Military Heat

Algeria returns 15 MiGs due to quality issues

Writing by admin on Tuesday, 19 of February , 2008 at 10:31 pm

Algeria will return 15 Russian built MiG-29 SMTs back to Russia due to inferior quality of certain components and units. Deliveries of the aircraft started in March 2007 as part of a $1.28 billion contract for 35 units: 29 MiG-29 SMT and six MiG-29 UB trainers. After only 15 aircraft delivered Algeria decided to return the aircraft claiming that the quality of the delivered products is inferior to what was expected. It is possible that the Russians will offer Algeria the more advanced MiG-29 M2s or MiG-35s.

Comments (8)

Category: News

Tags:

8 Comments

Comment by mike

Made Sunday, 18 of January , 2009 at 12:56 pm

WJ20qU hi! how you doin?

Comment by jimo

Made Wednesday, 18 of February , 2009 at 8:32 am

why not purchase an F15E, & scrap the copy cat designs?

Comment by januz

Made Friday, 19 of June , 2009 at 5:26 pm

oh..so the NO RETURN, NO EXCHANGE doesnt work here..algerians why dont you come over to the US and check the hood of the F22s?

Comment by JIMO

Made Sunday, 28 of February , 2010 at 6:43 pm

It was their liquid filled guages, found out it was full of vodka, they found a decal that read: in case of emergency break glass, & all were broken.

[…] will choose Mig-29. Here plz read these: Algeria Returning Flawed Air Force Mig 29s to Russia Algeria returns 15 MiGs due to quality issues AFP: Algeria plans to return 15 fighter jets to Russia: report Russia to fly 34 MiG-29s that […]

Comment by Opzioni Digitali

Made Friday, 26 of July , 2013 at 8:44 pm

I am regular visitor, how are you everybody? This
article posted at this web page is really pleasant.

Comment by Lana

Made Wednesday, 20 of November , 2013 at 7:33 pm

The worst…. experts suggest Algeria may have opted instead for French Rafale fighters as France builds up its presence in the North African state, agh.

sites.google.com/site/empleosenguadalajara

Comment by P&W2cE

Made Sunday, 26 of January , 2014 at 10:21 am

I recently had the opportunity to inspect mid 90’s built SU-27’s as part of my job with Pratt & Whitney military engines here at Nellis AFB. What I found was some extremely low quality build of the entire SU-27 fighter. The engines use some very strange materials in their construction like non-Titanium fan blades that looked like stainless steel. Along with the stainless fan blades there was rust throughout the double walled section between the afterburner back to the nozzle which means they used what looked like stamped steel and not Titanium or even stainless but possibly Chromoly. I couldn’t tell for sure without pulling the nozzle to examine it but was not given the opportunity to do so.
I also noticed separation of the double wall insulated section between the after burner and the nozzle. These engines have very strange seems running the entire length between the AB and nozzle with some of the heat insulation showing in the split, these insulated sections were actually two piece units with two welded seems…again, very poor design. Any of our engines at P&W use a one piece milled (not cast) insulated section of a Pratt & Whitney developed ceramic type material or Titanium depending on the application, never do we use seems in any of our military or commercial designs.
On the skin and canopy of the SU-27’s the poor build quality was apparent, some of the canopies were actually separating from both sides of the frame and on one of the fighters there was a 2″ long separation with canopy glass still visible in the gap but on the other side it was pulling away at nearly 4″ long and it did have a slight air gap where there was no canopy but a very small slit about 1/16th of an inch wide and a few inches long. They used clear silicone to fill the gap!!! you could actually see the imprint of a finger they used to smooth out the silicone as if they were sealing a bathtub glass door enclosure to the tub. Scary!
The access panels for the internal equipment had anywhere from 1/8″ to almost 1/2″ gaps. The fit and finish on all gaps was terrible. Not to many people get a close up look at Russian military equipment but in the past 15 or so years during Red Flag exercises or visits by allies that happen to fly Russian equipment I was able to get up close looks at everything from German Mig-29’s, India’s SU-30’s and many fighters that the USAF now own like Mig-21’s, 23’s and even a Mig 25 along with SU-25’s,020/22’s and again the fit and finish, gap separation, canopy frames, distorted optics in their canopy glass are all 2nd rate manufacturing with poor designs. Engines that would never be found on any U.S. Military aircraft. Every one of these aircraft showed at different extremes poor design and manufacturing.
I would have to think the Russians are extremely poor when it comes to developing canopies for their fighters, I don’t think the Russians have anything like the F-22’s or even the F-16’s canopies that are basically one piece design with optical views that have no distortion at all.. The F-22’s canopy is pure art, the optical properties in such a complex design is near perfect with zero distortion while being able to automatically dim depending on the outside intensity of the sun, or if below clouds or at night. At night it will revert to it’s clear state. This “Computer Controlled, Electronically Charged” canopy can go from it’s darkest setting to crystal clear in less than a second and back again. In it’s darkest setting the canopy turns a rather beautiful bronze color with the pilot not visible at all.
When you are used to being around planes that are extreme designs that when you close your eye’s and run your hand along the side of it, but can’t feel a single gap like on the F-22 , then you get a good look at a Mig-29 or SU-27 with some very poor build quality, you can see why they can undercut the cost by millions compared to the cost of F-15’s, F-16’s, Typhoons or Rafales. There is a reason why the Mig-29, SU-27 class of fighters have such poor accident rates.
Even during Red Flag exercises the Russian made fighters have a poor mission completion rate and are short on range especially in the clean configuration. In many situations they have to call bingo fuel then break off the mission to hit a tanker. Unlike the F-22 which holds a Saudi Arabia amount of internal fuel, in excess of 26,000lbs.
I hope I cleared up some question some may have had or not about Russian manufacturing of high performance aircraft. What I’ve pointed out above is just a short list of the problems with the Russian way of design and manufacturing.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.