Two former LanceR pilots in the Romanian Air Force kindly accepted an interview for the blog. V. has already been interviewed on his experiences in MiG-29 and MiG-23, and participared in the development of the Sniper variant. His colleague P. was one of the top graduates of his promotion, and started flying MiG-21MF in 1978. In 1996 he joined the Supersonic Aviation Training Center in Bacau, and became an instructor in the LanceR.
1. What do you think were the strong and weak points of LanceR?
Strengths of modernisation:
- navigation accuracy
- aiming system
- ease of launching A/A missiles
- DASH 3 - Display and Sight Helmet
- mission preparation system
- mission debriefing system
The upgrade has also changed things that seem somewhat insignificant but are of major importance such as the colour in the cockpit. If before the LanceR we were used to a crude and somewhat disturbing green, with the LanceR we had a much more comfortable colour, namely grey. The reorganization of the entire cabin (which was extremely crowded making it difficult to see into the front hemisphere), resulted in the release of the left and right side of the HUD display allowing a much improved and helpful visibility. As the aircraft and engine had a number of in-flight operating restrictions, these and other restrictions were managed by a verbal annunciator which made it easier to keep the flight and safety elements under control, allowing the pilot to concentrate on the combat aspects to a much greater extent. For the first time the Romanian pilot was confronted with what is now called SA (Situational Awareness), realising the tactical configuration in which the flight was taking place and trying to act accordingly.
The weak point remained as before the upgrade the low flight range.
2. Can you describe the upgrade in terms of:
a) Sensors performance (EL/M 2032M radar compared to the old one)
The MMRC was far, far above what we had on planes in the country at the time. The unmodernized MiG 21 had an RP21 radar that could hardly see a target at a distance of up to 20 km and missile launch was below 5 km.
V. The MiG 23 had an outdated multi-mode radar which did not define the intercept phases as the LanceR did and whose performance was relatively good but not compared to the Westerners. And the range was relatively good but the R23 missile we could not fired because the radar locked on the target only below 30 km.
The MiG 29 had an multi mode radar better than that on the MiG 23 for guiding the R-27 R in head on/rear hemisphere engagements .We could see 10 targets and locked one of them (STT- Single Target Track). Compared with the radar on the LanceR this one was far ,far behind it on all aspects. The Elta 2032 radar had A/A ,A/G and A/S submodes of operation and all the presentation of the information to the pilot was very easy to understand and friendly to operate. On the right side and down there was a block of info for the pilot related to the target- Type, closure speed, azimuth, presentation angle, altitude, etc.
b) Range of air to air missiles and other armament
R3S, K13M, R-60M, Phyton 3 and R-73.
c) Situational awareness
The term SA has come to be much better understood with the exploitation of the avionics on board the LanceR which incorporates enough information on the HSD (Horizontal Situation Display) page and not only . Specialized avionics engineers who became system engineers with the new on-board architecture were adjusting the information received from the specific departments to populate these subformats with information from which the pilot could understand the tactical situation and the threats to be taken into account in the execution of the mission. The FEBA - Front Edge Batlefield Area subformat accurately positions on this format the limits and combat ranges of the ground/air threats in the area of interest ensuring the pilot's survival in the context of these threats and their maximum range. This legacy is now perpetuated among F-16 pilots whose avionics are very similar to those of the LanceR.
d) Ease of flight/automatization of the cockpit
HUD, DASH and HOTAS increased flight comfort, along with a host of MFCD/MFD navigation sub- formats as well as cockpit ergonomics greatly improved flight quality and ease of flight.
3. MiG-21 LanceR was the world's first widely used operational aircraft which incorporated a HMD (Helmet Mounted Display System). Can you comment on its performance/advantages?
P. didn't have anything to compare it to but compared to the DASH 3 the following headsets were maybe just less heavy because he doesn't see what else he could add on the display. Maybe colourful presentations.
