Lets say you have an Airforce that can only acquire Mig-21 and

Technically, yes. Realistically, no.

Your best bet using something like a MiG-21 against a modern foe would be following the tactics the NVAF used in Vietnam. That means using heavily conservative ambush tactics in conjunction with air defenses to attack targets of opportunity. In Vietnam, that was comparatively easy because the North Vietnamese early warning network could see the strike packages comparatively far out and sortie planes as necessary.

With stealth, however, 5th gen aircraft, the paradigm has changed. The distances at which early warning networks can detect stealth aircraft is massively reduced, and the advanced EW suites on them mean that missions will likely flown higher, faster, and with standoff munitions compared to Vietnam. That means that the 5th gens may not ever be detected at all while still hitting targets with impunity. Plus, their advanced sensor suites make hiding your own fighters very difficult. Any air campaign would have ISR find airfields fairly quickly, with follow up strikes destroying any aircraft they could find on the ground.

Your best bet would be some kind of ambush tactics, somehwat like this:
>5th gens somehow spotted, either through visual early warning network or consistent use of same routes
>MiG-21s distributed to hidden airfields along strike path
>MiG-21s sortied after 5th gens have passed
>zoom climb, close as fast as possible for IR AAM/gun kill
>make a single pass and run the fuck away
This *might* work once, assuming the 5th gens and their supporting AWACS get complacent. But after that, all the assets that contributed to the attack are pretty much guaranteed to get fucked by the next wave of strikes.

>>33835412
If they have a good C4ISR aircraft on their side and the 5th Gen Aircraft don't then yes it's possible. Hell look at how long the F-4 stayed a viable platform, especially with the ICE upgrade.

File: JF-17.jpg (467KB, 1200x809px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 1200x809px

I use pic-related in large enough numbers to deplete their missile batteries.

>>33835561
>pakishit

certainly there must be an alternative without losing all honour and self respect?

>>33835561
It's Chinese, and the most advanced Mig-21 derivative around.

>>33835412

You can upgrade a system only so much before it inevitably turns into a different one altogether.

In short: No.

In long:

By adding sensors and more hardpoints for more missiles, bombs, fuel tanks or possibly even a stealthy container to carry said missiles/bombs, you will need to reinforce the airframe wich leads to the plane weighing a lot more wich means you'd need a more powerfull engine wich means you have to modify the inlet to increase airflow which means either make the inlet diameter greater or make the shock-cone smaller but that is not advisable because the radar is inside that shock cone and a smaller radar is a big nono so you have to increase the diameter wich means adjusting the entire airframe to compensate for the difference in airflow, weight, weight-balance and stresses.

On the other hand though, you could offset the increase in weight by using composite materials but in the end, even composites can only do so much and you still end up with an airframe that is inherently not stealthy.

File: wallpaper-2262960.jpg (318KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1920x1200px

>>33835412
Convert them into space migs.

>>33835412
Former aircraft Maintainer here, also worked with AFETS on a number of occasions...too many so that the autism rubbed off on me.

The real answer: You would need to take the aircraft, strip it to the airframe, gut everything, and start from there. Then you could put a very powerful radar, engine, power gen, etc. sure.

The other answer: Modern aircraft do not dogfight. It is a missile game. Yes high G maneuvers provide evasion. so what do you do? what do you do...?

Take and pod the entire weapons system of a modern system, and slave it to bolted on cockpit controls that have nothing to do with the rest of the jet. Something like that, see below, go from there. All you need to be able to do is launch missiles from stand off distance in a sufficent volley, and have a radar so extreme that your jet is pig fat. Even then, You still have to contend with things like "mock radar" where a signal is fed back that is louder and stronger than your initial signal which does something worse than jam. It "lies" giving you a hole in your airspace.

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104604/anasq-236-radar-pod/

>>33835663

having flown with an ASQ-236 last week, i'll say this:

it's only an air-to-ground radar. masking is a problem when using it, and podding a radar like that for an air-to-air role is dumb due to body masking.

