Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Problems With India's Mig-21  
User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 5
Posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5899 times:

A pretty interesting and impressive blog post in the NY Times today about India's large fleet of Mig-21s

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/...ig-21-fighter-jets/?src=rechp&_r=0

Even as the MIG-21 stands tall in its performance for the Indian armed forces, its safety record, specifically in the past decade, has come under harsh criticism. A few months back, India’s defense minister, A.K. Antony, said that out of 29 crashes over the past three years in the Indian Air Force, 12 have been MIG-21 airframes. Two more MIG-21s have crashed since Mr. Antony put out those numbers.

It seems crazy that one of the world's largest countries is still using this second generaton fighter, despite it's relatively low maintenance costs (India also had an agreement with the former Soviet Union that allowed them to build Mig-21s in India).


Do you like movies about gladiators?
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3966 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5878 times:

Meh, it's a cheap, old school aircraft that India has sunk costs and a massive spares inventory - they are an excellent source of hours for a pilot base that India wants to increase in stick time.

But 29 crashes across all types in 3 years? Nearly 10 a year? That's high, whatever you attribute it to! I doubt that the Mig-21 should be singled out, looks like there is an underlying issue that needs to be identified...


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5855 times:

Is worth noting that many air forces use older aircraft quite successfully in their operations.

the USAF only got rid of its last T-33 in 1988.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5810 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
Is worth noting that many air forces use older aircraft quite successfully in their operations.

the USAF only got rid of its last T-33 in 1988.

Of course - but the T-33 was a trainer all of its life. Inda's Mig-21s are still frontline fighters ... and India isn't exactly Bolivia or Myanmar ... it's a very large country with a sizeable, modern military.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29802 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5714 times:

The US isn't exactly Bolivia or Myanmar either. The last b-52 is around 50 years old and still in service.

I am sure I can come up with more examples



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 858 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5675 times:

Quoting planespotting (Reply 3):
it's a very large country with a sizeable, modern military.

It's a large country with a fraction of its military that can be classed as modern. Just like China, once you scratch below the surface you see a lot of legacy equipment, most evident in their respective fighter fleets.


User currently offlineseahawk From Germany, joined May 2005, 1075 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5560 times:

The MiG-21 is not easy to fly, the inlet design is problematic for bird strikes, the planes and especially the engines are old (and mostly flown more hours than designed for).

User currently offlineTripleDelta From Croatia, joined Jul 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5527 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting seahawk (Reply 6):
The MiG-21 is not easy to fly

Actually, pilots say it's quite easy to fly - once you get it up to speed that is  . During approach and landing it indeed handles like a brick, but when operating in the speed range it is designed for - transsonic and beyond - it handles quite nicely and is very nimble. Its major problem in all regimes is endurance: even when you ease up on the throttle you're looking at around 50-60 minutes aloft without external tanks.



No plane, no gain.
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2137 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5457 times:

A few years back, I had a chance to visit an large India Aerospace company and got a peek at their fab facility for some of the Mig components. I was surprised at the archaic tooling used to fab the detailed parts (mostly master gauges and hardly any digital data).

The other thing I noticed was the lack of sealant applied to the joints etc. On commercial aircraft we apply sealant everywhere to protect from corrosion.

Perhaps the extensive use of titanium on the aircraft eliminated the use of sealant, but I just can't help but believe that these Migs were not design/built to last.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineTripleDelta From Croatia, joined Jul 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5413 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 8):
but I just can't help but believe that these Migs were not design/built to last.

In European service they've shown themselves to be surprisingly durable. The Croatian AF is still flying its mid-70s bis models with some success (apart from a general lack of spares). Indeed, part of the fleet will soon undergo a life extension program, which will give them up a decade more service... even though they'll likely remain in service for much less, they'll still clock up at least 40 years of active front-line flying .

Also, aircraft of similar vintage (including newer 80s examples) are still flying in Bulgaria and Romania.

