. In reality a2a is a lot more then point defence. About AIM9x. I do not think I can agree with that. AIM9x was the reply after testing German MIG29 in USA... So the AIM9x is the folow up of the less advanced AIM9 versions. Do you think that USA would bring AIM9X while they know it is less?
>>You are mixing up the 2. The bison has 4th gen avionics. Israeli radars and jammers, MFDs, HOTAS control, navigational aids like sextents, the Tarang RWR etc. along with BVR capability. Heck, not to mention it has autopilot too. The same cannot be said for the PG. The PGs equivalent would be the Mig-21 Ms and MFs and not the bison.
You might be suprised what is in PG. Since it is a lot more agile and has more fuel then M/MF and besides that is is produced 35 years later... PAF was desperate to get some planes but I doubt that is as bad as plane that are that old. Design is altered but also technology is newer.
>>I for one can support you at that. The plane is 22m in length. I dont know, maybe you were talking to kids. The MKI is not stealth. Even, the F-15 will look like a black spot on the radar. Why else do u think the MKI carries a radar as powerful as a ground station radar. It is not trying to hide. You can see it with your RWR at a distance of 200+km. The MKI and F-15 are not meant to hide. The MKI's mission priorities include anti-air, SEADs and mini AWACS functions. Getting close to and bringing down the MKI is easier said than done.
Getting close to P/PG is easier said then done. Just notice the rwr on newer planes. There is a lot of interaction between JF17 technology and PG. I hope you did read about the ECM suit of the JF17. It is very advanced compared to that what PAF has at the moment. If you are less visible then you have less enemies. If that counts for the Gnat and Bison then I will love to add tha for F16, Mirages 5/3, JF17 but somehow the planes of the other side are always supersized when it comes to comparisation. Getting MKI in the air will be noticed by AWACS far away. That already is a problem. The TVC makes the big MKI bit more agile in lower speeds but it still is a big heavy plane that is difficult to hide.
>>>The wars we have had until now have not changed equations anyway, not the pattons, centurions, migs, sabres, starfighters, hunters, gnats, frigates, carriers etc. Neither india nor pakistan have been able to claim any kind of decisive edge anyways. We continue to hold what we had since partition. So, why bring poor gnat into the picture. It was just one platform out of many that were employed and none have contributed to change.
I agree with that. Both have nukes now. In the past both faild to exploit their weapons and tactics to the max. I have seen and touched the Gnat in USA. Unbelievable. Lovely plane. When used more effective it would have a bigger impact then most van imagine. But same can be said of some weapons on the Pak side.
>>>All india and pak did in the west pak border is move some troops a few kilometres on either side of the border, fight as long as our economy allowed us to. Then retreat and start chest thumping using the media even to this day.
The war never lasted long and did not bring any changes. I think besides decimating Pakistan area (Bangladesh) there is hardly any thing to cheer about. What does suprise me is that 5 times bigger (atleast) cannot win easily. But then again, trillions time better USA cannot win Afghanistan either. Mankind is unfortunately nationalistic and forgets the losses. It is no difference in the stock trading. Everyone loves to talk about the top stock but at the moment no one is talking about their total losses.
Nice talking to ya.
The F104 was called a widowmaker. F16 in Europe has its records in crashing. Just count how many peace losses Belgium and Holland has. Still, I used that negative remark of the Indian press and there are big numbers of this plane responsible for pilot losses in the IAF. I do not think we can blaim pilots for the bigger numbers. As far as I know upgraded mig21 bis is called mig21 Bison. Mig21 Bis was the ultimate mig21 after it gor a bigger radar and more fuel storage in the spine. Negative impact was less agility. But it had a better engine. Here ACIG:
[One of the latest entrants is the MiG-21 Bison (formerly known as the MiG-21-93/UPG), the ultimate upgrade to the ageing MiG-21bis in order to bring it up to modern standards. The upgrade mainly revolves around the Phazotron Kopyo-M radar and integrated BVR attack capability with R-77 BVRAAMs. Other features include a SURA HMS, a semi-glass cockpit and a Sextant Totem-3000 Ring laser gyro nav. system with GPS, to mention a few. Note the conformal countermeasure dispensers, the new Tarang RWR's antennae on the tailfin and the single piece windshield.]
Hindunet
[India started procuring MiG-21s from the erstwhile Soviet Union's MiG-MAPO after the Chinese attack of 1962. Today, the IAF has over 300 MiG-21s (16 operational squadrons) - MiG-21 FLs (interceptors, inducted into the IAF between 1996 and 1970), which are nearing the end of their lives and whose squadrons are being number-plated, MiG-21Ms (ground attack planes, inducted during 1970-73) and the MiG-21 Bis variant (multi-role, inducted between 1977 and 1985). Although the MiG-21 has evolved since its early days and upgrades - such as the $626-million contract that India signed with Russia in March 1996 to upgrade 125 MiG-21 Bis fighters - are being pursued, they are fast ceasing to be state-of-the-art. The MiG-21 Bis upgrade programme (the plane will be called MiG-21 Bison after upgradation) is limping along, after suffering two crashes - one in September 2002 and the other in April 2003. So far eight aircraft have been upgraded, but optimists aver that it would take at least four years before HAL is able to upgrade 125 MiG-21 Bis fighters, which are expected to stay in squadron service until 2015.]