>>33835651
Besides looking cool, it's way too small to be space anything. You're gonna need way more fuel for an orbital capable plane. Along with some sort of fancy engine like the bong Sabre. Also
>nose air intake
>yet keeps f-35 shape in sides where the air intakes would be
Finally, the body would not look anything like that on a reentry capable plane.
>>33835412
Wasn't there a thread in which someone calculated you could have 200'000 MiG-21s instead of the F-35 program?

>>33835412
Convert them into cruise missiles. Launch them at the base the 5th-gen is operating from. A 5th-gen on the ground is just like any other target.

>>33835412
Easy, you bury them out in the desert about 30ft below the surface. The enemy can't beat your air force if it's protected by the sand itself

>>33835708
saddam pls go

>>33835412
>buy massive amounts of migs
>blot out the sun

Can 5th gen aircraft fight in the shade ?

>>33835412
What if you acquired about 2 million Migs and built some sort of massive super Mig the size of a small city pretty much impenetrable and armed with thousands of CWIS and AAMs. Set that thing over the white house and watch the burgers panic

>>33835600
It's a great value for the price.

>>33835722
>>33835755
Actually, a similar concept would theoretically work. With enough MiGs, you could manage sortie rates far higher than anything an opponent could realistically counter, and (at great loss to your own forces), you'd eventually be able to overwhelm defenses and hit them at their bases.

Again, realistically though, it'd be hard to field a force of anything large enough to overwhelm the several thousand F-35s that are going to be in service.

>>33835722
Who would win, the sun, or a trillion mig-21s?

>>33835801
It would be interesting to see a critical mass of Migs ( probably hundreds of billions) able to completely annihilate a sizable portion of an enemy country in a single massive sortie

File: 1404764779342.png (45KB, 440x1460px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 440x1460px

>>33835755
Belka is that you?

>>33835836
>mass of a trillion migs : ~10^15 kg

>mass of the sun : ~10^30 kg

Needs more migs.

>>33835862
How many?

>>33835895
What's the plan ?

File: Beast Planet.png (413KB, 800x620px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 800x620px

>>33835915

File: 1492813336692.jpg (5KB, 110x90px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 110x90px

>>33835853
LONG LIVE BELKA

>>33835940
If you get like 10^31 or so you might be able to form a black hole. That would fuck the sun up pretty bad.

>>33835968
>MiG-21
>The only fighter measured in orders of magnitude
>...
>"10^17 bogies 3 o'clock high, sir"

>>33835940
my warplanet nigga. I owned that beast planet when I was 11. It was boss as fuck.

>>33835609
Doesn't need to be stealthy.

It needs to be fast, carry a modest number of good missiles (aim120D, aim9X), and above all else have a fuckoff huge current-gen radar.

So what you do is:
>launch in superior numbers, preferably 3:1
>detect the 5th gen fighters
>dump all missiles in first pass, doubletapping and tripletapping where necessary
>run the fuck away with superior speed
If you could take a MIG-21-2000 (most current production variant, last modified in 2001), make it marginally faster (the MIG-21-2000 is already capable of mach 2.0), and cram a big current-gen radar in it swarm tactics would be very successful.

>>33835412
Sure.

Get a shit ton of them and arm them with nuclear weapons.

>>33835609
Mig-21 shapes are pretty stealthy by themselves. There are talks in Runet about MiG company experiments on MiG-21 platform which reduced its RCS to numbers less than 1m2.

>>33836062

that's a lot of if's. at that point you're not really flying a MiG 21 anymore, and it's honestly cheaper to have a 5th gen jet when you're doing things like that.

>>33835695
idk lets find out

F-35 Programme: 1.508 trillion

1.508 trillion (through 2070 in then-year dollars), US$55.1B for RDT&E, $319.1B for procurement, $4.8B for MILCON, $1123.8B for operations & sustainment (2015 estimate)[8]
Mig 21 individual cost= 1.52-3.12 million

operations and sustainment costs less, but i cant find any info on how much it would be, so we are going to have to be innacurate and just hope its enough for all the planes, as i understand it the F-35 is a great many times more expensive to operate and sustain so it should be.

