We Fly Dangerously Little. We Urgently Need a New Type of Fighter Aircraft!
Major General Rumen Radev. Deputy Commander of the Bulgarian Air Force and Chief of the Integration Project Team, Charged with Choosing A New Type of Combat Fighter Aircraft speaks to NATO&Bulgaria magazine and Club Wings magazine



General, last December a delegation led by you visited Slovakia and Poland and studied the modernization program of the MiG-29 fighters in these two countries. What are your conclusions, as regards the modernization of the Bulgarian MiG-29s?
We definitely saw and learned a lot of useful things. The problems of the Bulgarian Air Force (BAF) run deeper than the lack of modernization of the MiG-29s.
At present, we have to quickly free up some of the radio frequencies for civilian needs. The way we are going to do this – whether by upgrading the MiG-29s, or by acquiring a new type of fighter aircraft, will have enormous consequences for the future of our fighter aviation and the combat capabilities of the Armed Forces for many decades. Thus, we must conduct a detailed analysis not only of the technical and financial aspects of the upgrade of the MiG-29s, but also of all other factors – technical, operational, and financial, which will determine the overall future development for the next 15 years, at least, until the rest of its life cycle.
The Integration Project Team, of which I am the leader, is charged with conducting a complete analysis of the two options: the modernization of the MiG-29 with its subsequent maintenance, or its replacement with a new type of aircraft. Our analysis clearly shows that replacing the MiG-29 with a new type of aircraft is the better option, in all respects – operational, time related and financial.
Yes, but you know that other NATO and EU countries have opted to keep their MiG-29s and invest in them. Clearly, there must be good reasons for that?
This is a very hotly debated issue, but the appropriate thing to do would be to present the information correctly. Four of the six EU and NATO countries (Germany, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Romania) which used to rely on MiG-29s in the past, had them decommissioned, and replaced by other aircraft, mostly new ones; only two countries (Slovakia and Poland) decided to upgrade their MiG-29s.
The reasons why some countries had replaced the MiG-29 have to do with the need to invest significant resources in their maintenance and use, after upgrading them to NATO and ICAO standards. The processes of modernization of the Slovak and Polish MiG-29s began quite early, in 2003-2004. At such an early stage in their life cycle, it was considered cost-efficient; a hypothetical modernization scheduled to begin today and finish around 2018 is an entirely different matter. In addition, Poland already has 48 new F-16 Block 52s, and Slovakia is looking for a replacement of its MiG-29s.
Does this mean that you do not support the modernization of the Bulgarian MiG-29s?
I don’t want to sound like anti-MiG-29 at all. This is the type of aircraft I have been flying on since 1990, an aircraft I appreciate immensely, and which forms the backbone of our Air Force. But if we want to take the best from this aircraft, we must be objective about it, and realistic about its actual capabilities, maintenance costs, and future options.

In this regard, there exist 3 myths about the MiG-29, which are rather popular in the media and in various publications, including your magazine. Such myths, to put it mildly, do not contribute to finding a rational solution for the continued operation of these aircraft in our country.
The first myth is that MiG-29 possesses modern combat capabilities and is (allegedly) better than many of the more modern fighters. I wish that were true, but the truth is different. Except for its excellent maneuverability and toughness, the MiG-29 has very little to offer in a modern-day air force operation. As regards capabilities, it has serious deficiencies in a number of critically important aspects. Just to mention some of the problems - communications, navigation and target identification, communications protection, exchanging and displaying tactical information, range, effectiveness and precision in engaging air and ground targets, all-weather capability, multi-target capabilities, computer processing power, self-defense systems, targeting systems, cockpit design, precision weapons, range and endurance, tactical and planning systems on the ground, etc. The technological abyss between our air force and those of countries using modern fighters is really huge and widening, with each passing year. The worst thing is that all this affects the pilots and their ability to benefit from modern advanced training models, without which success in modern-day air operations is unthinkable.
But isn’t this the exact reason why other countries modernize their fighter aircraft, in order to compensate for these deficits?
This is the second myth. Although different, in the sense of technology and execution, both the Slovak and the Polish upgrades overcome just some of the capabilities deficit and only solve the issue of communication systems compatibility, navigation and identification, as well as communications protection. Such an upgrade, in our case, would amount to about 150 million levs, a serious amount of money. Unfortunately, this would not contribute much to the combat capabilities of the aircraft. In reality, the money would be spent on navigation and identification capabilities, basically to make them use different frequencies. In order to achieve increased combat capabilities of the MiG-29s, they need a number of other significant improvements - improved airframe, tactical information exchange and display, modern multifunctional radar and computer, integrated targeting sensors, automatic targeting systems, a new helmet system, integrated precision weapons, a complete overhaul of the cockpit, etc. In short, this would not be just an avionics upgrade, as in the case with Slovakia and Poland, but a deep modernization, in accordance to the tasks we are expected to perform. If the MiG-29 is going to remain our only type of fighter aircraft until 2030, then such complete modernization would be unavoidable.