[Edited 2013-08-09 08:22:51]


No plane, no gain.
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5395 times:

Quoting TripleDelta (Reply 9):
In European service they've shown themselves to be surprisingly durable. The Croatian AF is still flying its mid-70s bis models with some success (apart from a general lack of spares). Indeed, part of the fleet will soon undergo a life extension program, which will give them up a decade more service... even though they'll likely remain in service for much less, they'll still clock up at least 40 years of active front-line flying .

Yeah, depending on your definition of success you can keep an aircraft flying for quite a while. For a lot of nations having some fast jets that go up and fly around is good enough for what they need to accomplish. If you are only flying a dozen or two dozen aircraft it really does not matter if they are Mig-21's or SU-35's all that much.


User currently offlineTripleDelta From Croatia, joined Jul 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5392 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 10):
For a lot of nations having some fast jets that go up and fly around is good enough for what they need to accomplish. If you are only flying a dozen or two dozen aircraft it really does not matter if they are Mig-21's or SU-35's all that much.

That is all very much true - but it nevertheless shows the durability of the aircraft itself. In Bulgarian, Croatian and Romanian service for example the -21s are still front-line birds, and are able to perform all the duties required of them in that role. All three air forces have jets in the fleet that are combat capable and not just for show (or as a paper force).



No plane, no gain.
User currently offlinemechatnew From United States of America, joined May 2005, 102 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5392 times:

Most of Indain's MIG-21 were ungraded to Mig-21 Bison standard. It has a new radar, jammer, off boresight WVR missiles and radar guided BVR missiles. Still a very capable short range interceptor.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12589 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5384 times:

People interested in the topic might want to read:

America's Secret MiG Squadron: The Red Eagles of Project CONSTANT PEG

It found that many Soviet aircraft of that era had nasty handling characteristics, so the OP's report of lots of MIG-21 crashes wasn't really a surprise to me.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14030 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5345 times:

Up to quite recently the Italians were still operating F-104 Starfighters, which through continuous upgrades, were up to the end still capable of fighting it out with much more modern aircraft. Many western countries also still operate the F-4 Phantom II.

Jan


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4896 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5029 times:

It seems that one of the problems is (was) the lack of jet training aircraft, forcing cadets to directly migrate from single engine prop trainers directly to the Mig-21. Fortunately, with the paperwork, delays etc out of the way, the IAF has inducted Pilatii and BAE Hawks as a stepping stone.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 8):
A few years back, I had a chance to visit an large India Aerospace company and got a peek at their fab facility for some of the Mig components. I was surprised at the archaic tooling used to fab the detailed parts (mostly master gauges and hardly any digital data).

The other thing I noticed was the lack of sealant applied to the joints etc. On commercial aircraft we apply sealant everywhere to protect from corrosion.

Perhaps the extensive use of titanium on the aircraft eliminated the use of sealant, but I just can't help but believe that these Migs were not design/built to last.

bt

The truth is that it will take a generation or two before you see that kind of competence in India, especially in the public sector. There is a shortage of vocational training and quality secondary education to start, and a lack of tradition in the technical arts.


User currently offlineseahawk From Germany, joined May 2005, 1075 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4994 times:

Quoting TripleDelta (Reply 7):
Actually, pilots say it's quite easy to fly - once you get it up to speed that is . During approach and landing it indeed handles like a brick, but when operating in the speed range it is designed for - transsonic and beyond - it handles quite nicely and is very nimble. Its major problem in all regimes is endurance: even when you ease up on the throttle you're looking at around 50-60 minutes aloft without external tanks.

True but it seems like many accidents happen during landing. Many bird strikes, which the 21 does really not like, and many pilot errors. But that is not surprising as the Indian training system is not up to speed and the MiG 21 is used as much as an operational aircraft as an advanced trainer, for which it is not that suited.


