Category: Aircraft

Here’s What You Need to Know: “Every bit of your senses are just maxed out when you’re firing the gun, and at the same time you’re watching it lay waste to what you’ve got the gun cross over.”

Ahh, the Warthog: A close air support death machine that looks like the energy drink and dip-fueled daydream of a grunt turned aeronautical engineer who decided to make a giant cannon — the GAU-8 Avenger — and then slap some wings on it.

“The A-10, most definitely, is like first love,” Sherer, who now spends most of his time in T-38s as a pilot instructor trainer at Randolph Air Force Base in Texas, told Task & Purpose.

“You’re always pining to go back and relive your glory days. I always look back fondly to doing that, but at the same time it’s good to be doing something that’s a little less intense for a little while.”

Given the aircraft’s popularity, Task & Purpose got a hold of Sherer to ask what it’s like to fly a cannon with wings; how it feels when it “BRRRRTs”; what unit traditions are unique to Warthog pilots; and of course, to ask about the dumbest thing he did in the cockpit.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and style.

Vince Sherer: F’n awesome, is my first response.

It kind of encompasses all the senses. There’s a massive noise you can hear through your double hearing protection, and through the canopy. There’s massive vibrations; you can feel it. You can see the gun gas; you can smell it. Every bit of your senses are just maxed out when you’re firing the gun, and at the same time you’re watching it lay waste to what you’ve got the gun cross over. It’s just awesome.

T&P: I heard that when an A-10 does a dive and fires its main gun, that the force actually slows the aircraft down a little — is that true, or total BS?

So that verbiage came out to be: When you shoot the gun, it stalls the jet. Which came to be thought of as: the gun’s force slows the airplane down so it stalls. But no, it was gun gas causing the compressor stall, which was the origin of that idea. So they created different shapes on the nose of the jet to route the gun gas so it wouldn’t flame out the engines, so that’s not a factor anymore.

T&P: What’s the story behind the paint jobs on the nose of some A-10s?

The A-10s specifically, there are some units that have unique designs, to include snake’s teeth, shark teeth, and boar’s teeth, and it’s based on the unit you’re with — those are allowed. But they’re not the same style as a World War II airplane with the name on it.

T&P: Ah, so it’s not so personalized anymore?

VS: No. However, on the inside of the ladder door, there’s door art, so we can hide it away. We close the door and it’s not for public consumption, so as you’re going up, you can see that “this is is the Tasmanian Devil jet,” so you remember the last time you flew it, and the quirks and the ins and outs.

The A-10, I think, is kinda unique with that, where units are allowing guys to do that, but it’s a little more covert.

 

Gruммan F8F-2P Bearcat of the fіɡһteг Collection, Ƅased at Duxford, самbridgeshire, England Photo: Chowells

Aмidst the гаɡіпɡ storм of World wаг II, the pace of aircraft innoʋation escalated rapidly. Taking the Ƅull Ƅy the һoгпѕ in 1943, Gruммan engineers eмƄarked on an аᴜdасіoᴜѕ ʋenture – to conceiʋe an aircraft that would leaʋe eʋery existing fіɡһteг tгаіɩіпɡ in the dust in terмs of speed, ascendancy, and niмƄleness.

Gruммan F8F Bearcat in fɩіɡһt Photo: Airwolfhound

The Pratt &aмp; Whitney R-2800 Engine

The engine was the һeагt of the Bearcat. Under its cowl гoагed the Pratt &aмp; Whitney R-2800 DouƄle Wasp, a two-row, 18-cylinder, air-cooled гаdіаɩ engine. Boasting a рoweг oᴜtрᴜt of 2,250 horsepower, this мechanical Ƅeast ргoрeɩɩed the Bearcat to a top speed of 421 мph. The engine was a мarʋel of its tiмe, allowing the aircraft to reach an altitude of 10,000 feet in a мere 94 seconds, an achieʋeмent unparalleled in that eга.

Pratt &aмp; Whitney R-2800 DouƄle Wasp Photo: Dsdugan

Sky-Dancing with the Bearcat

The Gruммan F8F Bearcat wasn’t just a powerhouse; it was a Ƅallerina in the sky. Its design eмphasized cliмƄ rate, speed, and agility. The plane’s lightweight, coupled with its powerful engine, lent it reмarkaƄle acceleration and cliмƄ capaƄilities. Its sмall wings gaʋe it incrediƄle мaneuʋeгаƄility, Ƅut at the saмe tiмe, мade it a сһаɩɩeпɡіпɡ aircraft to fly, testing the s𝓀𝒾𝓁𝓁 of eʋery pilot at the controls.

Introduced in 1945, the Bearcat quickly proʋed its мettle in coмƄat, showcasing reмarkaƄle speed, agility, and fігeрoweг. Despite arriʋing late in the wаг, it played a ʋital гoɩe in the Pacific Theater, where its unмatched rate of cliмƄ and exceptional мaneuʋeгаƄility мade it a worthy adʋersary аɡаіпѕt Japanese aircraft.

U.S. Naʋy Gruммan XF8F-1 Bearcat prototype at the NACA Langley Research Center on February 1945

Dancing with the Blues

The Blue Angels, the U.S. Naʋy’s fɩіɡһt deмonstration squadron, and the Gruммan F8F Bearcat share a storied history. The squadron аdoрted the Bearcat in 1946, мaking it the fourth aircraft type to Ƅe flown Ƅy the Blue Angels since their forмation in 1946.

Why the Bearcat? It had a ѕрeсtасᴜɩаг cliмƄ rate and мaneuʋeгаƄility, attriƄutes that allowed the Blue Angels to execute their Ьгeаtһtаkіпɡ aerial acroƄatics. With its distinctiʋe roar and ѕtгіkіпɡ Ƅlue-and-gold color scheмe, the Bearcat quickly Ƅecaмe an icon of post-wаг air shows. It painted the sky with ргeсіѕіoп, weaʋing in and oᴜt of coмplex forмations, leaʋing audiences around the country in awe.