The big problem is that such a complete modernization would cost hundreds of million levas; and still we will not achieve some of the capabilities, while others would remain problematic, due to a number of technological and licensing limitations. Considering that after such a massive modernization (if it takes place at all) the aircraft would only be used for about another 10 years, we are left with the big question about the cost effectiveness of such a massive investment.
The fact that many countries regularly upgrade their fighters is a different matter. With the introduction of modern open architecture computer systems and digital data busses, updating the software and some of the hardware every 3-5 years has become standard practice. This saves a lot of money and the effect on combat capabilities is very impressive. In our case, we have not upgraded a single bolt in 25 years, and now we have to do everything at once. This is a difficult, costly and risky endeavor.
What about the third myth?
The third myth, which is being actively pushed with the help of a number of your fellow journalists, is that the MiG-29 is the cheapest possible solution, since, you see, it could fly until 2029, so we only need fuel.
On the contrary – MiG-29 is a very expensive solution, for a number of reasons. It is true that it might be able to fly until 2029, but this only applies to the airframe. The big problem with the MiG-29 is that the life cycles of the engines and of the other important aircraft components, are very short. So, for example, after every 350 flight hours, each engine must be removed and sent to Russia for overhaul, and when it reaches 1200 flight hours it has to be thrown away and replaced with a new one. The situation with the other aggregates is similar. The landing gear, ejection seats, and a number of other components must be regularly replaced. The airplanes require mandatory maintenance every 1000 flight hours.
Everything is made even more complicated by the fact that after this amazing aircraft was acquired in the past, it was left with almost no financing; we still managed to fly on it somehow, but it was only thanks to the incredible efforts and professionalism of the engineers and technicians – we are immensely grateful to them. There is another important fact – we have been flying very little for quite some time, so we have managed to stretch the periods between overhauls to the maximum. Unfortunately, this practice also has its limits and now we are on the verge of being unable to fly. The number of flight hours has been steadily falling for the last several years, and this tendency is not going to change this year despite the efforts and the priority financing allocated by the MoD. The reasons are not only financial, but also have to do with observing the terms of the maintenance and overhaul contracts for the engines and other components - their implementation has been postponed time and time again and has become almost unpredictable; this, in turn, has a negative effect on the planning and pilot training.
If we want to have 6-8 aircraft which can fly, we must sign maintenance and overhaul contracts, the cost of which significantly exceeds the total amount of budget for capital investment of the MoD for 2014. Things will get even trickier in 2015 – 2019, however. Then the airframes, the engines and other expensive components will reach their limits of 1000-1200 flight hours. If we want to continue flying this aircraft, maintenance will not be enough, we will have to start buying new components. We will need money - a lot of it. We will need at least 25 million levas – per aircraft! Additionally, by 2029 these components will have to be replaced several more times, due to their short life cycles.
If you draw the line and make the calculations, you will see that just the technical maintenance of the aircraft until 2029 will require a significant amount of money, even excluding upgrades, fuel, and new weapons systems (the replacement of which is long overdue). At present, all the media focus is on the modernization of the MiG-29, as if this is the most important, or the only problem. The most important problem of the MiG-29 is not its modernization, but its maintenance. Additionally, the modernization itself carries a number of legal, licensing and technological risks, and is unlikely to be completed within 2 years, as many people seem to hope.
If the decision to modernize the MiG-29 were taken, and the money were provided, it must be made crystal clear, that this would not be the end, but only the beginning of spending money. It would be a pity to waste a lot of money on aircraft, which would have to remain grounded most of the time, due to the impossibility to find money for their technical maintenance. We would also be left with no resources for the acquisition of a new type of aircraft.
Is there a way out of this situation?
To acquire a new type of fighter aircraft - the sooner, the better.
So, about this new type of fighter - how many of them are we talking about, and at what price?
We need at least 16 aircraft in order to be able to accomplish our tasks and conduct normal pilot training. I cannot comment on the price, but the analysis of a number of variants shows that under certain circumstances the price for acquiring and using 16 fighters, even new ones until 2030, is comparable to the price we would have to pay for upgrading and using the Mi-29s. The difference is that in 2030 we will own a completely paid-for, fully functional squadron of fighter aircraft with modern capabilities, while the MiG-29 will no longer be usable and we will have to start looking for a new type fighter once again.