User currently offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7637 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4943 times:

1 point about the MIG21, is that it is still basicly the same generation as the F104, Lightning, Mirage 3 etc.

Accident rates were much higher then.


User currently onlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4720 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 13):
It found that many Soviet aircraft of that era had nasty handling characteristics, so the OP's report of lots of MIG-21 crashes wasn't really a surprise to me.

Not really the best source for that assumption. When the guys flying them were basically flying a completely foreign to them piece of equipment with no training for type of course they "handle bad".


User currently offlineTripleDelta From Croatia, joined Jul 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4606 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting seahawk (Reply 16):
True but it seems like many accidents happen during landing. Many bird strikes, which the 21 does really not like, and many pilot errors. But that is not surprising as the Indian training system is not up to speed and the MiG 21 is used as much as an operational aircraft as an advanced trainer, for which it is not that suited.

Remind you of a similar aircraft in German service?  The Starfighter was designed with the same performance principle in mind, had the same low speed issues - and suffered greatly from a politically-forced rapid introduction into service that eventually culminated in the loss of almost 30% of the entire fleet (most of which in the first years of service).

However, the arrival of Johannes Steinhoff had turned the Starfighter force - and indeed the entire Luftwaffe - into a smooth-running model of efficiency which it is still today. Drawing a comparison with India, the problem appears to lie more, as you said, in the deficiencies of the entire AF system rather than the issues of the aircraft itself. MiG-21 losses - like those of the Starfighter - are just symptoms of a rotted command structure.



No plane, no gain.
User currently offlineaklrno From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 945 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4297 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 18):
Not really the best source for that assumption. When the guys flying them were basically flying a completely foreign to them piece of equipment with no training for type of course they "handle bad".

About 20 years ago when US-USSR relations were thawing (maybe later and it was US-Russia), some US pilots went to Russia to fly some late model Russian planes, and Russian pilots came to the US to do the same. The Russian pilots weren't allowed to fly F15s or F16s, but instead they got to fly F4s. When a reporter asked a Russian pilot what he thought of the F4 he said "it handles like a steamboat."


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12589 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4205 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 18):
When the guys flying them were basically flying a completely foreign to them piece of equipment with no training for type of course they "handle bad".

Not sure you'd reach the same conclusion if you read the book...



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 1992 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 4144 times:

Article briefly touched upon the main reason for so many crashes.

IAF lacks good basic trainer aircraft. For too long they depended on a domestic built basic trainer, which is no where close to Mig-21 capabilities.

IAF purchased BAE Hawk, which is an advanced trainer aircraft. Missed the point.

Finally last May IAF purchased 112 x Pilatus PC-7s. They are supposed to get 2 per month. Probably too late to save any Mig-21s but good to have a basic trainer, when most of the pilots are young.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Problems With India's Mig-21
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Another MiG 21 Crash In India! posted Sat Feb 21 2004 13:40:47 by IndianFlyboy
India Defense Minister Flies In IAF MIG-21 posted Sat Aug 2 2003 00:29:39 by Gamps
End Of The Line For The Mig-21... posted Tue May 7 2013 07:57:30 by alberchico
Mig-21 & A4 Most Influential Fighter Designs? posted Fri Feb 4 2011 12:04:40 by faro
Riat 2010... Not Looking Good? (Mig-21 Dropped) posted Mon Jun 21 2010 10:47:02 by l33roy94
Video: Flying In A MiG-21 posted Wed Feb 21 2007 17:57:52 by A342
2 F-16's And A MiG-21 For Sale On EBay... posted Mon Sep 19 2005 18:13:55 by USAFHummer
MiG-21 Name posted Thu Aug 18 2005 23:21:47 by Kukkudrill
Another Indian Air Force MiG-21 Crashes posted Tue Mar 8 2005 12:01:36 by VictorTango
Lockheed Wins Planes Deal With India posted Fri Feb 11 2005 02:38:38 by Aseem

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format