Mikoyan MiG-29

513 Pages·2007·142.602 MB·English

by  Yefim Gordon

...
(
_ j
.......... ~
\
I
•
Mikoyan MiG-29 Contents
© 2006 Yefim Gordon
Original translation by Dmitriy Komissarov
ISBN (1 0) 1 85780 231 4
ISBN (13) 978 1 85780 231 3
lntrod uction . . ... . ............. . .......... . 3
Published by Midland Publishing
4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE1 0 3EY, England Part 1 TAKING SHAPE ...... . ....... . ... 5
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [email protected]
Part 2 LEARNING TO FLY .............. 35
Midland Publishing is an imprint of
Part 3 THE FAMILY STARTS GROWING . . 51
lan Allan Publishing Ltd
Worldwide distribution (except North America):
Part 4 THE NEW GENERATION .. . ...... 91
Midland Counties Publications
4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE1 0 3EY, England
Part 5 PUSHING FOR THE NAVY . ...... 109
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [email protected]
www.midlandcountiessuperstore.com Part 6 NEW LORDS, NEW UPGRADES . . 149
North American trade distribution:
Part 7 THE 21ST CENTURY
Specialty Press Publishers & Wholesalers Inc
39966 Grand Avenue, North Branch, MN 55056 GENERATION .................. 169
Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Toll free telephone: [phone]
Part 8 THE MIG-29 IN ACTION . ........ 221
www .specialtypress. com
Part 9 THE MIG-NIFICENT DISPLAYS .. 277
This book is illustrated with photos by RSK MIG, Lll,
Yefim Gordon, Victor Drushlyakov, Sergey
Krivchikov, Dmitriy Pichoogin, Sergey Popsuyevich,
Part 10 THE MIG-29 IN DETAIL . ........ 313
Alfred Matusevich, Sergey Sergeyev, Arthur
Sarkisyan, Maksim Bryanskiy Anton Pavlov, Sergey
Part 11 THE MIG-29 vs
Balakleyev, Pavel Novikov, Sergey Skrynnikov,
Nikolay Valuyev, Alexandr Vasil'yev, Valeriy THE COMPETITION . . . .......... 419
Kolodka, Vyacheslav Martyniuk, Dmitriy Seden,
Dmitriy Grinyuk, Nikolay Nikolayev, Sergey
Part 12 THE OPERATORS . .............. 437
Kuznetsov, Mikhail Nikol'skiy, Dmitriy Komissarov,
Sergey Burdin, Vyacheslav Moiseyev, Alexandar
Appendix
Radic, Martin Baumann, Ryszard Jaxa
Malachowski, Wactaw Holys, Andrzej Rogucki,
PRODUCTION LIST ...................... 505
Norbert Czajkowski, Carlo Kuit, Marinus D. Tabak,
Chris Lofting, Guido Buehlmann, Marcus Fulber,
Thomas Girke, Simon Watson, Robert J. Ruffle,
Miroslav Gyurosi, as well as from the archives of
Yefim Gordon, IT AR-TA SS, the USAF, Luftwaffe, the
Canadian Armed Forces, the Bangladesh Air Force,
Acknowledgements
Air Forces Monthly, World Air Power Journal, Air
Fleet, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Flight
International, Scale Aircraft Modeling, Aviatsiya i The author wishes to thank first of all the employees of
Vremya, Krasnaya Zvezda, M-Hobby, Kommersant
RSK MiG (notably Engineering Centre Director Vladimir
and the Russian Aviation Research Trust.
I. Barkovskiy, MiG-29K/MiG-29M2/MiG-290VT programme
chief Nikolay N. Boontin, MiG-29 programme chief Arkadiy
Line drawings by Andrey Yurgenson and RSK MiG.