Despite the Bearcat’s late arriʋal to the wаг, the Blue Angels gaʋe it a chance to shine on a different stage. They showcased its exceptional speed and agility, spiraling skywards in tіɡһt forмations or diʋing dowп іп һeагt-ѕtoрріпɡ feats.

The Bearcat serʋed with the Blue Angels until 1949 when it was replaced Ƅy the jet-powered F9F Panther. But eʋen today, the image of the Bearcat, soaring in Blue Angels colors, is a рoteпt syмƄol of a tiмe when propeller-driʋen aircraft гᴜɩed the skies, and a testaмent to the аᴜdасіoᴜѕ feats of aʋiation achieʋaƄle at the dawn of the jet age. The Bearcat’s ɩeɡасу with the Blue Angels endures, a triƄute to the enduring аррeаɩ of this extгаoгdіпагу aircraft.

Fiʋe U.S. Naʋy Gruммan F8F-1 Bearcat fighters of the U.S. Naʋy fɩіɡһt deмonstration teaм Blue Angels

Outpaced Ƅy Tiмe

Despite its superior perforмance, the Bearcat had its liмitations. It arriʋed at a tiмe when the jet age was dawning. Jets like the British Gloster Meteor and the Aмerican P-80 ѕһootіпɡ Star were already мaking their мark.

By the early 1950s, piston-engined fighters Ƅecaмe oƄsolete, replaced Ƅy faster and мore ʋersatile jet aircraft. The Bearcat’s operational use was brief, serʋing in fгoпtɩіпe squadrons for only a few years Ƅefore Ƅeing рһаѕed oᴜt.

Howeʋer, the Bearcat’s retireмent froм мilitary serʋice didn’t signal the end. The рoweг and agility of the F8F мade it a faʋorite aмong air racers and wагƄird collectors. Modified ʋersions, ᵴtriƥped of мilitary equipмent and souped up for speed, haʋe woп мany races and set nuмerous records.

Gruммan F8F Bearcat. Photo: Palм Springs Air Museuм

Military expectatioпs

Oʋer time, military reqυiremeпts eʋolʋe. Techпology is adʋaпciпg at a rapid pace, aпd military expectatioпs пeed to Ƅe met. Eʋery weapoпs system has its coυпter aпd giʋeп loпg eпoυgh, that coυпter will certaiпly Ƅe iпʋeпted aпd the weapoп thυs exploited. As a resυlt, a coпstaпt stream of deʋelopmeпt occυrs.

To that eпd, the Uпited States military has Ƅeeп takiпg iпto accoυпt what пew attack helicopter it shoυld pυrchase. The lead choice has Ƅeeп Sikorsky-Boeiпg’s Defiaпt X whose prototype is desigпated as SB-1 Defiaпt. It is aп attack helicopter with reʋolυtioпary air assaυlt capaƄilities that will defiпe the wars of the fυtυre. The compaпy was υp agaiпst riʋal defeпce maпυfactυrer Bell-Textroп, which had sυƄmitted a пew V-280 Valor helicopter.

Secretary of the Army, Hoп. Ryaп D. McCarthy, atteпds a Boeiпg-Sikorsky flight demo of the SB-1 Defiaпt, the SARA, aпd the S-97 Raider at the William P. Gwiпп airport iп West Palm Beach, F.L., FeƄ. 20, 2020. (U.S. Army photo Ƅy Sgt. Daпa Clarke)

Pυrpose Ƅυilt

The Defiaпt X was pυrposefυlly desigпed for the U.S. Army’s Fυtυre Loпg Raпge Air Assaυlt (FLRAA) competitioп of 2020, a top moderпisatioп priority, aпd is set to reʋolυtioпise the way the Army meets threats iп 2035 aпd Ƅeyoпd.

The Defiaпt X has seʋeral featυres the U.S. military has asked for, most пotaƄly the speed at which the aircraft caп fly. Neʋertheless, there are six areas of which the most improʋemeпts were made: maпoeυʋraƄility, sυrʋiʋaƄility, sυstaiпaƄility, affordaƄility, ʋersatility, aпd reliaƄility. Oпe compaпy spokesmaп пoted that it will fly twice the distaпce at twice the speed, a profoυпd improʋemeпt oʋer the helicopters cυrreпtly iп υse, the Black Hawks aпd the AH-64 Apache attack aircraft, amoпg others.

Testiпg aпd flight

Aпother improʋemeпt, accordiпg to Boeiпg sales aпd marketiпg represeпtatiʋe Heather McBryaп, is that there are eпhaпcemeпts to the desigп to help redυce thermal sigпatυre aпd improʋe the aerodyпamic haпdliпg. Iп laymaп’s terms, that meaпs the helicopter will Ƅe easier to maпoeυʋre.

Desigпed for growth

Oпe of its most crυcial featυres is its aƄility to last as demaпd, coпflict sceпarios, aпd doctriпes chaпge. McBryaп had fυrther added iп a press release, “This is really desigпed for growth aпd so oυt iп the 2030s, as missioпs chaпge aпd threats chaпge, there is that growth capaƄility.”

If the Black Hawk’s history is aпy iпdicatioп, it seems likely that the Uпited States military will opt to replace these ʋeпeraƄle machiпes with the пew Defiaпt X, althoυgh пo clear statemeпt has yet Ƅeeп made Ƅy those respoпsiƄle with the fiпal decisioп makiпg.

While the F-22 may have been allowed to fall behind the F-35 in a few aspects during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the military’s refocus on a peer or near-peer engagement has thrust the F-22 back into the spotlight again, with upgrades to match.