So 1.508 trillion-1123.8 billion= 384.2 billion

384.2 bn/1.62m= 237,160

or 384.2 bn/3.12 m= 123,141

so somewhere in the region of 200,000 yeah

>>33836151
Okay fine.
>take Mig-21-2000
>strap a big fucking radar on it
>do as the OP says and rig it to fire AIM120D's
>missile spam and run away, no 5th gen fighter can catch a mach 2 plane

>>33835853
Belkan's were fucking retarded.
>Go to Belka.
>"Hey guys, how about putting these new weapons called "nukes" on InterContinental Ballistic Missles.
>Does so.
>Rekts Oseans.

>>33836144
>on runet
I wouldn't put too much stock in it

>>33836201
>mach 2
>for like 4 minutes until it runs out of fuel and also ruins the engine completely

>>33835412
Aircraft is the plural form of Aircraft.

And yes, if you have the ability to swarm a 5th gen squadron then you can, in theory, win. According to Viktor Belenko the strategy to fight 4th gen American fighters like the F15 and F14 was to swarm as many fighters as possible and maybe enough would make it through.

>>33835690
Had to use it as an example, since APS-154 still is kinda outside the understanding of most people and isint really for target acquisition like a traditional radar is.

Only way the pod would work is like the old ww2 night fighters, where the antenna is sticking out past the nose. Still, had to throw the idea out there.

I am going to call you Lt. No fun, but I like you anyway, because you are kinda fun.

>>33836168
I think the original thread had anons guesstimating some economies of scale.

>>33836253
Except everything after the 21-63 got new, much much more fuel efficient and durable engines and the Israeli produced 21-2000 has even newer, even more efficient and durable engines and is capable of sustained full-afterburn flight for 15 minutes without droptanks and can supercruise.

>>33835412

fuck of Croatia.

>>33836287
"You see, killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and shut down. Kif, show them the medal I won."

>>33835412
>Is it possible to make them win a fight against 5th gen aircrafts?
India has handed the USAF some very embarrassing defeats in wargames with its old MiG-21s. And they're still upgrading them: Google "MiG-21-93"

>>33835412
Yes because if I can add anything currently being researched that's some sci fi drone death laser shit

File: Capture.png (688KB, 846x471px) Image search: [Google]

688KB, 846x471px

>>33835412
don't need it to fight a 5th gen aircraft, just take out some sand niggers in a Toyota

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaHvY3hffcw

>>33836062

>and above all else have a fuckoff huge current-gen radar.

Which requires a large nose cone to house the radar in which the MiG-21 hasnt due to the limitations of the shock cone that it has.

What you also have to put into mind is power and heat. You need to have a beefy generator to provide ample amounts of power to said radar to "burn" through the stealth aspect of the opposing 5th gen craft to acquire them at range and furthermore, using this much power generates a lot of heat and then you become that much more visible on enemy (thermal) camera's.

>Doesn't need to be stealthy.

But it sure as fuck will help evening the staggering odds.

>>33836144

1m2 of frontal RCS is nothing. You would need at least 0.01m2 of RCS or else you will be detected from 300++ kilometers.

>>33836643
Uuh no senpai. Bisons were the last of them.

File: IMG_0337.jpg (52KB, 915x610px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 915x610px

Could the f-104 beat the mig 21?

>>33836320

i got promoted last week. it's captain no fun now.

>>33836924
No. They tried back in 1971.

>>33836201
>>33836822
>>33836643
People often forget that MiGs are fast as fucc boi ,and if they were shit they wouldn't be used largely today. Just because a countries defense budget is lower than that of a superpowers doesn't mean they make compromises everywhere. They want tohavethe best for their budget and the fact that the plane is still in service speaks for itself

>>33837054
Samefag here,also if the blueprinta for the MiG 21(which set the very foundings of 5th generation fighters) weren't stolen by the americans the MiG 21 would maybe be one of the top fighter jets out there

>>33837082
The soviet pilot brought the plane to the Americans and it was the MiG 25,not 21

>>33837118
My bad,still,point made

>>33837082
>>33837128
>>33837054

y'know, there's other requirements for a good jet fighter besides gotta go fast.