B. Slobodskoy, Chief Test Pilot and Flight Test Facility
Colour artwork by Yuriy Tepsurkayev, Mikhail Bykov
and Valentin Vetlitskiy. Director Pavel N. Vlasov, former MiG-29 Chief Designer
Valeriy V. Novikov and former Deputy Chief Designer
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may
Vano A. Mikoyan). Thanks go also to Anton Pavlov who
be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
co-authored Chapter 8, Dmitriy S. Komissarov who did the
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
translation and co-authored Chapter 12. Thanks are also
mechanical or photo-copied, recorded or otherwise,
without the written permission of the publishers. due to Peter G. Davison, Chris Lofting (who furnished
excellent shots of the Peruvian MiG-29s), the research
Printed in England by lan Allan Printing Ltd
group of Scramble Magazine, and the Russian Aviation
Riverdene Business Park, Molesey Road,
Research Trust.
Hersham, Surrey, KT12 4RG
This book relies on unclassified sources (books and
Visit the lan Allan Publishing website at:
www.ianallanpublishing.com magazines published in Russia, the UK and the USA).
MiG-29 3
Introduction
By the end of the 1960s the air forces of most and a top speed of Mach 3. However, opera
countries of the world that possessed a well tional experience gained in Vietnam forced
developed aircraft industry were equipped the US Air Force to totally redefine the
with second-generation jet fighters - the advanced fighter concept. The powerful radar
Mikoyan MiG-21 (NATO reporting name and heavy missile armament of the F-4 gave it
Fishbed) , the McDonnell (later McDonnell an advantage over the MiG-21 only at long
Douglas) F-4 Phantom II, the Northrop F-5 and medium range; in a dogfight the lighter
Tiger/Freedom Fighter and the Dassault and nimbler MiGs came out on top. Hence the
Mirage Ill. The principal requirements which new general operational requirement (GOR)
these fighters were designed to meet were for the FX called for a lightweight fighter armed
high performance (a top speed of Mach 2.0 with only an internal gun and short-range
or better and a service ceiling of 19,000- AAMs. Later, however, the USAF thought bet
20,000 m [62,335-65,620 ft]) , guided air-to ter of it and revised the GOR to include a fire
air missile (AAM) armament and the control radar and medium-range AAMs. The
provision of a fire control radar enabling the gross weight was set in the 20-ton (44,090-lb)
aircraft to operate day and night in all class and top speed at Mach 2.5.
weather conditions. US aircraft manufacturers began design
At the same time third-generation fighters ing fighters to meet the new requirements in
were about to emerge, such as the MiG-23 1969; McDonnell Douglas won the FX contest
(NATO codename Flogger) in the Soviet with the F-15 Eagle, securing a contract by
Union, the Dassault Mirage F.1 in France and the end of the year. The prototype YF-15A
the SAAB JNAJ 37 Viggen in Sweden. No took off on 27th July 1972 and deliveries of
quantum leap in speed and altitude perfor production F-15As commenced in November
mance was needed at this stage. The main 1974.
requirements were longer range, better Still, the lightweight tactical fighter idea
manoeuvrability, the ability to operate from was not dead and buried. In the early 1970s
semi-prepared tactical airstrips and versatility. the USAF General Staff decided it was advis
Third-generation fighters were to enter ser able to complement the costly heavy fighters
vice in the early 1970s, along with upgraded with much lighter and cheaper aircraft gross
versions of the MiG-21 and the F-4. However, ing at 9-10 tons {19,840-22,045 lb). Such a
by then the fighter makers on both sides fighter would have simpler avionics and a lim
of the Iron Curtain had started working on ited weapons range (internal cannon and
fourth-generation aircraft which would form short-range AAMs only) but high manoeuvra
the backbone of NATO and Warsaw Pact air bility. The LWF (LightWeight Fighter) pro
forces in the next decade. The USA made the gramme was announced in January 1972,
first move by announcing the FX (Fighter with the MiG-21 as a reference point for the
Experimental) programme in March 1966. designers. The USAF was well aware that in a
Boeing, Lockheed and North American dogfight the Fishbed was more than a match
entered the competition, to be followed by for the more sophisticated and better armed
Republic (a division of Fairchild-Hiller Corp but less agile Phantom - and that often the
oration) later on. Phantom pulled the short straw.
Originally the single-seat twin-engined FX In February 1972 General Dynamics (ex
was to have a 27-ton (59,520-lb) gross weight Convair) , Northrop, Boeing , LTV-Aerospace
4 Introduction
....
