Red Flag. We were
flying as part of Red
Air with the callsign
‘Fulcrum’.”
On exercise,
they went to the
northwest of the
training area and
surprised the Blue
Air side with a beam
approach from very
low level.
Sadzulewski
continued: “They
noticed us, but
thought we were
other F-15s and
continued to prepare
for their air-to-ground
role. When the first
‘kills’ were passed it
was too late for them
to react.
“Since we had
no AAR [air-to-air refuelling]
capability with our MiG-29 we
were allowed to land in Tonopah
Test Range airfield for refuelling.
“During that time most of our
opponents went back to Nellis.
The Red Air F-16s used AAR to
stay in the area. After departing
from TTR we met with those guys
for a DBFM [defensive basic flight
manoeuvres] sortie and return to
Nellis.
“For most of the Red Flag
participants, it was the first air-to-
air contact with the real MiG-29.
Despite threat simulation with
the F-16, they totally agreed that
nothing is better than to fight the
‘real thing’.”
In May 2000, the MiGs returned to
North America to take part in Maple Flag in
Canada. During this exercise the Fulcrums
were on the defender’s side, and the
pilots’ training with the F-4Fs of their sister
squadron paid dividends. Sadzulewski
recalled: “When we were ‘spiked’ we had
to react in a defensive way to avoid being
killed by an AMRAAM [AIM-120 Advanced
Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile] shot.
During the debriefing a F-15 pilot told me
that I managed to defeat four AIM-120s.” He
attributed his success to good situational
awareness – the result of daily training withthe F-4Fs of their
sister squadron at
Laage. “They had
the APG-65 [AN/
APG-65 All-Weather
Multimode Airborne
Radar System] of
the F/A-18 installed
and were able to
shoot the AIM-120.
So we got a superb
knowledge of when
to turn in terms of
distance, altitude
and aspect angle
when faced with an
AMRAAM threat.”EXERCISES
The Fulcrums
returned to North
America several
times over the
next four years to
participate in various exercises,
including Agile Archer in 2002
and Sniper in 2003. During
the latter, which took place at
Eglin AFB in Florida, the MiGs
were flying against drones with
their R-73 and R-27 missiles.
Exercises involving different
adversaries at Deci and other
NATO bases continued apace.
The main opponents for the
MiGs were F-16s (450 flights),
F-15s (more than 400 flights),
F/A-18s from different nations
(almost 350 times). The Mirage
2000 or the JAS-39 Gripen were
less frequently used.
F-4Fs or Panavia Tornado
F.3s did not play an important
role in the DACT with the MiG-29G.
Oberstleutnant Michael Wegerich, who
led the integration of the Soviet fighter
into the Luftwaffe said : “The MiG-29G
was able to maintain its advantage against
the Mirage 2000 and F/A-18 better during
high-speed combat and achieved a higher
angular speed.
“F-15s were similar to the MiG-29G if
they did not carry conformal and/or other
additional fuel tanks. If they did carry
additional fuel tanks, they had poorer
manoeuvring qualities. F-16Cs, especially
Block 30/40, slightly exceeded theAbove: Oberstleutnant Peter Steiniger
was operations officer with the MiG-29
squadron at Laage. In common with many
of the Luftwaffe pilots, he originally flew the
McDonnell Douglas F-4F Phantom before
converting to the Fulcrum. Peter Steiniger
Top: Looking through the Head Up Display
(HUD) of a MiG-29, which is in formation.
It was considerably more sophisticated than
those on the MiG-21 that many of the NVA
pilots had been used to. Peter Steiniger
Below: From September 3 to 17, 2003,
MiG-29s detached to Deci for exercises
with Israeli Air Force F-15Ds of 106 Sqn.
Peter Steinigerhttp://www.aviation-news.co.uk 2926-30_german_migs_part_2DC.mfDC.indd 29 01/03/2018 17:04