Mig vs Sukhoi vs Yak vs Tuplev

Welcome to the Russian plane tournament! Today we have the Migs, Sukhois, Yaks, and Tuplevs all competing against each other to find out who'll come out on top! Who has the best fighters? Place your bets!
(I know fighters aren't everything but I'm just curious. I know crew skill matters too but what about the tech?)

 

I vote for Sukhois. Su-35/37 are two great aircrafts in many aspects!

 

Neither Yak nor Tupolev have had a fighter in service since the sixties so it pretty much boils down to MiG versus Sukhoi, and the Su-27 family are more advanced than the MiG-29 so I don't think this will be a lasting or very hot topic.

 

What about the Yak-38 Forger (Harrier rip-off)? That's was still in service into tthe 1990s wasn't it?

 

I wouldn't call it a fighter. But by all means, if you want to compare it to the MiG-29 or Su-27.

 

Depends on if you want something to fly off a small carrier with. Over central Europe, either the Su27 or MiG29, over the middle of the Atlantic however...

 

...I would rather prefer to stay on the boat, rather than to fly Forger. Some quotes from the net:

"Reliability was very poor. The lift engines were the worst problem, with a useful lifetime of only about 22 hours. Since the lift engines were only used in takeoffs and landings that was better than it sounded, but it still wasn't good, and there were plenty of other things to go wrong. When the KIEV went on its first cruise in the Mediterranean in 1976, it carried six Yak-38s. Only three were working at the outset of the cruise, and only one was flying at the end."

"A brief operational evaluation was performed in Afghanistan in 1980 and confirmed the limitations of the type: poor range and load, too complicated and unreliable, too hard to maintain, and too hard to fly."

 

These days I think Sukhoi is tops, with the Su-33 replacing the crappy Yak 38 Forger as the carrier strike craft. But until the 80's, Mikoyan Gurevich was Russia's most successful avation designer. the Mig-15, Mig-21, Mig-23/27, Mig-31, and Mig-29 were all excellent aircraft in their repective periods

IIRC The Mig-23 is the only aircraft with the dubious distinction of having shot down an F-15, in Israel 1983... Unless you believe the Russian claims of Syrian Foxbats abushing a couple of eagles...

The concept of Syrian aerial tactics alone is ridiculous

 

What? The Su 27s are better than the Mig 29? I dunno. The Mig 29 was an excellent aircarft. And don't forget the high flying, near Mach 3-speed Mig 25 Foxbat. It could probably outrun and outfly any Sukhoi.

 

But that was probably all it could do, run away from it.

 

I thought no F-15 had ever been shot down, what's the story?

 

Such high speeds are not needed in modern air fights. This dogma proved its faults in Vietnam -- along wuth the other american obsession to arm their fighters exclusively with missiles -- were the very fast modern american fighters ran into difficulties when entagled in low/medium altitude fights with slower fighters used by the Vietnamese...

 

Well, the Mig 29 still has a chance.

 

I think the new Su-37 is more than a match for the MIG-29...(however they were designed for different roles; MIGs were supposed to be anti F-16 and Sukhois anti F-15)

 

Err. Artyom Mikoyan and (somebody) Gurevich - two different people....
MiG 29 has a 1 degree per second lower instantaneous turn rate IIRC, and is considerably cheaper to buy. Several sources have put forward the thought that the Fulcrum would have been a better all-round carrier aircraft that Flanker due to cost and space constriants.
The later versions (fatback with extra fuel tanakge) are no where near as limited in capability as the original with regard to range.
Su-37 and MiG 29OVT with thrust vectoring are probably the most deadly aircraft for close combat in any air force in the world today (if they ever get into full service...)

 

In the Ethiopian-Eritrean war, the Su-27 has claimed a handful of Mig-29's with no known losses... Also it is generally thought to have far better avionics, the stock Mig-29 doesnt have a very powerful radar. The Mig-29 would have a chance against an Su-27 if it got close enough as it is extremely maneuvrable...

Also the Mig-23 downing the F-15's: one was the famous 'one-wing-landing', technically an aerial victory i think *not a kill. One more was shot down over Syria...

 

Hmm. Pilot training and quality have a lot to do with it. Plus the fact that the radar "range" is dependant upon dish size - and Su 27 series has a larger diameter nose, therefore a larger diameter radar scanner dish . I did some basic calculations many years ago (mid/late eighties) but cannot remember what the figures were. But IIRC Su 27 has a 33% or thereabouts higher lock-on range.

 

Anti-F16 and anti-F15, huh? Well, that probably means that the Fulcrum is an extremely manuverable interceptor that has about the same radar as the Fighting Falcon-comparitively bad-and the Flanker has better radar and speed to match the F15.

 

This was the Russians' initial purpose when they developed Mig-29 & Su-27.

However, the newest Su-35 & Su-37 i believe to be a very dangerous adversary against F-16s and quite a match for F-15s

Su-33 advanced from Su-27 and it's the analogue of F-14 while MiG-29K is the analogue of F-18.

 

Your point? What about analogues of F14s and F18s?