T. I can instead compare this helmet to the SLEM on the MiG-29 which was a simplistic and late 80's level targeting system that was extremely effective in conducting close air combat with easy launch of missiles intended for these missions - R-60M and R-73. In fact, on the 29 was a monocular that lowered to the eye level and with the help of sensors in the cockpit could direct the seeker head of the missile from the beam in the maximum field of view (+/- 20° and +/-45° respectively) preparing it much faster for launch without the need to manoeuvre the aircraft in the boresight. This was also the great advantage of this aircraft, an advantage maintained until the Westerners developed this system to today's level, which far exceeds the initial level achieved by the MiG29.
4. LanceR could use both Western and Eastern AA missiles like Python and R-73. Was there any preference of one over the other (stocks/effectiveness/useful life)?
The technical-tactical capabilities of the R-73 missile were superior, but it is difficult to establish how these qualities were really because in a close air combat there are many factors that must be taken into account, one more important than another and perhaps more decisive in the finality of the action.
And of course missiles were used whose expiry date was close to, if not exceeded, and this could have some influence on the conclusion here.
5. Was there any system that was planned to be integrated but left out (Data link, long range AA missiles, new cockpit glass as in MiG-21 Bison?
The LanceR had a much more advanced cockpit than the Bison. The BVR A/A missile was the only one that was still to be integrated, but it was dropped because the program was over budget. But the cockpit configuration and avionics architecture was far beyond the level of the Indian Bison.
But perhaps the most important and advanced was the data transfer system (DTS) which was done with a flash memory from which you transferred to the system everything you prepared in advance for the mission on the ground - from changing radio channels to the sequence of change of display management on the 2 MFCDs/MFDs almost anything you could manage in advance and transfer to the aircraft - navigation elements, combat employment, electronic warfare etc. Post flight analysis ( using VRGE - Video Recording Ground Equipment ) was an extremely advanced way to interpret the flight and streamline each mission. And let's not forget that even close air combat was possible to be instrumented because upgrade included this aspect.
6. Some of the upgraded LanceR were M models. Was there any difference in performance once upgraded to LanceR (vs the MF)?
The engine on the MF variant was better and more powerful than the one on the M. That's why all the LanceR C variants were with Tumansky R13-300 MF engines which had 63.7 kN compared to the Tumansky R11-F2Sk 300 engines on the MiG21 M variant which had only 60.8 kN in afterburner mode.
7. What was the typical range of the Elta EL/M 2032 vs large bombers and fighters? When detecting fighter aircraft, could you see a difference between types with higher and lower RCS (F-15 vs F-16)?
P. recalls that on larger targets (such as the IL-28) they also appeared at distances greater than the 150 km maximum range of the MFCD intercept format. For small ones with a small RCS (3 m² like the MiG 21) the target could be seen at distances of 60 - 70 km at altitudes of 4000 - 6000 m and towards 80-85 km at higher altitudes.
V. When I was in the upgrade program the Israeli pilot who flight tested the performance of the radar asked me to fly as a target in a hilly region at heights of 3000-5000 m and told me from what distance he could see me. I was pleasantly surprised when he told me he could see me at 70-75 km. Obviously I was comparing the radar capabilities of the MiG 29 and was pleased to find that the radar on the 21 was far beyond the capabilities of the 29 version 9-12 we were flying.
8. What was the most challenging mission/sortie you flew?
A weather search (before each flight day/night it was customary to do a weather search of the flight area to determine which variant of the flight plan to fly).
Usually this was done by two-seater aircraft and at that time I was with the regretted N.S. I had seen enough heavy weather before but not over such a large area and with turbulence and precipitation of such intensity to freeze the blood in your veins....
9. How did the reliability of the new systems compared with the old one? Were there any initial/teething issues with the upgrade?
P. remembers that there were some problems with the converters that had reliability problems in the beginning.
V. As far as I remember at the beginning these converters were imported from China where they were used on the J-7 variants they were flying but apparently it was not the best choice and then they were replaced by some produced by Auxilec from France and the problems solved themselves. The integrator did not compromise on flight safety issues.
10. How many hours did you typically flew per year?
P. More and never less than 90 hours.
V. Compared to us, they flew a lot more. We were flying 40-50 hours at 29 when we still had enough reserves and spares. As they got shorter and shorter, the number of flying hours decreased so that eventually the number of flying hours decreased that we were forced to divide the pilots flying this aircraft into two groups.