>>33837199
Dude, production numbers and service years are telling for themselves. It's a workhorse, an icon and one of the best pieces of machinery created by humanity.

>>33837199
I know just saying,it is fast but also quite agile and a good pilot might do something with it. Just saying

>>33837005
but they can beat the their own pilots.

>>33837229
>Dude, production numbers and service years are telling for themselves.
Yes - the MiG-23, its intended replacement, was such a piece of shit that operators preferred to keep flying the MiG-21 until its kinks were worked out

>one of the best pieces of machinery created by humanity.
Good lord no. The MiG-21 was like a shittier version of the F-104.

>>33837230

not if it dies to a BVR shot due to doctrine and onboard sensors.

>>33837229

just because we made a ton doesn't mean it's not out of date.

>>33835412
possibly, Datalinking will be key.

replace the radar in the nose cone with a small AESA radar, probably not much smaller than the AESA proposed or equipped ( cant remember which) on Gripens replace missiles with ASRAAM and meteor, and fit a IRST sstem as well.

Datalink multiple planes together so their sensor network is combined, should significantly enhance the chances of detecting a stealthy aircraft before it destroys them, and the multiple airframes mean many missile platforms when you do detect a target.

basically you create a wall of radars with missiles attached.

given the cost of the avionics a few 5th gen fighters could probably provide the same performance at lower cost but its doable.

the alternative is to swamp the enemy with a shit ton of mig 21s with either ASRAAM or aim9x and hope to get some into range beofre the are all shot down.

>>33836924
nope the starfighter killed more of it's own pilots than the enemy

>>33835412

Try it out in CMANO you fag.

Then post screenies.

>>33837414
That's actually the tactic EADS was using when they simulated Typhoons against F-35.
Fly in spread out formation to increase chance of detection (side and rear of F-35 is less stealthy) and use the datalink to share target information.

>>33837414
Would just get picked up by the rwr and plinked from BVR ranges.

You can't fight stealth at range with non stealthy targets.

Those trying to spam fail too, that assumes you know where the planes you need to spam at are. You don't. You will just lose half your force, then the stealthy airframe will just leave and come back in three hours.

File: 65674556456.jpg (41KB, 590x330px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 590x330px

>>33836203
Didn't something like that happen in AC6 and the nuke launcher got destroyed anyways?

[spoiler]which is why ICBM trucks exists in the first place[/spoiler]

>>33837661
>Would just get picked up by the rwr and plinked from BVR ranges.

thats why AESA and LPI radar, still gonna tae stupid losses, still be better off with 5th gen to fight 5th gen but OP asked how you could go about the task, not is the task sensible or even remotely a good idea, it isnt.

however within those stipulations >>33837414
is probably the best approach, its a bad idea to fight 5th gens with mig 21s in general,, but if you have to do it at all then wall of radar plus missiles is probably the best way.

>>33836168
But then you need to factor in fuel and pilots for 200 000 migs as well

File: relative rcs.png (103KB, 504x680px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 504x680px

>>33836144
>Mig-21 shapes are pretty stealthy by themselves.

love this meme

>>33837831
LPI probability of intercept goes way up if you have a gazillion of them going at the same time.

File: MiG-21_RB23.jpg (605KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 1280x960px

>>33835412
Not really, its inlet cone greatly limits the size of its radar. That is why the soviets ended up moving away from the that style of plane over time.

Having said that the JF-17 design does draw from the MiG-21.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC/PAC_JF-17_Thunder

It can do aerial reconnaissance, ground attack and aircraft interception. Keep in mind that aircraft interception does not mean going after other fighters, it means going after attackers, bombers, and reconnaissance planes. Of course the MiG-21 was not really made for that type of work as its main role either.