The first prototype YF·16A light
fighter (serial 72·1567, c/n 60·1)
in General Dynamics
demonstrator colours. The
unusual chin air intake, the
blended wings with leading-edge
root extensions, the all-round
vision canopy and the wingtip
missile rails are clearly visible.
c
~
::E
"
Q)
Q)
.s::
.:<:
0
.3
and Lockheed submitted their proposals for lution of the P.530 project developed in
the LWF contest. GO's Model 401 and 1966 as an F-5 replacement. In April GO and
Northrop's P.600 were selected for full Northrop were awarded contracts for the
scale development. The former project was completion and testing of prototypes of the
based on studies made by Convair for the two fighters as the YF-16 and YF-17 respec
FX programme, while the latter was an evo- tively.
Both aircraft entered flight test in 1974 ; the
YF-16 won the flyoff in January 1975. The
USAF requested that the aircraft be given
strike capability under the ACF (Air Combat
Fighter) programme. The definitive F-16A
Fighting Falcon made its first flight on 8th
December 1976 and entered production in
August 1978.
However, Northrop's efforts were not lost.
McDonnell Douglas decided that the YF-17
could be modified at minimum cost to fit the
US Navy's NACF (Naval Air Combat Fighter)
requirement. The aircraft then entered full
scale development in January 1976 as the
(/)
<tl
C)
::> McDD F/A-18 Hornet shipboard air superiority
0
a
fighter/attack aircraft. The prototype made its
Q)
c
c
first flight on 18th November 1978 and pro
0
a
0
duction commenced in 1979.
::E
A
The McDonnell Douglas F-15A
(exemplified by F·15A·4·MC
71-0287, c/n 10 in high-viz test
colours) was the USAF's heavy
advanced fighter of the 1970s•
....
The Northrop YF·11A lost out
to the YF-16A but became the
basis for the naval F/A-18. It
resembled a cross between the
F-15 and the F-16, having both
twin tails and LERXes.
MiG-29 · ·5
PART ONE
•
•
6 · · · · MiG-29
Early Studies and the PFI/PLMI Programmes YF-17 were regarded as the PFI's principal
In the late 1960s the Soviet Union was also adversaries in air-to-air combat, though the
working on the fourth-generation fighter Northrop fighters were replaced by the General
concept. Analysing operational experience with Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin) F-16 when the
fighters in regional conflicts, Soviet engineers results of the LWF contest became known.
began considering ways and means of Typical aerial targets in the interceptor or
enhancing combat capabilities. The latest know 'hunter-killer' role included the F-4E, GD F-111 A
how and technologies and the entire potential of Aardvark, Panavia MACA (Tornado) and
the Soviet aerospace industry were brought into SEPECAT Jaguar fighter-bombers.
play. Fourth-generation fighters were to be The PFI differed from third-generation
armed with new air-to-air missiles and feature a fighters mainly in having higher manoeuvrability,
sophisticated weapons control system (WCS). a completely new avionics suite and highly
All three of the Soviet Union's leading fighter effective new weapons. High agility would be
makers joined the research and development attained by utilising new aerodynamic layouts
effort. These were the design bureau led by improving the lift/drag ratio and installing
Artyom lvanovich Mikoyan - aka OKB-155 or lightweight, powerful and fuel-efficient engines
MMZ Zenit (Zenith), OKB-51 led by Pavel to achieve a thrust-to-weight ratio in excess of 1.
Osipovich Sukhoi, aka MZ Koolon (Coulomb, a The integrated weapons control system would
physical unit), and the bureau led by Aleksandr feature digital computers, an infrared search
Sergeyevich Yakovlev, aka OKB-115 or MMZ and track (IRST) unit complementing the
Skorost' (Speed). (Note: OKB = opytno customary radar and be based on semi
konstrooktorskoye byuro - experimental design conductors rather than vacuum tubes for greater
bureau; the numbers are codes allocated for reliability. The armament would comprise a
security reasons. MMZ = Moskovskiy mashino fast-firing gun and new short- and medium
stroitel'nw zavod - Moscow Machinery Plant; range AAMs.
