Could MIG ever recover part of its status?

Could MIG ever recover part of its status?

Attached: Aviamix2015-03_(cropped).jpg (723x482, 98K)

Not without money.

Probably not given the state Russias economy is in

Considering MiG never built a dominant plane in the first place they're pretty much still on course. They evenly matched the F-86 in Korea because it was relatively easy easy to reach the apec of 1st gen fighter design with basic reliable engines and proper aerodynamics. The MiG-21 put up a fight because the West were too eager to push forward and some leap frog over the 3rd generation and jump straight to radar and computer guided warfare. The MiG-29 put MiG back in its place of designing mediocre not even equivalent gen aircraft again, with the 29 being a mere 3.5 gen at best fighter with 20 minutes of point defense flying time in a cockpit that provides the pilot with as little situational awareness as possible.

I believe "MiG" doesn't exist anymore. It's all under the umbrella of some "united aircraft corporation" thing. Mikoyan is long dead. Most of the original team are probably either dead or have emigrated. I don't see Russia ever designating another MiG plane.

You didnt even mention their biggest failure, the MiG-23. Also the MiG-31 was (is) based.

MiG's best work is the 31, especially for the time it came out. It had a very powerful PESA radar and the capability to guide against multiple targets, something the Soviets decided they didn't think was important for the MiG-29 or Su-27 when they initially appeared. It's still a potent interceptor for its role. That role may become obsolete very soon, however, if it hasn't already.

And what status would that be?
The best russia plane russia would allow its vassals to have?

Why don't they focus on cheap throw-away combat drones? It sounds it would fit them quite well.

Daily reminder

Attached: 1522707334319.jpg (3300x2550, 752K)

>MiG 31
>good
Isnt it a great coincidence that all Russian military hardware that are still considered great or good, are those that never saw combat?

The MiG 21 put up a fight because North Vietnam almost always have the advantage in combat. They pick when and where to intercept, do hit and run attacks, and flee to bases where US pilots were forbidden to go. But even then, their kill ratio is sub par at best.

I don't recall the F-22 ever getting into air-to-air combat, but I think most people who know even a little about the subject can agree it is a capable aircraft.

>F-14 rekt by MiG-23 never happened
>Where did Irainan F-14? Don't think about it too much, what are you, a commie?

Attached: this kills the tomcat.jpg (800x918, 380K)

EUROFIGHTER

what?

Is there an F/A-18 figure to add to this?

Attached: 1427113150622.jpg (713x561, 84K)

>he cant read a simple chart
wew

>Why don't they focus on cheap throw-away combat drones?
but thats what they have been making all this time :^)

F15 is 104-0. Also the only plane to ever shoot down a satellite

It’s not very good. 2/1/1

My only gripe is that the chart has an F-15E, not an air-superiority version like an A or a C.

Attached: f_15_eagle_9.jpg (1024x766, 139K)

The 29 is one of the best fighters ever designed.

What does it matter when the F15 exists?