A lot of people forget that the Sovit Union had a long gap of air superiority fighter development. There was nothing really designed with that was a its main role from 1955 with the MiG 19 till 1970 with the MiG-23. They beleived they could just have interceptor that had air superiority as a secondary role. The USAF did the same thing during that time frame save with fighter-bombers.

File: sdggg.jpg (44KB, 530x306px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 530x306px

The Israeli-upgraded MiG-21 Bisons of the Indian Air Force are considered the most "advanced" of the '21 you can get, but it's still pretty outdated

>>33836201
Also, the 'mig-21s are cheaper to operate so let me just handwave away the vastly increased operating costs of operating literally 100 times more fighters' is top tier retardation.

You are not even realistically looking at 1/5th the cpfh, the basing costs are going to be flat out stupendous (where the fuck do you even keep 200,000 fighter jets?).

>>33835556

How hard would it be to hit the AWACS plane? With either AA missiles or the aforementioned Mig-21s? I Guess since AWACS is AWACS if they detected something coming at them there'd be nearby defenses like ships with missiles or a fighter loitering nearby for just such an occasion?

I just realized I've never thought about an AWACS defending itself aside from being launched from and very close to a carrier group

>>33835412
Nice try, Kim Jong-Un.

>>33836949
Thank goodness you aren't Major No-fun. Thought congratulations for Captain, now anon...captain anon, its time, do you stay in and go to the pentagon to have your soul removed, somehow escape into the desert and become a test pilot for the rest of your days, either of those takes you to major, or do you go for that tempting civilian career?

Good banter. I would have enjoyed working with you, and probably drawing a dick on the bottom of your boot as you climbed in the jet. Not being rude, just honest. Kinda my thing.

File: Ek61AvsTykm6k.gif (914KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

914KB, 853x480px

What about stealth tech on a MiG-21?

File: 8675309.gif (2MB, 250x404px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x404px

>>33835412
I really wish Magnitude or Leatherneck or whoever it is now running the MiG-21Bis would UNFUCK their shit. It's been almost a month and I still can't use countermeasures with the ASO-2 pods equipped. GOD DAMMIT.

>>33838662
If fighters are getting close enough to hit an AWACS then the chain of fuck ups would be extraordinary. Unless it is a purposeful suicide mission (ie, a lot of planes pointed directly at it and firing afterburners to get one or two shots in with RTB not even an option) it's logistically not worth the loss of life and airplanes.

>>33839036
It is not a thing outside of active countermeasures or the Russian LieTech plasma envelope which would totally not blind the 21 as well.

>>33835412
just put nukes on each jet and detonate them over the target

File: su-30mkkh-31-2.png (122KB, 625x376px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 625x376px

>>33838662
Well, it's hard enough to require a 4th Gen and a snazzy long-range anti-radiation AAM. The Soviet Union knew how vital it is to American air combat doctrine that they devised a plan to knock it out from the get-go

File: am_I_the_only_who_thinks_this_is_bullshit.gif (2MB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 220x220px

>>33835607
>most advanced Mig-21 derivative

That's like claiming to be the world's tallest midget.

>>33837998
>the most stealthiest plane gets rekt

wow you sure proved your point with that

>>33838997

Test Pilot, thankfully i got my master's in engineering before i joined. hopefully i get a slot and get lined up for a sweet civilian paycheck when i get out. sounds more fun than flying for the airlines and telling war stories at the bar the rest of my days.

>>33843649
>Mig-21 shapes are pretty stealthy by themselves
Yeah, no fag.

File: su-15 (5).jpg (48KB, 1073x464px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1073x464px

>>33838297
>There was nothing really designed with that was a its main role from 1955 with the MiG 19 till 1970 with the MiG-23
>What the fuck is Su-15?
>What the fuck is Tu-128?
>What the fuck is MiG-25?
Bitch, please.

>>33836168
>Operating 200,000 MiG-21s costs less than operating 2,443 F-35s
No. Not unless you only want 200,000 big pointy lawn ornaments. MiG-21s are cheaper to operate, but certainly not ~80 times cheaper.

Let's try this:
An F-35 costs ~$42,000/hr to operate. That may go down in the near future but we're going to ignore that, and say that $1124 billion goes to paying for 26 million flight hours worth of operations for the fleet, or about 11 thousand flight hours per airframe over the 50-year lifespan.

The MiG-21, on the other hand, costs about $4,500/hr to operate, and therefore about $50 million per airframe over the same 50-year, 11,000-hour service life. We'll add a ~$2 million individual procurement cost to this to arrive at a total lifetime cost of $52 million per airframe.

Now we divide this across the F-35's overall $1.5T budget, assuming that nothing will be spent on further R&D of the MiG and ignoring MILCON because fuck it, it's a drop in the bucket anyways. This gives us a more realistic figure of about 29,000 MiG-21s for 2,443 F-35s.

>>33835797

You can get Gripens for that price and don't feel dirty after buying it.

>>33844073
The Su-15, Tu-128, and MiG-25 were all dedicated interceptors, not air superiority fighters.

File: Concept of concept.png (129KB, 822x658px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 822x658px

>>33835412
Change the air intake to add a decent radar, add an IRST in front, change the wing design to double delta, put a better engine with thrust vectoring, change old hydraulic controls to fly-by-wire and HOTAS systems, add a helmet cueing system and finally add some fucking canards. Everything gets better with canards. Pic somewhat related, I'd change the canopy to a bubble canopy. Main drawback of all those changes, the MiG-21 would probably cost more than a better jet.

>>33836643
There almost no details about that wargames. Probably migs dominated in numerical superiority or unequal conditions.
>>33837054
>>33837230
4-th gen fighters are typically has better maximum speed, acceleration and agility. The only advantages of Mig here are cost, reliability and simplicity.

>>33843661
If you end up at edwards and "ice" Caterina is still there, well that's cool, and if you end up in debrifing at shadow that was my old stomping ground. good luck man. Though never forget this very important fact: twin tails and twin engines are the he man correct way to fly. Only lawn darts, drones, and failures go single engine single tail.

F-15 Master race.

>>33844814

or it was BFM or ACM, where the small size of the MiG 21 comes in handy because it's easy to lose the visual especially if they're flying pointy BFM like i'd expect them to, that actually works in their advantage somewhat given how small it is when looking to the front.

>>33844920

i haven't flown a single engine aircraft since the T-6, and i don't intend to ever again. except maybe like a 152 on the weekends.

>>33844646
>MiG-21
>Dedicated air superiority fighter
I see.

>>33845159
u wot m8

The claim was that the MiG-21 was an interceptor, as were all its Soviet contemporaries. The VVS really lacked a "true" dedicated air superiority fighter at the time.

>>33845243
The claim was that "There was nothing really designed with that was a its main role". Which is false.

>>33845263

the MiG 25 was designed to shoot down US HVAA like B-52s, E-3s, KC-135s, etc.

are you seriously suggesting that it was designed to shoot down a F-4? especially given how it has AA-8's and AA-6's as its armament.

File: Su-7B_Fitter_A.jpg (1MB, 2610x1485px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2610x1485px

>>33845263
Anon, all those aircraft you mentioned were dedicated interceptors as their main role - especially the Su-15, MiG-25, and Tu-128, which were
>missile-armed interceptor to replace the Su-11
>long-ranged interceptor to replace Yak-25
>high-performance interceptor to take on next gen of supersonic bombers
and all were primarily PVO rather than VVS assets from the start. The MiG-21 is closer to a real air superiority fighter, but its original design had it closer to the role of the F-104 - a point defense interceptor - than a real air superiority fighter. The closest thing the VVS actually had to a dedicated air superiority fighter for that generation was the Su-7, which was originally intended to act as a frontline fighter, but doctrinal changes and similarity to the MiG-21 ended up having the MiG-21 take over that role while the Su-7 became a strike aircraft.

File: 3000010612_2.jpg (155KB, 709x504px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 709x504px

>>33845404
There is something inexplicably sexy about this aircraft

>>33845404
You are acting as if MiG-21 is not an interceptor. Why?