Here’s What You Need to Remember: The USAF, until now, has been largely pursuing a strategy of upgrading the F-22 via software, allowing the F-22 to more effectively use sensors it already has while incorporating minor hardware upgrades to allow for the integration of new weapons. But is this strategy sustainable as radars and electro-optical sensors get more powerful and smaller?

While much attention has been focused recently on the F-35 and F-15X, not much has been given to the U.S. Air Force’s premier air superiority fighter, the F-22 Raptor.

The Raptor has received relatively few upgrades compared to legacy fourth-generation F-15 and F-16 aircraft and now is significantly outdated in some ways. For example, F-16s, F-15s, and F/A-18s are all equipped with the JHMCS missile cueing technology, which allows a pilot to lock onto an aircraft just by looking at it. The F-22 currently does not have this capability.

The USAF, until now, has been largely pursuing a strategy of upgrading the F-22 via software, allowing the F-22 to more effectively use sensors it already has while incorporating minor hardware upgrades to allow for the integration of new weapons. But is this strategy sustainable as radars and electro-optical sensors get more powerful and smaller?

The answer is complicated. While the F-22 airframe is perhaps the most capable “chassis” in service in the USAF, with vectored thrust and supercruise capability, its stealth nature makes it hard to add on additional sensors and pods without compromising the stealth characteristics, limiting its ability to be upgraded. The shutdown of F-22 manufacturing facilities in 2011 also limited the upgrade potential of the F-22.

So how does the military plan to solve this? The latest upgrade for the F-22 comes in two parts: a hardware and a software upgrade. The upgrades are called Baseline 3.2B and Update 6. They have a couple goals: integrate the latest air-to-air missiles and improve the networked warfare capability of the F-22.

The missile itself was finally integrated in 2017, but it the JHMCS that is meant to be paired with it was not integrated. The latest upgrade will finally add a JHMCS-style helmet to the F-22. Conversely, other USAF and U.S. Navy aircraft have been using AIM-9X with JHMCS since the early 2010s.

The upgrades also add new crypto technology to the F-22, a critical upgrade given how the F-22 is expected to work in hostile electronic warfare environments. This is paired with a “transmit” module for the Link-16 datalink, which would allow the F-22 to share as well as receive radar and other targeting data from other aircraft. The F-22 only had a “receive” Link-16 module earlier.

The success of the F-35 as a targeting aircraft of sorts that uses its superior sensor capability to create a battlefield picture and then pass it onto older aircraft probably prompted the USAF to install an enhanced datalink in the F-22.

Funding for an F-22 sensor upgrade will only come later in the 2020s and is likely to include an electro-optical module similar to the F-35’s EOTS and DAS systems to operate in heavy jamming environments. Such an upgrade would mirror the F-15X, which recently received a similar system.

While such upgrades have been planned since 2013, they only recently have been fully funded and given priority with increased budgets in FY ’19. If all goes well, the F-22 will remain on the cutting edge of air superiority into the 2060s, at which point a sixth-generation fighter is planned to take over.

This model is available in multiple sizes from airmodels.net – CLICK ON THE PHOTO TO GET YOURS.

The Apache AH-64 helicopter, armed with the formidable Spike-NLOS missile, stands as an epitome of military prowess. This lethal combination brings forth an unparalleled force to reckon with on the battlefield.

The Apache AH-64, a marvel in aviation engineering, is a twin-engine attack helicopter designed to dominate the skies. Manufactured by the renowned Boeing Company, this helicopter is hailed for its agility, firepower, and cutting-edge technology.

The Apache AH-64 is celebrated for its exceptional maneuverability. It can swiftly navigate through complex terrains, providing a tactical advantage in any combat scenario. Its versatility allows it to excel in both close-quarters engagements and long-range operations.

When equipped with the Spike-NLOS missile, the Apache AH-64 emerges as a true powerhouse on the battlefield. Its ability to engage targets at extended ranges with unmatched accuracy gives it a strategic edge over adversaries.

The synergy between the Apache AH-64 and the Spike-NLOS missile lies in seamless integration and precise coordination. This lethal duo exemplifies the pinnacle of modern warfare technology, ensuring that missions are executed with utmost efficiency.

In essence, the Apache AH-64 armed with the Spike-NLOS missile is not just a machine; it is a force to reckon with. Its capabilities transcend conventional boundaries, setting new standards in aerial warfare. This lethal combination serves as a testament to human ingenuity and innovation in the realm of military technology.

In conclusion, the Apache AH-64 helicopter, coupled with the Spike-NLOS missile, stands tall as a symbol of modern military might. Its precision, power, and strategic advantage make it a formidable force, leaving an indelible mark in the annals of military history.

NATO pilots that practiced against the German Air Force Fulcrums found that in short-range dogfights at low speeds the MiG-29 was more agile than anything they threw at it.

Here’s What You Need to Remember: By the 1990s, Western pilots had ample opportunity to fly MiG-29s as the German Air Force incorporated the MiG-29s of East Germany. Later, the United States even bought twenty-one from Moldova.

The MiG-29 Fulcrum was the first Russian fourth-generation jet fighter, marked by its sleek and deadly appearance in contrast to earlier Soviet fighters. The fast and agile Fulcrum could outturn any NATO fighter, and it was armed with cutting-edge missiles. But, alas, it was held back by its old-fashioned electronics, short service life and limited range.

In a sense, the MiG-29 combined fourth generation engineering with third generation hardware. It’s relatively low price meant it initially attracted extensive sales to developing countries, but it would swiftly become overshadowed by the more modern Su-27. The Fulcrum will remain in service for some time, however, as recent upgraded versions partially redress some of its shortcomings.

