Back in the 20th century everyone talked about MIGs, when people thought about Soviet planes they thought about Mikoyan's aircraft like the Mig-21, Mig-19 and Mig-25.Nowadays everyone only talks about Sukhoi's stuff, like the Su-27(and its variants), Su-57 and Su-47.Did Mikoyan fall into irrelevance? Did the Russians stop using their jets? If that's the case, then why did they do that?
>>65131061I can assure you without the shadow of a doubt it's related to corruption in some major way.You can apply this answer to many questions about why the USSR did/ Russia does things the way they did/do. That being said, the MiG-19 is one of my favorite aircraft of all time.
>>65131061IIRC they were absorbed into Sukhoi in the late 90s or early 00s into something called the Russian Aerospace Concern or something like that
>>65131061>Russia does things the way they did/do.what i read:>Russia does things the way they dildo
20th century was all about dogfighting. Maneuverability, speed, altitude.21th century is all about gay max range missile spam who detects who first via an AWAC.Mikoyan excelled in the former but I guess cost benefit it’s better to spam cheaper Sukhois with a data link.
>>65131152was meant for >>65131080
>>65131080I like the 19 too but for me best Mig is the flogger>but it's not goodI know, that's part of why I like it
Mig23
>>65131061>Did Mikoyan fall into irrelevance? To a certain degree, yes. MiG-25, 29 and 31 looked great and were perceived as a threat when they were first introduced.But over the decade that followed this first introduction each of them turned out to be flawed, sometimes after careful analysis, sometimes after observation, and sometimes in direct combat.Unlike their western-made counterparts, these flaws were not removed through changes or redesigns, mostly because teh Soviet Union was running out of money, or failed to exist, or didn'T have the tech to make modern integrated circuitry for avionics, or engines that just lasted longer, etc. etc.>Did the Russians stop using their jets? No. Russia still uses MiG-29s and MiG-31s in numbers. But the MiG-29 is a short range interceptor designed to maintain air superiority over the Elbe in WW3.The MiG-31 is a long range interceptor designed to intercept US bombers coming in over the north pole.Both these roles prety much became irrelevant in the early 90s, and on top of the the MiG-25 and 29 got their shit pushed in in Iraq.This limited export sales in the 90s and 2000s.>If that's the case, then why did they do that?The simple, short answer is that Sukhoi's larger Su-27 and designs derived from it are better suited to be upgraded into more modern multi-role fighters.But the MiG-29 is still a valid threat when handled correctly, this has been shown countless times in excercises..The 31 is also still a threat, just flying into that thing's envelope is not a good plan.Please note that use cases like throwing ALBMs from the MiG-31 are . . .odd. Burning fuselage flight hours like that is probably not an economically viable use.
>>65131185>but it's not goodYou want not good? Here bombs fuck you.
>>65131185Ask these guys about Mig23.
>>65131061>In December 1999, Nikolai Nikitin was appointed the corporation's General Director and General Designer. Nikitin focused most of the company's resources on the development of the Tu-334 passenger aircraft at the expense of military programs.[5] This prompted the resignation in December 1999 of many of its leading military aircraft designers, including the chief designers and their deputies for the MiG-29 and MiG-31 programs.[5]>In 2006, the Russian government merged 100% of Mikoyan shares with Ilyushin, Irkut, Sukhoi, Tupolev, and Yakovlev as a new company named United Aircraft Corporation.[4] They tried to make money which pissed off the engineers and then the company failed because all of the engineers had gone to work for Sukhoi.
>>65131201>interceptor designed to maintain air superiority
>>65131201Mig-31 keeps being useful in the ukrainian war and has yet to be shot down in combat, like the F-15 or the harrier, turns out going high and fast is great for launching standoff weapons and air to air missiles.
>>65132222>Mig-31 keeps being useful in the ukrainian warmay i see it?or are you talking about lobbing missiles from across the Caspian Sea? lol>and has yet to be shot down in combatmay i see it in combat?
>>65132272I don't have russian onboard footage, but it probably wouldn't be all that insteresting as it's all bvr anyway.https://www.twz.com/air/ukrainian-su-25-shoot-down-seen-in-harrowing-onboard-video
>>65132288so it can hit soviet crap from bvr, cool, so can anybody
>>65132222it is good at those things but like he said, the airframe was made for a very specialized role in interception and was pressed into performing CAP/being a missile truck and having it do those things is eating into its limited lifetime