>>33845333
I am not suggesting anything, I am telling you that MiG-21 was not designed to shoot down F-4.

>>33845472
>You are acting as if MiG-21 is not an interceptor. Why?
I'm not? I don't know where it looks like I claimed that. The MiG-21 was definitely an interceptor, just not to the extent that the Su-9/11 was. It was more of a "light" interceptor for the VVS as opposed to the "heavy" interceptor the Fishpot served as for the PVO.

File: mig-21f-13 & yugoslav qt.jpg (113KB, 702x960px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 702x960px

>>33845561
If you agree that MiG-21 was an interceptor, why do you keep arguing that nothing was developed in its main role, which is indeed interception, between 1955 and 1970? This is just false. The philosophy behind pre-Fulcrum Soviet interceptor galore was that dogfighting is effectively dead and missiles will dominate in all aerial engagements, including air superiority. The fact that other interceptors existed does not make MiG-21 any less of an interceptor.

>>33845712
>why do you keep arguing that nothing was developed in its main role
I'm not?

>>33835561
The JF-17 looks like it can mount decent radar...

MiG-21 Bisons are pretty good bang for the buck seeing as they can mount AA-11s and I believe AA-12s. Won't have the same standoff range of a western fighter because of the lackluster radar but at least it gives them a modern missile load. With some decent terrain masking, it could potentially get some kills.

>>33838571
You're completely missing the point of this thought experiment
>UNLIMITED BUDGET
>but can only use Mig21 airframes
>no restrictions on what you do to any one airframe or how many airframes you can have

If I wanna say I field 10^15 Mig21's and create a literal flying wall to swat the 5th gen fighter out of the sky with an aerial collision it would be valid.

>>33838662
It's not hard, but it IS impractical because it's a 1-way trip for whichever plane you send for it.

File: mig-21-93 (1).jpg (549KB, 1200x812px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 1200x812px

>>33848232
With an unlimited budget you can strap a top notch radar to it, use modern missiles and implement some RCS reducing features, probably making its signature on par with 4+ gen fighters due to its small size. The answer is yes, it could easily score some kills, especially in BVR and with support of ground assets, but it would never win you a war being implemented in any sane numbers against qualified air forces.

>>33848334
And nobody is claiming it could. Again, you're missing the entire point of the thread.

The thread stated that given an unlimited budget and free reign to strap whatever you wanted to the Mig21 airframe, could it score a single kill under any circumstances against a gen5 fighter.

Well, fucking obviously the answer is yes, and it's just fishing for funny or clever ways to go about it.

>>33848370

the easiest way would be to kamikaze one at an airshow into a Raptor.

>>33848384
I personally like the idea of using them as cruise missiles to attack an airfield with parked 5th gens.

File: how about a serious discussion.jpg (89KB, 460x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 460x600px

>>33848370
>and it's just fishing for funny or clever ways to go about it
You aren't really succeeding so far.

File: amo72178_1.jpg (81KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x500px

>>33848409
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KS-1_Komet

File: 3m25 kh-80 meteorit-a (2).jpg (420KB, 1417x818px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1417x818px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-80

>>33840527
Would this really work? Have they made any or is it all theoretical?

>>33848795
>Would this really work?
As well as any other anti-radiation missile, sure.

It's worth noting, though, that to perform the semi-ballistic lofted long-range trajectory that the image depicts requires a full 3D track of the target, not just the azimuth/elevation information that a passive anti-radiation seeker provides. Azimuth/elevation is sufficient to guide on a direct trajectory, but this will degrade range as the missile has to pass through a much thicker portion of the atmosphere enroute to the target.

>Have they made any or is it all theoretical?
The K-100 was developed specifically for this role, yes. The anti-air variants of the Kh-31 are purely speculatory.

File: mig-31bsm with r-37 (1).jpg (225KB, 1500x1084px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1500x1084px

>>33849544
R-33 and R-37 do exist and are in service though.