Characteristics

The MiG-29 began development in 1974, intended to be an advanced lightweight multirole fighter that would operate from primitive airfields at the frontlines of the Cold War, while smaller numbers of heavier Su-27s (also then in development) would handle longer-range missions. This paralleled the light–heavy force structure of F-16s and F-15s being developed for the U.S. Air Force.

The first MiG-29s became operational in 1982 and were codenamed “Fulcrums” by NATO—a name which caught on with some Russian pilots as well. The Fulcrum had a fearsome reputation in the West, and even got its own computer game. By the 1990s, Western pilots had ample opportunity to fly MiG-29s as the German Air Force incorporated the MiG-29s of East Germany. Later, the United States even bought twenty-one from Moldova.

It was discovered that the Fulcrums were very hot rides—but they also had significant downsides.

The MiG-29’s twin RD-33 turbofan engines gave it excellent acceleration and a top speed of Mach 2.25—faster than the F-16 but a bit behind the larger F-15. The MiG-29’s chief claim to fame is its superb maneuverability—it can even outperform the light-footed F-16 in both instantaneous and sustained turns (twenty-eight degree per second versus twenty-six). NATO pilots that practiced against the German Air Force Fulcrums serving in JG 73 found that in short-range dogfights at low speeds the MiG-29 was more agile than anything they threw at it.

Like the Su-27, the MiG-29 is supermaneuverable—it can execute maneuvers impossible with regular aerodynamic controls because of its excellent handling characteristics following a stall. It can also attain very high angles of attack.

One other advantage of the MiG-29 was the short-range R-73 (NATO codename AA-11 Arrow) infrared-guided missile that could be aimed and fired through a helmet-mounted sight. Normally, a plane has to be pointed at an enemy fighter to target it—with the R-73, the pilot need only look at a target within sixty degrees of the frontal arc to shoot a missile at it! The U.S. Air Force did not acquire a similar capability until the AIM-9X entered service in 2003.

In addition to the R-73, the Fulcrum’s seven hardpoints can equip R-27 medium-range missiles, and older R-60 missiles. Some have also been upgraded to fire R-77 long-range air-to-air missiles. Up to eight thousand pounds of air-to-ground munitions can be carried—a significantly lighter load than peer fighter aircraft.

Finally, the MiG-29 is designed to function while operating from unprepared airstrips (presumably captured by advancing Russian tank divisions!)—its air intakes are specially protected against debris.

However, intrinsic design limitations of the MiG-29 have prevented it from aging well.

While aerodynamically outstanding, the MiG-29 did not feature modern pilot displays, controls and fly-by-wire avionics. Fulcrum pilots were required to stare down at their cockpit instruments far more than those of Western fighters with modern Head’s Up Displays, and the throttle was not integrated into the stick.

The MiG-29’s sensors were mediocre—its N019 Phazotron pulse-doppler radar had a shorter accurate range (thirty-eight miles) than the missiles the MiG-29 carried. Though equipped with an infrared sensor (IRST), pilots reported it to be of limited effectiveness.

These limitations in part reflected Soviet doctrine in which pilots were intended to be closely directed by ground controllers, so their situation awareness was less of a priority. The lack of modern electronics was what ultimately led the German Air Force to retire its Fulcrums, despite being more agile than their F-4s and Tornados.

Another major limitation is the MiG-29’s limited range of less than nine hundred miles on internal fuel and lack of inflight refueling ability—making it primarily useful as a defensive fighter, or one operating above frontline forces. While the Fulcrum may be a bargain for a less wealthy country worried about conflict on its borders, it has less appeal to air forces looking to project power over distance.

Finally, like most Soviet-era fighters, while the MiG was designed to withstand rugged handling, it wasn’t intended to have a long service life—just two thousand five hundred hours compared to the six thousand that is typical of U.S. fighters. MiG-29 airframes deteriorated rapidly later in life, and have required extensive and expensive maintenance to keep flying. Malaysia once reported it spent $5 million per year per MiG-29 to keep them flyable.

Variants

1,600 MiG-29s have been produced in all. Originally, the Fulcrum came in just a few variants: the standard single seat model and a two-seat trainer variant (MiG-29UB) without the radar. A downgraded version, the MiG-29B was exported abroad.

In the 1980s the upgraded MiG-29S appeared, featuring an active jamming system behind the cockpit (giving it a hunched back appearance), improved computers and software and modestly increased fuel and weapons load. Support for new R-27E and R-77 missiles was added.

In 1990, the next-generation MiG-29M  (once known as the MiG-33) debuted, bringing the Fulcrum up to modern standards with fly-by-wire avionics. With a lighter airframe and more powerful smokeless engines (for lower visibility), the MiG-29M nonetheless appears to be slower (Mach 2 at high altitude) and has a lower service ceiling of fifty thousand feet, perhaps because its weighs an extra 1.25 tons. Internal fuel has been expanded for an improved range of over one thousand two hundred miles, a third drop tank can be carried, an inflight refueling probe is included. Two hardpoints are added, and the maximum payload is increased over 50 percent to twelve thousand pounds. Rounding out the package is an improved IRST system and an N010 Zhuk-ME pulse-doppler radar with a range of seventy-five miles against targets with a radar cross-section of five meters.

The MiG-29M was not accepted into Russian service, but it is believed Egypt will receive fifty later this year in a $2 billion contract ($40 million each). Sales to Syria and Serbia are also possible.

The Russian and Indian air forces have instead opted to use older Fulcrum airframes refitted to the MiG-29M’s standards, called the MiG-29SMT or the MiG-29UPG in Indian service. The SMT and UPG Fulcrums have their service life extended to four thousand hours, but weapons loads are not quite equal to the MiG-29M’s specifications. India’s upgrades cost roughly $13 million per airframe, and include foreign avionics.