The youngest mig21 bison is 23 years old... The oldest could be 31 years old. I don not think that upgading this difficult to fly plane is making it lot safer. And please do provide data to show that it is not the Bis that crashed but the other. Mig21 plane is essentiel a small body around the Tumansky engine... There is not much to improve.
>>>No doubt the plane lacks in some quarters. But, what it lacks in mobility it compensates with firepower. As the USAF pilot mentioned, the Mig-21 gets to shoot the first shot. No matter what platform they are shot from, the R-73 and R-77 are no pushovers. The mig-21 bison is a 2nd generation platform with 4th generation avionics and firepower. It would be stupid to underestimate 4th gen weapon systems. The R-73 is more potent than the AIM-9X.
If the Mig21 Bison has good ECM hen I surely think that the Americans have that for their planes. I think in certain actions they might get a sting of the mig21 but in a normal war the Mig21 will not have a impact. They just avoid getting near airfields. And added firepower decreased range more and it had to give away agility. The fact is that a plane with almost no range and just 2 BVR has no real value besides point defence (airfields). In that respect the JF17 is in the same corner. You cannot do a lot with jus 2 BVR. So they have probably rails for double launching. In reality a2a is a lot more then point defence. About AIM9x. I do not think I can agree with that. AIM9x was the reply after testing German MIG29 in USA... So the AIM9x is the folow up of the less advanced AIM9 versions. Do you think that USA would bring AIM9X while they know it is less?
>>You are mixing up the 2. The bison has 4th gen avionics. Israeli radars and jammers, MFDs, HOTAS control, navigational aids like sextents, the Tarang RWR etc. along with BVR capability. Heck, not to mention it has autopilot too. The same cannot be said for the PG. The PGs equivalent would be the Mig-21 Ms and MFs and not the bison.
You might be suprised what is in PG. Since it is a lot more agile and has more fuel then M/MF and besides that is is produced 35 years later... PAF was desperate to get some planes but I doubt that is as bad as plane that are that old. Design is altered but also technology is newer.
>>I for one can support you at that. The plane is 22m in length. I dont know, maybe you were talking to kids. The MKI is not stealth. Even, the F-15 will look like a black spot on the radar. Why else do u think the MKI carries a radar as powerful as a ground station radar. It is not trying to hide. You can see it with your RWR at a distance of 200+km. The MKI and F-15 are not meant to hide. The MKI's mission priorities include anti-air, SEADs and mini AWACS functions. Getting close to and bringing down the MKI is easier said than done.
Getting close to P/PG is easier said then done. Just notice the rwr on newer planes. There is a lot of interaction between JF17 technology and PG. I hope you did read about the ECM suit of the JF17. It is very advanced compared to that what PAF has at the moment. If you are less visible then you have less enemies. If that counts for the Gnat and Bison then I will love to add tha for F16, Mirages 5/3, JF17 but somehow the planes of the other side are always supersized when it comes to comparisation. Getting MKI in the air will be noticed by AWACS far away. That already is a problem. The TVC makes the big MKI bit more agile in lower speeds but it still is a big heavy plane that is difficult to hide.
>>>The wars we have had until now have not changed equations anyway, not the pattons, centurions, migs, sabres, starfighters, hunters, gnats, frigates, carriers etc. Neither india nor pakistan have been able to claim any kind of decisive edge anyways. We continue to hold what we had since partition. So, why bring poor gnat into the picture. It was just one platform out of many that were employed and none have contributed to change.
I agree with that. Both have nukes now. In the past both faild to exploit their weapons and tactics to the max. I have seen and touched the Gnat in USA. Unbelievable. Lovely plane. When used more effective it would have a bigger impact then most van imagine. But same can be said of some weapons on the Pak side.
>>>All india and pak did in the west pak border is move some troops a few kilometres on either side of the border, fight as long as our economy allowed us to. Then retreat and start chest thumping using the media even to this day.
The war never lasted long and did not bring any changes. I think besides decimating Pakistan area (Bangladesh) there is hardly any thing to cheer about. What does suprise me is that 5 times bigger (atleast) cannot win easily. But then again, trillions time better USA cannot win Afghanistan either. Mankind is unfortunately nationalistic and forgets the losses. It is no difference in the stock trading. Everyone loves to talk about the top stock but at the moment no one is talking about their total losses.
Nice talking to ya.
Last edited:
