AHC: a 'proper' heir to the MiG-21

...no, not MiG-23, let alone MiG-29.
The task is to come out with an affordable (= no swing-wing, just one engine) performer, with issues of the MiG-21 adressed - short range and low-speed handling and maneuverability. Reasonable electronics, useful radar included, that can use better radar-guided missiles than the it was the R-3R. Uses technology of the day, so it could be produced in factories where the MiG-21 was produced.
 
So, basically a Soviet F-16.
Well there reportedly was Mikoyan’s Project 33 which was similar to F-16 in 80-ties and probably would be decent follower of MiG-21.
It is said MiG sold design to Chinese and Chinese FC-1/ JF-17 is partially based on it.

6072936041_5c42e55b3b.jpg
 

SsgtC

Banned
Well there reportedly was Mikoyan’s Project 33 which was similar to F-16 in 80-ties and probably would be decent follower of MiG-21.
It is said MiG sold design to Chinese and Chinese FC-1/ JF-17 is partially based on it.

6072936041_5c42e55b3b.jpg
It even looks a little like a Viper
 
It even looks a little like a Viper
Russian called it eF-16skij or something like that. It was suppose to have same engine as MiG-29.

If you look at Chinese FC-1/JF-17, you can see some similarity there too. But if Chinese fighter really got some of its origins in Project 33.
 
Well there reportedly was Mikoyan’s Project 33 which was similar to F-16 in 80-ties and probably would be decent follower of MiG-21.
It is said MiG sold design to Chinese and Chinese FC-1/ JF-17 is partially based on it.
...

God knows how many features were nicked from F-16 there :) Great, if too late proposal nevertheless.

The Guizhou JL-9 - Chinese rework of the MiG-21/J-7. 'Double delta' wing with increased area and better maneuveability, side intakes, more free space in the nose. 2-seat only, though, 'our' heir will be 1-seater.
The 1st Chinese type with the double delta wing was the J-7E.
Chin intake, that resulted in, IMO, ugly fighter was the J-7F. Better looking was the J-7MF, a fighter of similar appearance to the F-16, and not far away from the Ye-8/MiG-21M project - picture
 
Just curious, what’s wrong with the MiG-23? I always thought it was a good aircraft for its day, albeit with the added problems all swing-wings had.
 

SsgtC

Banned
Just curious, what’s wrong with the MiG-23? I always thought it was a good aircraft for its day, albeit with the added problems all swing-wings had.
It was designed strictly as a high speed bomber interceptor, not an air superiority fighter.
 
Just curious, what’s wrong with the MiG-23? I always thought it was a good aircraft for its day, albeit with the added problems all swing-wings had.

There were MiG-23s, and then other MiG-23s. The early export types with radar from 1960s (S, SP, SM versions) and shot range missiles, were barely better than latest MiG-21s, and were barely more than target practice for top-notch Israely AF in 1982 that jammed Syrian communications and radars, while using their own radars to guide their fighters to attack the obsolete MiGs from favorable possitions. Add in the well-trained and experienced Israely pilots, next-gen fighters with new radars and missiles - the outcome is predictable.
The new Sapfir radar was not equal to the radars installed on F-16A, let alone on Mirage 2000, F-16C or any F-14, F-15 or F-18. It will take MiG-31 to achieve echnological ballance vs. West's best. It also took a while for the Sapfir to work reliable, and for Soviets to come out with improved missiles, ant then there was additional delay for those improvements to spread into non-block countries.

The MiG-23 exelled in climbs, due to excellent thrust-to-weight ratio, unfortunately that category is poor substitute for other shortcomings that are mostly related to onboard electroincs. Mid- and late-versions were decent combat aircraft, the IRST system was installed to passively search and track enemy A/C.
 
There were MiG-23s, and then other MiG-23s. The early export types with radar from 1960s (S, SP, SM versions) and shot range missiles, were barely better than latest MiG-21s, and were barely more than target practice for top-notch Israely AF in 1982 that jammed Syrian communications and radars, while using their own radars to guide their fighters to attack the obsolete MiGs from favorable possitions. Add in the well-trained and experienced Israely pilots, next-gen fighters with new radars and missiles - the outcome is predictable.
The new Sapfir radar was not equal to the radars installed on F-16A, let alone on Mirage 2000, F-16C or any F-14, F-15 or F-18. It will take MiG-31 to achieve echnological ballance vs. West's best. It also took a while for the Sapfir to work reliable, and for Soviets to come out with improved missiles, ant then there was additional delay for those improvements to spread into non-block countries.

The MiG-23 exelled in climbs, due to excellent thrust-to-weight ratio, unfortunately that category is poor substitute for other shortcomings that are mostly related to onboard electroincs. Mid- and late-versions were decent combat aircraft, the IRST system was installed to passively search and track enemy A/C.

Reportedly they had lots of issues with stability, reliability and were a bit lethal to their own pilots.
 
Reportedly they had lots of issues with stability, reliability and were a bit lethal to their own pilots.
Czechoslovakia had 70 in 4 versions including trainig. I believe 3 were losts with pilots as casaulties, at least 2 were training. Another 2 or 3 were lost without life losses. According to Czechoslovaks it was relatively demanding on maintenance and big intakes were “magnets” for birds. The way it was designed this often could lead to engine fires.
Called “boxes” by Czechoslovaks. Not so popular but not directly unpopular.
 
God knows how many features were nicked from F-16 there :) Great, if too late proposal nevertheless.

The Guizhou JL-9 - Chinese rework of the MiG-21/J-7. 'Double delta' wing with increased area and better maneuveability, side intakes, more free space in the nose. 2-seat only, though, 'our' heir will be 1-seater.
The 1st Chinese type with the double delta wing was the J-7E.
Chin intake, that resulted in, IMO, ugly fighter was the J-7F. Better looking was the J-7MF, a fighter of similar appearance to the F-16, and not far away from the Ye-8/MiG-21M project - picture

So, the best choice to replace MiG-21 might be MiG-21 as improved variant, perhaps with Ye-8 looks you mention. Why? Even Soviet electronics got smaller, so each generation would pack more processing power and better radar performance in smaller package. Better engine, ie. RD-33, would improve range and performance. Meanwhile, development of helmet-mounted-display and off-boresight launch missiles (a la R-73) is underway. This better MiG-21 would be competitive - or perhaps even better with it's dogfighting missiles - to F-16 in air-to-air combat up until it has AMRAAM.

It would be probably much cheaper than MiG-23 or MiG-29, thus available in larger number both for VVS as well as for export. Actually, MiG-21's upgraded with same technology might be export fighters of choice. At same time, Soviets would be wise to produce Su-27 as advanced heavier fighter, thus having a true high-low mix.

But, of course, this approach would not be so good from Soviet industrial viewpoint. Fighter design bureaus would rather design completely new aircraft rather than tinker with old ones. Same goes for aircraft industry itself. Upgrades are not as sexy as producing brand new fighters with brand new techology.
 
Last edited:
...no, not MiG-23, let alone MiG-29.
The task is to come out with an affordable (= no swing-wing, just one engine) performer, with issues of the MiG-21 adressed - short range and low-speed handling and maneuverability. Reasonable electronics, useful radar included, that can use better radar-guided missiles than the it was the R-3R. Uses technology of the day, so it could be produced in factories where the MiG-21 was produced.
Maybe a copy of the Mirage F1 ?
 
So, the best choice to replace MiG-21 might be MiG-21 as improved variant, perhaps with Ye-8 looks you mention. Why? Even Soviet electronics got smaller, so each generation would pack more processing power and better radar performance in smaller package. Better engine, ie. RD-33, would improve range and performance. Meanwhile, development of helmet-mounted-display and off-boresight launch missiles (a la R-73) is underway. This better MiG-21 would be competitive - or perhaps even better with it's dogfighting missiles - to F-16 in air-to-air combat up until it has AMRAAM.

It would be probably much cheaper than MiG-23 or MiG-29, thus available in larger number both for VVS as well as for export. Actually, MiG-21's upgraded with same technology might be export fighters of choice. At same time, Soviets would be wise to produce Su-27 as advanced heavier fighter, thus having a true high-low mix.

By late 1970s/early 1980s, I'd also go with frame-less windscreen, like the MiG-21s/F7s got through modifications after 1990s.
Interestingly enough, I'd try and install the R-29 engine on the 'super MiG-21', it was a potent engine, probably the best part of the MiG-23/27 designs.
Me loves Su-27 at any rate :)

But, of course, this approach would not be so good from Soviet industrial viewpoint. Fighter design bureaus would rather design completely new aircraft rather than tinker with old ones. Same goes for aircraft industry itself. Upgrades are not as sexy as producing brand new fighters with brand new techology.

There is certainly no need for the MiG company not to offer a spanking new A/C to carry the torch of the MiG-21 legacy, say from early 1980s on. Be it a 'F-16ski' (ie. the project like the one from the post #4 here), or something akin to Lavi, or Chinese J-10. Use the AL-31 as the Su-27. New radar and other electronics, 'ball' IRST, introduction of new materials, FBW, new missiles as available.
 
The Chinese have developed the Mig 21 and are still flying derivates, and the JF-17 is a directly related aircraft, imo the proper heir to the old Mig 21. It's just lacking state of the art jet engines but all Chinese jets lack those.

jf-17-f-16-e1424960116945.jpg
 
Just curious, what’s wrong with the MiG-23? I always thought it was a good aircraft for its day, albeit with the added problems all swing-wings had.

The USAF pilots flying them at Groom Lake and Tonopah didn't like them very much, didn't think it was that great, and at least one USAF pilot was killed flying one. Fast, but not a lot else going for it, and prone to biting the pilot.
 
At the rate that the Soviets stole American Technology at some point would we've been financially and technologically way ahead by slowing the pace down and doing the tinkering that they don't that they like to do? Also if you design a plane with a a specific defect that you know your enemy is going to build into their equipment causing a catastrophic failure that considered an act of War?
 
Top