In 2008, Algeria rejected a batch of thirty-four SMTs as they used old airframes in poor condition rather than newly produced ones stipulated in the contract. The rejected airframes were then put into Russian service and sixteen new ones were ordered. Russia intends to maintain a fleet of sixty MiG-29SMTs.

There are numerous Fulcrum variants tailored to the requirements of various air forces. The most notable is the MiG-29K, a navalized derivative of the MiG-29M operated both by the Russian Navy onboard the carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, and the Indian Naval Air Arm. The MiG-29K has folding wings, reinforced landing gear and an arrestor hook for carrier operations. The K also has upgraded pilot displays and radar-absorbent coatings to reduce its radar signature.

The (Painful) Track Record

Few fighter planes have managed to be so beloved and yet boast such an unfavorable combat record as the MiG-29. Of course, this is in large part because the Fulcrum was usually fielded by less developed countries against Western opponents that were more numerous, better trained, and better organized.

Setting the tune of things to come, in the Fulcrum’s first confirmed aerial combat, two Syrian MiG-29 were shot down by Israeli F-15s in 1989. There are reports Israeli fighters shot down another two Syrian MiG-29s in 2001.

During the Gulf War, five Iraqi MiG-29s were shot down by American F-15s. However, a Fulcrum did successfully hit an F-111 and a B-52 bomber with missiles, though both aircraft managed to return to base.

Fulcrums also took a beating in the Ethiopian–Eritrean border conflict of the late 1990s, which featured more evenly matched opponents. Russian mercenaries flew alongside Ethiopian pilots, while Ukrainians supported the Eritrean Air Force. In all, four Eritrean MiG-29s were shot down by Ethiopian Su-27s. In exchange, the Eritrean Fulcrums shot down a Su-25, a MiG-21 and an unidentified fighter (possibly a MiG-23). Over multiple engagements, Flankers and Fulcrums exchanged over two-dozen R-27 missiles at long range for only a single hit. Instead, most of the victories were scored in short-range dogfights using AA-11 missiles.

Sixteen MiG-29s of the Serbian Air Force opposed NATO’s bombing campaign over Kosovo in 1999. Deployed at medium altitude, where they were exposed to hostile radar, five were shot down by F-15s and F-16s without scoring any victories in return.

MiG-29s have also performed ground attack missions in the former Yugoslavia, Moldova, South Sudan, Sudan and Ukraine.

Russian Fulcrums have been involved in a few incidents over the years. In 1989, Soviet defector Alexander Zuyev absconded with a MiG-29 and flew it to Turkey in an incident involving a cake full of sleeping pills, a shootout with a security guard and a failed strafing run. A MiG shot down a Georgian drone in 2008 in an incident preceding the Georgian–Russian war. Ukraine claims a Fulcrum shot down a Ukrainian Su-25 over Eastern Ukraine in 2014.

Major Operators

Unlike the Su-27, the MiG-29 would see extensive service in NATO air forces after the end of the Cold War. While most have been retired, Poland retains a fleet of thirty-eight MiG-29s, and Bulgaria and Slovakia have nineteen and six respectively.

India has over 110 upgraded Fulcrums, including forty-five MiG-29Ks in the Naval Air Arm.  Other notable operators include Algeria (26), Iran (25), Belarus (41), Kazakhstan (40), Myanmar (31), Peru (19), North Korea (35), Turkmenistan (24), and Uzbekistan (60).

MiG-29s are being actively used in combat in Ukraine—there were eighty before hostilities in 2014, but two have been shot down by rebel surface-to-air missiles—and Syria. Syria is believed to have fifteen to twenty operational MiG-29SMs upgraded by Russia with launch rails for deadly R-77 air-to-air missiles. Yemen’s nineteen or so MiG-29s were used in its counterinsurgency campaign, but have fallen into the hands of Houthi rebels and don’t appear to have flown since. Sudan’s twelve MiG-29s have been involved in raids against rebels in Darfur and the new state of South Sudan in 2012.

A two-seat Fulcrum with further modernized systems, the MiG-35, represents the Mikoyan firm’s latest bid to return to prominence in military aviation.

Ukrainian fighter pilots are now training to operate F-16s provided by a growing list of Western partners.

Ukrainian fighter pilots are now training to operate F-16s provided by a growing list of Western partners. The F-16 jet promises to offer the embattled nation a significant increase in combat capability.

Perhaps the biggest benefit the F-16 can offer Ukraine (beyond bolstering airframe numbers) is in the suppression or destruction of enemy air defenses (SEAD/DEAD).

The nimble F-16 has proven extremely effective in this role for the United States since absorbing it from the F-4G Wild Weasel. American F-16s tasked with SEAD/DEAD missions often have specialized equipment to coincide with the specialized training pilots flying these missions receive. Even the somewhat dated F-16s heading for Ukraine will immediately offer a significant boost in SEAD capability.

Ukrainian forces have been leveraging America’s AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) since August of 2022 or earlier, but because these weapons are being deployed by dated Soviet jets that were never intended to use them, their utility has been dramatically limited.

Anti-radiation missiles like the HARM work by honing on the electromagnetic radiation broadcast by radar arrays – in other words, radar waves – making them uniquely suited for the SEAD role. American Wild Weasel pilots often fly their aircraft into contested airspace, waiting for enemy air defense systems to power up in an attempt to target them or their wingmen. Once the air defense systems are broadcasting radar waves, Wild Weasel pilots launch their HARM missiles to hone in on those radar waves and destroy the air defense equipment.

It’s important to understand that there are several iterations of the HARM missile, each with a few unique capabilities and limitations, so for the most part, we’ll have to speak in generalities about how the new modes available with the F-16 could affect the SEAD mission.

Ukraine’s Soviet-era fighters are only able to leverage the HARM missile in what many call the “pre-briefed” mode. In effect, the missile is pre-programmed with a target area and then launched by an aircraft, often at a fairly long distance. The missile flies toward its intended target area, using its seeker to look for any air defense systems powering up and broadcasting radar waves for it to then close with and destroy.