11. What was the maximum speed/altitude you reached?
The LanceR variant no longer used the High Altitude Helmet and the High Altitude Compensation Suit (CCI) and had a maximum flight ceiling limited to 14500 m and a maximum speed of M=1.8. For flight safety reasons I did not exceed them.
12. How fast could you take off in a scramble?
Because we don't equip ourselves as we used to with the High Altitude Helmet and the High Altitude Compensation Suit when scramble (QRA) was done, the time was around 6-8 minutes and this was for the alignment of the navigation system.
13. What about setting up a logistical chain from Israel? Was it complicated? Did the spare situation improve following the upgrade?
There was never any question of making a logistical supply chain with Israel. There was no need. Very professionally, the equipment had a very good MTBF (as Elbit had made known) compared to that on board the non-upgraded aircraft. So the only things we could always think of to have were tires, batteries and seat cartridges as we had fuel for flying.
14. Were there other countries interested in the upgrade? At that time Aerostar also overhauled Croatian MiG-21s
Other users' intentions were but they only wanted small very small upgrades and others gave up. Some only added a transponder and another radio but only for a small number of aircraft. And maybe we didn't do enough to make potential customers, whoever they were, more interested in such an upgrade.
15. Did the upgrade allow more hours to be flown due to easier maintenance/higher reliability of avionics?
Generally no. The concept of avionics operation has required changes in the way avionics are used but I don't think that modernization has led to an increase in flight hours, but it has changed the way maintenance and ongoing avionics related work is performed by adding new concepts such as today's Operational Levels O , Intermediate level I and Depot level D ….and many more..
But as I have already said, the reliability of the new equipment was far superior to the classic one and this had an overwhelming importance in the good training of the LanceR pilots.
16. Is there any anecdote you would like to share before finishing the interview?
These are some of the best anecdotes ...me in the front cockpit of a LanceR B., or in the prototype of A/G variant sn 9809 and a DASH 3… and some pictures with memories related to LanceR.
Other interviews:
I am always looking for more
veterans, active members or people related with the defence industry to
accept interviews. If you enjoyed reading the material and would be
happy to accept an anonimous interview you can get in contact with me.
My e-mail can be found in this link at the heading. Otherwise leave a
message in the comment sections.
- Interview with a former GCI/WPN controller in the French Air Force
- Interview with a Chieftain veteran
- Interview with a former Leopard 2A4 gunner in the German Army
- Interview with 2 Romanian MiG-23 pilots
- Interview with a former M48 commander in the National Guard of the US
- Interview with a former M-84 commander
- Interview with a former Merkava tanker
- Interview with a former Abrams tanker
- Interview with a former M60A2 "Starship" tanker
- Interview with a former Centurion tanker in the Army of Australia
- Interview with a former Type-59 tanker in the Army of Albania
- Interview with a former Leopard 2 tanker in the Army of the Netherlands
- Interview with a former Romanian MiG-29 pilot
- Interview with a former M60 tanker
- Interview with a former Pakistani Army Type-59 tanker
- Interview with a former Leopard 1 tank commander in the Army of Canada
- Interview with a former Merkava tanker
- Interview with a former M60A1 tanker
- Interview with a former M60/Abrams tanker
- Interview with a former Olifant tanker
- Interview with a former Challenger tanker
- Interview with a former M551 Sheridan driver
- Interview with a former Centurion tank driver in the Army of Sweden
- Interview with a former Centurion tanker in the Army of Denmark
- Interview with a USAF pilot who flew the F-106 Delta Dart
- Interview with an US Army M48A5/M60A1 veteran tanker
- Interview with a former British artilleryman and veteran of the Gulf War
- Former M60 tanker in the Army of Austria
- Former Chieftain crew member
- Former Chieftain gunner
- AMX30 commander of the Army of France
- NCO of the Army of Serbia
- Former crew member of Challenger 2
- Former Leclerc commander
- T-72 driver in Czech Army
- US Army M60 tank crewmman
- Interview with D., former US Army tanker with experience in the M60 and M1 Abrams
- Interview with Stefan Kotsch, former NVA/Bundeswehr tanker
- Interview with former Marine and writer Kenneth Estes
No comments:
Post a Comment