MMZ 'Zenit' or MMZ No.1 55 was the name of The Mikoyan OKB started work on a fourth
Mikoyan's experimental shop, while the Sukhoi generation fighter in 1970; at a very early stage
OKB's experimental shop was prefixed MZ, not the aircraft was designated MiG-29. Initially
MMZ.) the MiG-29 programme as a whole was the
In 1971 TsNII-30 (Tsentrahl'nw naoochno responsibility of Gleb Ye. Lozino-Lozinskiy who
issledovatel'skiy institoot - Central Research was also the project chief of the MiG-25MP
Institute No.30), a division of the Soviet Ministry heavy interceptor (the future MiG-31 Foxhound).
of Defence, issued the GOA for a fourth The actual work on the fighter's general
generation fighter tentatively designated PFI arrangement, however, was directed by the
(perspektivnw frontovoy istrebitel' - advanced preliminary design (PD) section. The chief of this
tactical fighter). The primary roles of the PFI section was Aleksandr A. Choomachenko, a
comprised destroying enemy fighters in close-in Doctor of Technical Sciences and a prominent
combat with short-range AAMs and an internal aerodynamicist.
cannon, intercepting aerial targets at long range Two major research bodies were actively
either by means of its own radar or with involved in the MiG-29 programme. The Central
guidance from ground controlled intercept (GCI) Aerodynamics & Hydrodynamics Institute
centres - and destroying them with medium named after Nikolay Ye. Zhukovskiy (TsAGI -
range AAMs, providing top cover for friendly Tsentrahl'nw aero- i ghidrodinamicheskiy
troops and point defence of important targets, institoot) aided with the general arrangement
destroying enemy reconnaissance vehicles, while the State Research Institute of Aircraft
escorting heavy aircraft, performing tactical Systems (GosNII AS - Gosoodarstvennw
reconnaissance and destroying small ground naoochno-issledovatel'skiy institoot aviatsion
targets in daylight conditions with bombs, nykh sistem; originally called NIIAS, without the
unguided rockets and gunfire. 'state' prefix) worked on the fighter's advanced
The aircraft had to possess 'look-down/ avionics. Both are located in the town of
shoot-down' capability (that is, the ability to Zhukovskiy south of Moscow.
destroy aerial targets flying below its own flight Selecting the proper general arrangement
level) and operate in any weather conditions, and aerodynamic layout was the key issue at the
day and night, in an active and passive PD stage. The engineers considered both
electronic countermeasures (ECM) environ conventional arrangements and the so-called
ment. The F-15 and the Northrop P.530 and blended wing/body (BWB) layout, or 'integral'
........
Soviet Air Force Commander-in
Chief, Air Marshal P. S. Kutakhov
was one of the decision makers
at the top level on whom the
MiG-29's fate depended .
....
Pyotr V. Dement'yev, the Soviet
Minister of Aircraft Industry in
the 1970s, is seen here in his
Colonel General's uniform.
Q)
.2:
~
"'
c:
0
"E
0
(.!)
E
""
Q)
>-
layout, when the wings and fuselage form a staggered-tandem arrangement. The aircraft
single lifting body. was to be armed with four K-25 medium-range
Much thought was given to the powerplant. AAMs based on the Raytheon AIM-7E Sparrow
a
Placing the air intake in the nose Ia MiG-21 was (a handful of these had been captured in
ruled out immediately because the inlet ducts Vietnam and shipped to the USSR for
would occupy a disproportionately large portion examination) , but eventually the work on this
of the internal volume; it had to be two lateral missile was discontinued.