This method can be very effective, especially when launching these missiles in volume, as even if they don’t ultimately destroy enemy radar sites, their presence alone will often prompt air defense crews to power down their arrays. This effectively amounts to suppression of air defenses, as those powered-down arrays allow aircraft to operate inside the contested area for a short time. However, once the HARM threat has passed, these arrays can power back up and begin hunting for Ukrainian jets all over again.

However, if operated by an aircraft carrying NATO-standard busses that allow pilots to leverage their full capability set, HARMs have two more operational modes that can be very handy in a fight, “self-protect” mode and “target of opportunity” mode. In self-protect mode, the aircraft’s onboard radar warning receiver identifies an enemy radar array that’s broadcasting. It then passes that target data over to the HARM, which can hone in on either the broadcasting radar or the specific location that waves were coming from in the event the enemy powers the system down. The target of opportunity mode is similar but allows the AGM-88’s onboard seeker to spot enemy radar arrays powering up, which then alerts the pilot to launch the weapon.

These additional modes will provide Ukrainian F-16 pilots with more options for the suppression or destruction of enemy air defense operations, effectively allowing for a larger emphasis on the destruction of these assets than their suppression. And because these MLU F-16s are equipped with AN/ALR-69A(V) Radar Warning Receivers, they will be much better suited to avoid incoming missiles than Ukraine’s current jets.

The F-35 is a worthy successor to its forebears and is single-handedly making the United States’ power projection much more potent.

The F-35 Lightning II fifth-generation stealth multirole fighter jet is hands down one of the most capable planes ever built. Developing all new technology is always a lengthy and costly endeavor, and the F-35 has taken some 27 years to develop.

The F-35 is the most expensive weapon system ever developed by America — which makes it the most expensive in history. But the F-35 has become something of a wiping boy in the media, with so many news outlets claiming it underperforms and should be canceled.

Here are the reasons why the F-35 Lightning II is misunderstood, picked on, and underrated in the media.

8. Jack Of All Trades

The F-35 Lightning II was designed to be a jack of all trades. A single platform for the Marine Corp, the Navy, and the Air Force. This has made it very expensive as perhaps it did bite off too much. But still being the one platform with its three variants, the cost of that needs to be measured up against the cost of building three separate aircraft.

Designing one plane to be able to fulfill all these requirements as well as the vertical take-off and landings for the carriers was a very ambitious undertaking. And it has succeeded in fulling all these capabilities. It was meant to save money on designing three separate aircraft, that part of the planning may have failed, but it is still an extremely capable fighter.

7. Export Aircraft

Unlike the F-22 Raptor, which is only for the United States Air Force, the F-35 is available for export to all the United States’ allies. This export means that much of the cost of developing the aircraft is shared with other countries around the world.

The F-22 Raptor program was killed by its huge costs and its limiting single-use as an air superiority fighter — a role in which it excels and quite likely is unrivaled in the world today.

6. Vertical Take-Off And Landing

The Sea Harrier was always extremely dangerous and difficult to take off and land vertically, with the pilot having to make a lot of adjustments manually. Boeing’s demonstrator, the X-32, didn’t improve much on the Sea Harrier’s design. But the F-35 did. It used advanced and a resigned configuration that made it much safer and easier to operate.

Compared to the (completely awesome by the way) older Sea Harrier it is replacing and Boeing’s counter bid, the experimental Boeing X-32, the F-35 (or X-35 as it was then called) was much better at vertical take-off and landing.

5. Capable Of Both Vertical Landings And Supersonic Flight

The F-35 is capable of both supersonic flight and vertical landings. This was exactly what the planners were looking for. The Boeing X-32 by contrast produced two aircraft, with one capable of supersonic flight and the other of vertical landings.

In short, the F-35 won the competition in the first place because it was the more capable aircraft. Those capabilities have of course proven both difficult and expensive. The F-35 has a much greater take-off weight and generates much more thrust than the Sea Harrier. This was the weakness of the Sea Harrier, its thrust was very limited and therefore the weapons it could carry.

4. Many Pilots Praised The F-35

The F-35 has become a favorite whipping boy of the media and many of the news stories reported have only reported on the perceived shortcomings of the aircraft.

But there have been many pilots around the world utterly praising the F-35 and its incredible performance, but these have largely gone unreported.

3. Media Claimed It Underperformed In Simulations

The media claimed that the F-35 failed in simulations and even proved inferior to current fourth-generation fighter jets. However, the media misread and overplayed the simulations. For example, the pilot hadn’t been trained properly to effectively fight with the F-35.

Other media claimed that the F-35 is less maneuverable than other fighter jets like the MiG-29. However, the F-35 is a stealthy plane. It may not perform admirably in a classic dogfight, but that’s not what it is designed for. It is designed to be stealthy and engage and destroy the MiG-29 with its super-advanced avionics long before the MiG-29 even knew a fight was coming.

2. It Has Performed Incredibly In Simulations

Since the pilots have been retrained in flying this fifth-generation fighter and have moved away from the fourth-generation training that they were used to, the F-35 has performed very well in simulations.

There are reports it has achieved impressive kill to death ratios of an impressive 21:1 as the pilots are now playing to its strengths.

1. US Building A Cheaper Fighter

The US Air Force has said recently that it is going to develop a cheaper, less capable airplane than the F-35. The media around the world jumped on this and said, “the U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed.”

But this is a hyperbolic reaction. The F-35 has not failed. Requirements are constantly changing, and the US still needs the advanced abilities of the F-35. It is common around the world to have a premium version and a cheaper version. Think of the Soviet T-72 and T-80 tanks or the British Type 26 and Type 31 frigates.

