Talk:Mikoyan MiG-29

Egypt

This page has no mention of the Egyptian fleet of MiG 29 31.205.8.163 (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Eygpt has a newer generation version; see the Mikoyan MiG-29M article. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:11, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

US private MiG-29 (N129UB) in 2023

Flight and airfield photos of Isaacman's N129UB in a grey/white/black camo livery in 2023 are in this video: Astronaut Training and Starship - With Jared Isaacman and Tim Dodd Some discussion of performance in commercial use. More images before & after the time point; but the time point clearly shows the FAA N number. Video is not a valid source for improving the article but does show that N129UB is staying FAA-flightworthy and is still flying. N2e (talk) 01:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

N2e The aircraft in the video is actually N29UB. It appears that the N129UB registration has been applied to... something, but I'm not sure what to make of the FAA registration page as I've never seen anything like it. I actually saw N29UB at AirVenture in July. - ZLEA _T\^C 23:00, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

MiG-29B

Is there a source that shows that there is a MiG-29B? Looking at the ru wiki ru:МиГ-29, they seem to omit a MiG-29B. Additionally, p 44 of this source discusses MiG-29 product 9.12, 9.12A and 9.12B and describes all 3 as MiG-29 (NATO designation Fulcrum-A), rather than MiG-29A. It also describes a MiG-29A as product 9.11A, cancelled in 1976 (p. 19), in favor of the MiG-29 and prototypes were never built (p. 24). I don't see a MiG-29B in the index or by word searching the book. I think the MiG-29A and MiG-29B usages in this article are some kind of confusion with the NATO Fulcrum-A / B designations rather than what was actually built by Russia. Currently, MiG-29B is used 20+ times in this article and each instance has no citation. Is there a reliable book source that lists MiG-29B? --Dual Freq (talk) 01:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Dual Freq The IP that added the MiG-29B to the Variants section has self reverted the change. As for all of the other instances, I agree that they are probably mistaking the NATO "Fulcrum-A/B" for "MiG-29A/B". I would not be against removing all mentions of "MiG-29B" and add citation needed tags to any unsourced content.

Unrelated, but I removed a stray bracket from the external link in your comment because it was messing with my markup highlighter. - ZLEA _T\^C 16:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

OK, thank you. I think I fixed most of them, except the more recent Serbian ones that the 2006 source can not mention. They are not 29A and 29B, probably 9.12A and 9.12B, but no source as to which were purchased or from where. --Dual Freq (talk) 15:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)