Flying & fighting in the MiG-21: In conversation with Air Marshal Matheswaran


Small, fast and wickedly agile, the Soviet-designed MiG-21 was an extremely potent warplane. For two decades it formed the backbone of the Indian fighter force. We spoke to Air Marshal M Matheswaran (retd) about what it was like to fly and fight in the MiG-21. 


When did you first fly a MiG-21 and what were your first impressions? 

I began flying the MiG-21s in 1976. At that time it was the prime aircraft in the Air Force. Quite obviously it was great to be selected to go into a MiG-21 squadron. First impressions – fascinating, sleek, and fast.

What were the greatest limitations of the MiG-21? 

None really. Particularly in performance, considering that period and environment. However, since it was truly light it carried limited fuel. Hence, range and endurance was low, as we entered the mid 80s and 90s.


What were the best qualities of the MiG-21? 

Small, low visual and radar signature, agile, excellent acceleration, and good thrust-to-weight ratio.

How would you rate the MiG-21 in terms of: 

Acceleration? Excellent

Sustained turning? Good

Instantaneous turning? Excellent.

High altitude performance? Good


Which aircraft have you ‘fought’ in training exercises? Of these which were the most formidable fighters? 

Mirage 2000, MiG-29, MiG-23 MF, Gnat, Jaguar, and a few others. MiG-29 and M2000 were the tough ones.

It could go supersonic at low level, out-accelerate the Mirage 2000 (hence F-16) at low level. It had a very powerful engine with a second reheat, a good sighting system and a good radar” 

What tips would you offer for ‘fighting’ these types?   In air-to-air combat performance the MiG-21Bis can hold itself. The Mirage 2000 and the F-16 would outlast due to longer endurance, better radar and also in strike role. 

Mirage 2000 pilot interview: Cutting it in the ‘Electric Cakeslice’ 

Do you believe the MiG-21 was the right choice for the IAF, what alternative fighters could have been procured at the time? 

The MiG-21 was chosen in 1963. The US did not offer any, and its best at that time – the Phantom – was not available. However, the Phantom would have been better suited to the strike role. The F-104 was not a patch on the MiG-21. India had French and British aircraft for strike role. The MiG 21 was very good, particularly in air defence, and high altitude interception. Given the production and TOT advantages as well, the decision to go for MiG-21 was excellent.

Find out what it was like to fly and fight in the Lightning here.

 What equipment would you have like to have seen integrated onto the MiG-21? 

The question is too generic. You need to specify time and environment. Anyway, in the 90s we felt acutely the need to have HUD, a digital navattack system, and a new radar. This we did achieve by 2003-04, although 3 years late and some teething problems. Finally it was an excellent solution. The aircraft was called MiG-21 Bison. The ‘Fishbed’s major limitation was its lack of gyro-sight.


Did you fly the MiG-21 into combat? Would you have been confident flying it into combat?

I had mobilised for war at least three times. I did active ORP duties for many years in early career.

By 1999 Kargil war, I was too senior, and hence in senior operational management role.

What is the greatest myth or misunderstanding of the MiG-21? 

I suppose myth and misunderstanding were more about reliability . That was a fallacy, that Russian technology was unreliable. Russian technology was very robust and reliable, provided you ensured your inventory management and logistics well. In performance much of the myths came from Israelis victories against the Arabs. This was primarily due to poor pilot skills and training. India evolved its own training methodologies and tactics development. Americans knew the aircraft well from their Vietnam experience. So finally any aircraft is only as good as the man behind the machine. The MiG-21, in its time, was an exceptional aircraft in good hands.

MiG 21 Indian Air Force [IAF]

Which variant of the MiG-21 did you fly? What were the various merits of the different Indian variants? All variants, starting from the Fishbed. The Fishbed (we called it Type 74) was very light, highly agile, and the most beautiful to handle, even in extreme low speeds. The subsequent versions became heavier, as they increased their internal fuel, more equipment etc. The MiG-21M was heavier, but had the same engine (R-11), as the Fishbed, and so became less efficient at low speeds. MiG-21MF had an improved radar and a more powerful engine (R-13), and so had similar performance as the Fishbed. The MiG-21Bis was the best of them, it was upgraded for multi-role operations. With wing tanks it had a good range. It could go supersonic at low level, out accelerate the Mirage 2000 (hence F-16) at low level. It had a very powerful engine (R-33) with a second reheat, a good sighting system and a good radar (Almaz). The Bis’s nose was heavier, and so its slow speed handling was slightly inferior to the Fishbed, but its other strengths made it a truly classy aircraft. The Bis was later upgraded to Bison, which was excellent.

Find out what it was like to be an RAF interceptor pilot here

How did the MiG-21 compare to the Mirage 2000? How would it compare with an F-16? In air-to-air combat performance the MiG-21Bis can hold itself. The M2000 and the F-16 would outlast due to longer endurance, better radar – and they are also superior in the strike role.