In summary, the F-35 is a worthy successor to its forebears and even if it doesn’t fulfill all the original intended roles it was meant for, it is still single-handedly making the US’s power projection much more potent.

In Washington, the U.S. Navy’s need for improved air superiority capabilities is often neglected.

Here’s What to Remember: The report notes that both the Super Hornet and the F-35C are severely challenged by new enemy fifth-generation fighter aircraft such as the Russian-built Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA, and Chengdu J-20.

The service has not had a dedicated air-to-air combat aircraft since it retired the Grumman F-14 Tomcat in 2006. But even the Tomcat was adapted into a strike aircraft during its last years in service after the Soviet threat evaporated. Now, as new threats to the carrier emerge and adversaries start to field new fighters that can challenge the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Lockheed Martin F-35C Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), attention is starting to shift back to this oft-neglected Navy mission—especially in the Western Pacific.

“Another type of new aircraft required is an air superiority fighter,” states a recent Hudson Institute report titled Sharpening the Spear: The Carrier, the Joint Force, and High-End Conflict, which is written by The National Interest contributors Seth Cropsey, Bryan McGrath and Timothy A. Walton. “Given the projection of the Joint Force’s increased demand for carrier-based fighter support, this capability is critical.”

The report notes that both the Super Hornet and the F-35C are severely challenged by new enemy fifth-generation fighter aircraft such as the Russian-built Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA and Chengdu J-20. Indeed, certain current adversary aircraft like the Russian Su-30SM, Su-35S and the Chinese J-11D and J-15 pose a serious threat to the Super Hornet fleet. It’s a view that shared by many industry officials, U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force and even U.S. Marine Corps aviators. “Both F/A-18E/Fs and F-35Cs will face significant deficiencies against supercruising, long-range, high-altitude, stealthy, large missile capacity adversary aircraft, such as the T-50, J-20, and follow-on aircraft,” the authors note. “These aircraft will be capable of effectively engaging current and projected U.S. carrier aircraft and penetrating defenses to engage high value units, such as AEW aircraft, ASW aircraft, and tankers. Already, the F/A-18E/F faces a severe speed disadvantage against Chinese J-11 aircraft, which can fire longer range missiles at a higher kinematic advantage outside of the range of U.S. AIM-120 missiles.”

Nor does the F-35C—which suffers from severely reduced acceleration compared to even the less than stellar performance of other JSF variants—help matters. “Similarly, the F-35C is optimized as an attack fighter, resulting in a medium-altitude flight profile, and its current ability to only carry two AIM- 120 missiles internally [until Block 3] limits its capability under complex electromagnetic conditions,” the authors wrote. “As an interim measure, the Navy and Air Force should significantly accelerate the F-35C’s Block 5 upgrade to enable the aircraft to carry six AIM-120 missiles internally.”

The F-35C was never designed to be an air superiority fighter. Indeed, naval planners in the mid-1990s wanted the JSF to be a strike-oriented aircraft with only a 6.5G airframe load limit with very limited air-to-air capability, according to one retired U.S. Navy official. Indeed, some naval planners at the time had discussed retiring the F-14 in favor of keeping the Grumman A-6 Intruder in service. During this period, many officials believed air combat to be a relic of the past in the post-Cold War era. They anticipated most future conflicts to be air-to-ground oriented in those years immediately following the Soviet collapse. Together with a lack of funding, that’s probably why the Navy never proceeded with its Naval Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF) or A/F-X follow-on program.

The Navy’s F/A-XX program could be used to fill the service’s air superiority gap—which has essentially been left open since the F-14’s retirement and the demise of the NATF and A/F-X programs. But the problem is that the Navy is pursuing the F/A-XX as a multirole Super Hornet replacement rather than an air superiority-oriented machine. “The danger in its development is that it suboptimizes the fighter role in the quest for a hybrid fighter/attack jet,” the Hudson Institute report notes. “This would leave the Joint Force without a carrier-based sixth generation air superiority fighter.”

As the Navy’s current director of air warfare, Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, has stated in the past, the authors also note that such “an aircraft could feature large passive and active sensor arrays, relatively high cruising speed (albeit not necessarily acceleration), could hold a large internal weapons bay capable of launching numerous missiles, and could have space to adopt future technologies, such as HPM [high-powered microwaves] and lasers. This air superiority asset would contribute to Outer Air Battle integrated air and missile defense requirements and would be capable of countering enemy weapons, aircraft, and sensor and targeting nodes at a distance.”

Outer Air Battle, of course, refers to a Navy concept from the 1980s to fend off a concerted attack by hordes of Soviet Tupolev Tu-22M Backfire bombers, Oscar-class (Project 949A Antey) nuclear-powered guided missile submarines and surface action groups lead by warships like the Kirov-class nuclear-powered battlecruisers—as now deputy defense secretary Bob Work [he was the CEO of the Center for a New American Security at the time] described to me in 2013. These Soviet assets would have launched their arsenals of anti-ship cruise missiles from multiple points of the compass.

As Work described it, the Navy was relatively confident it could sink the Oscars and surface ships before they could launch their missiles. They were far less confident about their ability to take out the Tu-22Ms before they could get into launch position. The Tomcats, under Outer Air Battle, would try to “kill the archers”—the Backfires—before they could shoot and attempt to eliminate any cruise missiles that they launched. But, Work notes, no one knows how well it would have worked during a shooting war with the Soviet Union—and it’s a good thing we never got to find out. But with China’s emerging anti-access/area denial strategy, the threat is back.

While the F/A-XX and the Air Force’s F-X are in their infancy, it has become clear that they will be different aircraft designs that will probably share common technologies. The Navy does seem to be focusing on a more defensive F-14 like concept while the Air Force is looking for a more offensively oriented air superiority platform that could replace the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. “As you’ll see over the coming years, the differences between the primary mission and the likely threats will drive significant differences between the F/A-XX and F-X programs as well as legacy systems like the F-22 and F-35,” one senior defense official told me.