intakes. Choosing the number of engines was A third study utilised the BWB layout with the
easy. A version powered by a single large fuselage, wings and engine nacelles all blended
turbojet proposed at first was quickly rejected. together. Unlike the two previous projects, this
Building on operational experience with the best was a light fighter with a normal gross weight of
single-engined third-generation fighters (the some 13.5 tons (29,760 lb). Thus it was not only
MiG-21, MiG-23, Mirage Ill and so on), Mikoyan lighter than other Mikoyan projects but also
opted for a twin-engined aircraft. This improved lighter than Sukhoi's entry for the PFI
survivability in combat and reduced accident competition, the T-1 0 (the future Su-27 Flanker)
attrition risk in peacetime. with a normal TOW of 21 tons (46,300 Ib ) and the
An early configuration of the MiG-29 had production single-engined MiG-23M Flogger-a
shoulder-mounted trapezoidal wings, a low which grossed at 15.7 tons (34,610 Ib ) fully
mounted horizontal tail and a single fin and armed. Another advantage of the BWB layout
rudder. The wings featured leading-edge root was that the prominent LERXes provided a
extensions (LERXes) and full-span leading-edge convenient location for the internal cannon;
slats. The sharply raked two-dimensional air finding a good place for it turned into a major
intakes with horizontal airflow control ramps problem in the 'conventional' projects. The
were strongly reminiscent of the MiG-25 Foxbat aircraft was shorter than the actual MiG-29 and
interceptor or the F-15. There were six had a wing area of only 25m2 (268.8 sq ft) .
underwing hardpoints: four for medium-range The blended wing/body layout had its
AAMs and two for short-range 'dogfight missiles'. opponents. Some of the engineers claimed a
Another early configuration was a sort of conventional fighter was easier to build;
cross-breed between the MiG-29 and the moreover, they were armed with calculations
MiG-31 (that is, the way each of them came to showing that the conventional layout offered a
look eventually) . Likewise it had boxy Foxbat smaller maximum cross-section area. PO
style air intakes; the nose gear unit had twin section engineer Yakov I. Seletskiy had to
wheels while the main units featured twin-wheel reduce the height of the No.3 fuel tank by 50 mm
a
bogies with the wheels located in tandem Ia (2 in) and came up with a cross-section area
SAAB JA/AJ 37 Viggen, not in the MiG-31's identical to that of the conventional version.
8 MiG-29
In 1971 several research institutes within the solution was to build up the future fighter force
frameworks of the Ministry of Aircraft Industry with two basic types complementing each other:
(MAP - Ministerstvo aviatsionnoy promyshlen an advanced tactical fighter (PFI), that is, a
nosti) and the Soviet Air Force 0fVS - Voyenno 'heavy' fighter capable of operating singly or in
vozdooshnwe seely) began developing fighter groups 250-300 km beyond the frontlines, and
force re-equipment concepts for the 1980s. an advanced mass-produced light fighter (PLMI
Analysis of trends in hardware and tactics perspektivnw lyohkiy massovyy istrebitel'; later
development showed that fighters were facing a changed to Lightweight Tactical Fighter, LFI -
broader range of missions in contemporary lyohkiy frontovoy istrebitel') optimised for
warfare. operations above friendly territory and the
Ideally the Air Force should have several tactical battle area - that is, 10 0-150 km (62-93
kinds of fighters with different weapons systems miles) beyond the frontlines.
optimised for the various mission types. For The PFI would be a sophisticated aircraft
instance, to intercept an enemy strike group featuring a sizeable internal fuel load and
over territory held by friendly troops a fighter ordnance load (at least four medium-range
would have to be 'tied' to GCI centres guiding AAMs in addition to short-range or 'dogfight
it to the target. Conversely, maximum AAMs' and a built-in cannon); it would have a
independence from ground control was comprehensive navigation, communications
required during 'free chase' missions over and electronic support measures (ESM) suite.
enemy-held territory. An interceptor needed With a specially configured avionics and
good acceleration and rate of climb, heavy weapons fit it could be operated by the PVO
armament and capable avionics giving it 'look (protivovozdooshnaya oborona - Air Defence
down/shoot-down' capability. An escort fighter Force). Conversely, the PLMI was to be as easy
•
should have sufficient range to operate 250-300 to build and maintain as possible, use semi
km (155-186 miles) beyond the frontlines. High prepared airstrips and be operated by average
manoeuvrability, a high thrust-to-weight ratio, a skill pilots and ground personnel. Its armament
wide speed range and special short-range air would be limited to two medium-range AAMs
to-air missiles were a must for close-in combat. and short-range weapons. The PFI and PLMI
Designing a single aircraft capable of would account for 30-35% and 65-70% of the
meeting all these contradictory requirements fighter force respectively, being the Soviet
didn't seem possible. Yet the Soviet Union could answer to the F-15 and the F-16 respectively.
not afford to have a multitude of specialised This concept was developed jointly by the
fighters in its inventory. A possible compromise fighter design bureaux, the Air Force's research
....