Everything you always wanted to know about Indian air power, but were afraid to ask: In conversation with Shiv Aroor

What advice would you give to pilots converting to the MiG-21? 

 It’s now too late. The MiG21 has been phased out. In any case, for a young pilot, off the training academy, the MiG21 is not an easy aircraft. It required the best of guys to be selected, those with above average skills.

Did the MiG-21 have any eccentric handling characteristics? 


What was your most memorable mission or flight and why?  

Many. However, I will name one. Quite early in the operational conversion syllabus one had to do the flight at the highest operational envelope height. So here I put on the supersonic suit, its pretty much the same outfit worn by Yuri Gagarin, and I did the supersonic profile. You climb to 16 km in a quick profile, accelerate to 2.1 Mach, and then zoom to 21km, and fly an interception profile accelerating from 1.8M to 2.1M. This part was dropped in later years (after the mid eighties). Quite obviously, later generation never got to wear the supersonic suit, except for those select few who flew the MiG-25.


What was the MiG-21 cockpit like? 

Quite fine for a design of its times. Compared to the F-16’s bubble cockpit, its rear visibility was limited, as was the visibility below the nose. The cockpit was old instrumentation and cannot be compared to today’s glass cockpit. Air-conditioning came on after take-off. On ground it was air ventilated. For Indian climates, it would be fairly warm on ground. However, did not matter for hardcore, passionate fighter boys.

Did you have confidence in the Russian armament and avionics? 


What was it like to fly the Mirage 2000? Find out here

How much variation was there in within the MiG-21 fleet, were certain aircraft better than others? 

Basic aircraft aerodynamics was the same. But differences included weight, thrust, and systems. Bis was the most different. For example it had Boundary Layer Control, which made a major difference in its approach/landing profile.

Which three words best describe the MiG-21? 

Light, agile, and excellent.


Special thanks to Angad Singh.

If this interests you, support with a donation (buttons above and below). If this goes well we’ll be able to give you much more! Recommended donation £15. Many thanks for helping to keep us impartial and independent. 

You may also enjoy 11 Cancelled French aircraft or the 10 worst British military aircraftSu-35 versus Typhoon10 Best fighters of World War II Su-35 versus Typhoontop WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to WarplanesFlying and fighting in the Tornado. Was the Spitfire overrated?

SAVE HUSH-KIT. Hush-Kit needs donations to continue, sadly we’re well behind our targets, please donate using the buttons above or below. Many thanks. I really hope Hush-Kit can continue as it’s been a fascinating experience to research and write this ridiculously labour-intensive blog.


The more you give the more we can give you 🙂

Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Guide to surviving aviation forums here



  1. sglover

    I like this site very much. You guys have put out some really terrific, original stuff over the years, and I want more! So I’m willing to chip in some money to keep it going.

    But I really really really don’t like using PayPal, mostly because I hate the thought of a single microcent of my money enriching Peter Thiel. The guy is arguably the closest thing living to a comic book supervillain, and I have zero desire to aid anything that comes out of his evil head. Have you guys ever considered using Patreon? Granted, the world being what it is, it might be that Thiel has his tentacles in that, too, via some financial engineering or shell company or something — but for the moment I’m not aware of it. So how about giving your donors the option?

    • Hush Kit

      Thank you very much! Delighted you’re enjoying it, I’m not the most techy person… working out how to install the PayPal button almost gave me a nervous breakdown so I’ll stick with that for the time being 🙂

  2. Irfan Masum

    There is no way MiG 21 could out speed Mirage at low level. I have flown the Mirage V and have clocked 750 kts at low level (660 kts being the Mach 1 at low altitudes)

    The Mirage tactics to engage with a MiG 21 were simple. Enter the battle area with high speed. Pick visual or radar contact and take a missile shot, if possibe. Then close in to gun range still maintaining high speed. Don’t engage in a turning batte and disengage maintaining high speed.

  3. Irfan Masum

    I would like to comment on the assertion “MiG 21 Bis can hold its own against Mirage 2000”

    I beg to differ for the simple reason that Mirage 2000 has BVR capability and an intelligent pilot flying it will never engage the Bis in close combat when he can shot him from 40 NM. Hence, in air superiority role the Mirage 2000 will always come on top.

  4. GM David

    I beg to differ with Masum. I have flown the MiG 21Bis and have flown at 1300Kmph which is just above 700 knots at tree top. The BVR Combat ranges vary from head on to as low as 2kms in a low level chase. So the kill zone in a BVR engagement is elliptical. The MiG 21 has a very low radar cross section. I am confident that a MiG Bis will holdout in a combat.

  5. Pingback: Flying & fighting in the MiG-21: In conversation with Air Marshal Matheswaran | Harpreet's Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s