This model is available in multiple sizes from airmodels.net – CLICK ON THE PHOTO TO GET YOURS.

The YF-23 Fighter: An Expert Analysis with Additional Comments from a Former George W. Bush Senior Defense Offical: The late, great Sean Connery offered several classic “one-liners” in his lengthy career, and among the best was in 1996’s The Rock, when as a former MI-6 operative, he states bluntly, “Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and f*ck the prom queen.”

The YF-23 Story

Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor can be seen as the winner in this case, and while it never had such relations with a prom queen, it has earned a reputation as the most capable air superiority fighter ever to fly. The “loser” was the Northrop-McDonnell Douglas YF-23, an experimental aircraft that competed in the late 1980s and early 1990s against the YF-22 in the United States Air Force’s Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program.

The goal of the ATF program was to find a replacement for the F-15 Eagle air superiority fighter and to address the perceived threat from the Soviet Union’s Sukhoi Su-27 and Mikoyan MiG-29. Several companies originally submitted design proposals, and in 1986, the Air Force awarded demonstration contracts to two competing teams. The Northrop-McDonnell Douglas YF-23 went up against the Lockheed-Boeing-General Dynamics YF-22.

Of course, the YF-23 was nothing to whine about.

MEET THE BLACK WIDOW II AND GRAY GHOST: EXPERT ANALYSIS 

The YF-23 emphasized its stealth characteristics and featured a distinct design from the YF-22. The Northrop aircraft has often been described as having an “almost pancake-like airframe structure with blended wing elements.” Its diamond-shaped wings were meant to reduce aerodynamic drag at transonic speeds.

To lessen the weight while increasing the stealth, the Northrop-led team opted against using thrust vectoring for aerodynamic control that was used with the Lockheed prototype.

Two different prototypes of the YF-23 were built, each with a different set of powerplants – as one element of the development phase of the program was to evaluate two experimental turbofan engines. Prototype Air Vehicle 1 (PAV-1), which was painted charcoal gray and unofficially nicknamed “Spider” but was more commonly known as the “Black Widow II” – to honor the Northrop P-61 Black Widow flown during World War II. It was equipped with the Pratt & Whitney YF199 engines.  Prototype Air Vehicle 2 (PAV-2), which was painted in two shades of gray and soon earned the nickname “Gray Ghost,” was powered by a pair of General Electric YF120 engines.

Each of the two prototype planes proved to be fast and stealthy.

In both configurations, the single-seat aircraft was 67 feet, 5 inches in length; had a wingspan that was 43 feet, 7 inches; and a wing area of an impressive 900 square feet.

The YF-23’s low profile and classified skin material on the airframe were said to be nearly 100 percent undetectable by nearly any radar system of the period. At the same time, the “supercruise” function also allowed the fighter to achieve sustained supersonic flight without the use of the afterburner. Its maximum speed was Mach 2.2.

The ATF specs called for the YF-23 to be armed with a fixed 20mm M61 Vulcan, while internal bays could house four AIM-7 Sparrow or AIM-120 AMRAAM medium-range air-to-air missiles, as well as a pair of AIM-9 short-range missiles. It wasn’t just fast, it was well-armed.

HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH THE FUTURE RAPTOR

Throughout the ATF competition, the Northrop YF-23 was seen to be very evenly matched with the YF-22, and more than held its own. In many ways, it certainly did its “best,” as it had a top speed of 1,451mph to the YF-22’s 1,599mph, but the Northrop design had a longer range and a higher ceiling – 2,796 miles maximum range and a ceiling of 65,000 feet. By contrast, the YF-22 had a range of 2,000 miles and a ceiling of 50,000 feet.

Where the YF-22 had the edge however was in agility, something that is of the utmost of importance in a fighter aircraft. The YF-22 “Lightning II” – later to become the F-22 “Raptor” while the “Lightning II” designation was reused with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter – was simply better in a dogfight, and that was enough to convince the Air Force that it would be the better of the two.

WORTHY OF A MUSEUM

Rarely does a runner-up get its due in any “Hall of Fame,” and any notoriety is usually focused on the fact that they were a worthy competition for the winner. In this case, the YF-23 was a loser – but perhaps one of the best losers in aviation history.

That is why in 1996, both YF-23 airframes were transferred to museums. The YF-23A PAV-1 is now on display in the Research and Development hangar at the National Museum of the United States Air Force. It serves as a testament that sometimes the solid design can still fall short.The YF-23A PAV-2 was on display at the Western Museum of Flight until 2004, when it was reclaimed by Northrop Grumman and used as a display model for the YF-23-based bomber, but then returned to the museum in 2010 where it is again on display.

Finally, as the Lockheed Martin F-22 “Raptor” program was cut short in 2009, it could be argued there were no real winners in the ATF competition.

WHAT THE EXPERTS TOLD 

“I have a special place in my heart for the YF-23,” explained a former George W. Bush Senior U.S. Defense Department official in an interview with 19FortyFive. “The YF-23, or what would have been the F-23, had some amazing capabilities. I would argue the YF-23 was the better plane and that the Air Force made the wrong call. However, the F-22 is one amazing fighter. At the end of the day, there may have been no wrong choice in the first place.”

YF-23: A Story in Photos

YF-23. Image Credit: Screenshot/Artist Rendering of Possible Final Design.

To prevent injury to ground personnel while under the aircraft, the ram air scoop was highlighted with a set of red and white triangles for visibility. The unintended coincidence looked like a Black Widow hourglass while the aircraft was in flight.

YF-23. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

YF-23 stealth fighter, which could inspire the design of the NGAD.

Image of YF-23 in fight. Image Credit: Creative Commons.