There are many advantages to buying new fighter aircraft. First, we would solve, at once, the issues with the deficit of combat capabilities, compatibility and the freeing up of radio frequencies. Second, the new aircraft can be delivered - gradually, of course - sooner than the modernization of the MiG-29s could take place.
Third, calculations show some long-term financial advantages of such a decision. It is true that the initial price of acquisition is high, but the new technologies guarantee lower maintenance costs, which form a significant part of the overall price over the life cycle of the aircraft.
Let me give you an example with the engine of such an aircraft. The engine as a whole has no specific replacement cycle; the individual modules have their own ones. And the shortest cycles are 1500 – 2000 flight hours (and not 350 flight hours, as in the case of the MiG-29). Thus, the overall life cycle of such an engine is practically equal to the life cycle of the aircraft as a whole. The same is true for the other components, so the annual maintenance cost of such an aircraft is significantly lower, than that of a MiG-29. Another important factor is fuel efficiency, due to the new technologies. By 2030, the savings from fuel could amount to a total of 200 million levas. Fourth, there exists the potential benefit from massive offset programs and technological transfer, which could provide serious momentum to our economy and create jobs. There are many examples of significant economic benefits in other countries.
And last, but not least – our pilots will at last be able to train in a completely different technological environment, using a much more advanced training model, which is a prerequisite for modern combat capabilities.
What will be the fate of the MiG-29, then?
I cannot predict the future of the MiG-29. The team I am the leader of makes calculations, conducts analyses, makes conclusions and offers suggestions. The decision for the modernization of the MiG-29, and its subsequent maintenance, however need not be taken in isolation, but in relation to the decision for acquiring a new type of fighter aircraft, which should be the leading consideration.
One thing is sure – we will continue to need the MiG-29s for quite some time. We must treat them with respect and take good care of them. However, before we can answer the questions surrounding them - should we modernize them and how many of them we need, to what extent to upgrade and how long to maintain them, etc., first we have to take the decision about the new type of fighter – what type, when, how many, what capabilities.
Of course, the best thing for us would be to buy 16 new aircraft, and replace the MiG-29s at once; however, we must be realistic. This would be a significant financial effort for the country, and would not be an easy decision to take, especially at present.
It is very important, however to start the process, which will really and decisively transform our Air Force. One possibility is for us, as a start, to buy 8-9 of the new type of aircraft, while at the same time put our maximum efforts into optimizing the maintenance of the MiG-29s. At the next stage, depending on the future financial capacity of the country, we could acquire 8 more new aircraft. It is important that the total number of aircraft should not be less then 16.
Why is this number so important for you?
The minimum total number of aircraft is related to meeting the most important requirement – the necessary number of pilots, trained to the required standard. The minimum number of aircraft needed to achieve that is 16, in order to guarantee the minimum number of flight hours. These flight hours are among the most important things we have to achieve. We have become accustomed to flying dangerously little, in breach of any standards for annual minimum of flight hours. What is more – we somehow got reconciled to flying dangerously little. We have even begun to feel some kind of complacency and have continued to maintain our capabilities. We are, however, beginning to pay the price for that, because our reserves of the most important resource – pilots – have almost run out. Our most recent attempts to train young pilots to fly on the MiG-29 were a failure – there are just not enough resources for that. In order to train a young pilot safely, you need three times the flight hours that an experienced pilot needs to maintain his skills and go on duty. And we just cannot avoid going on duty. And so it goes on, until the day the system finally collapses. This day is fast approaching; we do not have the minimum necessary flight hours for the system to be able to reproduce itself.
At the moment, the average age of the pilots on duty is 38 years – this is the minimum age required for retirement after 15 years of service. Next year there will be only three pilots who are under the legal minimum retirement age. The average age of our pilots is increasing quickly, and this is very worrying. This is the real and most pressing problem with our fighter aviation, and not the modernization of the MiG-29s. This is a problem that must be solved quickly and in a responsible manner.
If we do not begin the process of acquiring a new type of fighter aircraft, albeit initially in reduced numbers, next year it may be too late. At present, even 8 new fighter aircraft would give us the opportunity to double the flight hours we can achieve with the MiG-29s. Our young, highly-motivated and smart pilots need to start training on a new fighter as soon as possible; we have many such young pilots. They should train in a completely different technological environment, using much more advanced training methods. Only this will guarantee that we are building a modern, effective, and efficient air force, capable of meeting the challenges of our times.
The decision to acquire a new type of fighter aircraft is a strategic one, and will allow the Bulgarian Air Force to look forward to a bright future. The future they deserve.

An interview by Dimitar STAVREV