Deputy General Designer of
OKB-155 Gleb Ye. Lozino
Lozinskiy, the MiG-29
chief•
progr~mme
.... ....
Aleksandr A. Choomachenko,
preliminary design section chief
at the Mikoyan OKB. It was he
who determined the fighter's
general arrangement.
Taking Shape 9
and development (R&D) establishments and the
aircraft industry. It was at this stage that specific
operational requirements (SORs) for fourth
generation fighters were developed. The key
demand was the ability to win in close-in combat
by virtue of agility, a high thrust-to-weight ratio
and an effective WCS. Col. Sookhankin, Director
ofTsNII-30, and P. V. Fedosov, Director of NIIAS,
played a key role in defining the two-types
concept and getting it accepted. This was no
easy task; Air Force C-in-C Marshal Pavel S.
Kootakhov took a lot of convincing. It got worse
when Marshal Dmitriy F. Ustinov was appointed
Defence Minister, and worse still when Mikhail S.
Gorbachov became head of the Soviet state and
defence spending cuts ensued.
As early as the end of May 1971 MAP's
Scientific & Technical Council convened to
discuss the PFI programme for the first time; the
meeting was only for those who 'need to know'
and Air Force representatives were not invited at
this stage. The session included reports by
TsAGI Vice-Director G. S. Buschgens and NIIAS
Vice-Director A.M. Batkov who stated the aircraft
industry research establishments' perspective of
the problem. For the first time NIIAS, which had
done a prior analysis of combat aircraft
development in the West, floated the idea of
creating a fighter fleet composed of two types -
a 'light' fighter and a 'heavy' advanced tactical
fighter. Representatives of all three Soviet design
bureaux participating in the fourth-generation
fighter contest joined in the ensuing discussion.
The Mikoyan OKB was the first to make its
presentation. (Actually we should call it the OKB
named after A. I. Mikoyan. Artyom I. Mikoyan
...
passed away on 9th December 1970; his deputy of 23,000 m (75,460 ft} ; it was designed for a top
Rostislav Appollosovich Belyakov succeeded speed of 3,000 km/h (1 ,860 mph) at high altitude Rostislav A. Belyakov, the new
General Designer at the Mlkoyan
him as General Designer and the design bureau and 1,500 km/h (931 mph) at sea level, with an
OKB who succeeded Artyom I.
was named after its founder - a common effective range of 2,500 km {1 ,550 miles) in
Mlkoyan after the latter's death.
practice in the Soviet Union.) Deputy General cruise mode. The take-off weight was envisaged
Designer Gleb Ye. Lozino-Lozinskiy, who as 25,400 kg (56,000 lb), including 7,000 kg
headed the PFI programme at the Mikoyan OKB (15,430 lb) of fuel. The armament and the
in those days, presented a fighter provisionally powerplant parameters were optimised for the
designated MiG-29. Such designations allocated interceptor role. When the military issued their
at the preliminary design stage were sometimes first specific operational requirement, the
abandoned and later re-used; the MiG-23 is a MiG-29 project was reworked as a smaller
case in point. In this case, however, the machine with a 19,000-kg (41 ,890-lb) TOW.
designation stuck. The project unveiled at the session was a
PO studies on the advanced tactical fighter conventional fighter resembling the MiG-25 with
subject had been going on at OKB-155 for two shoulder-mounted low aspect ratio wings
years by then, and widely varying layouts had featuring moderate sweepback and twin tails.
been considered. In fact, the first project to bear The two afterburning turbojets in the 11 ,200-kgp
the MiG-29 designation had nothing in common {24,700-lbst) thrust class (such as the Lyul'ka
with the well-known fighter it eventually evolved AL-21 F-3) were located side by side, breathing
into. It was an interceptor with a service ceiling through lateral variable scoop air intakes. The