For some reason, MiG-29s don't seem to have lasted as long as F-16 built around the same time or even earlier. I wonder why? Is it inferior materials in the airframes, poor maintenance, hard use, or a combination of various factors?
When the West first got a good look at the MiG-29, I remember it came as quite a shock. Here was a light, twin-engined fighter with manouverability comparable to the F-18, with passive IR detection system, and helmet-mounted sight for non LOS IR missile targetting. I'm glad it didn't happen, but I'd love to see what an air war over Europe would have looked like c.1988. I really think that, save for pilot quality, the MiG-29 and SU-27 would have been a good match for F-16s and F-15s and Tornado F3s. Throw in massive numbers of MiG-21s and 23s, and NATO would have had their hands full.
|