Sample from the book eFka
MiG-21F in Czechoslovak service by Martin Janousek, included in the kit No. 11190 / MiG-21F in 1/48.
After retraining, the MiG-21F made a very favorable impres-
sion on me. Compared to the MiG-19, the 21 was more agile
in lateral control. Thanks to its smaller wingspan, its roll rate
was much better than that of the 19 or 15. But the turn radii,
both horizontal and vertical, were smaller on the 19. Overall,
it was more maneuverable. The MiG-19 could withstand higher
G-forces at lower speeds thanks to its swept wing.
From the beginning, we had a trainer available for retraining
on the 21, rst the MiG-21U without a periscope, then the US
and UM with a periscope. The periscope was a great benet
for the instructor, as it provided a view similar to that from
a solo aircraft.
Each type had its own characteristics. The rst modication
is usually the most successful, and each subsequent design
change worsened the ight characteristics. The EF did not yet
have autopilot, while the other versions did. The eFka was the
best in terms of piloting technique. Everything that was add-
ed to the aircraft worsened its aerodynamics. It was a trade-
o. On the other hand, the R-11F2S engines in the PF were
600 kg more powerful than those in the F. The same R-11F2S
engines were also used on the double seater. After the F came
the PF, which had 350 liters more fuel and had the most fuel
in its tanks of the entire series of 21s, but it was also the fast-
est in terms of landing speed. It maintained a speed of about
340 km/h, depending on fuel, of course. With the eFka, it
was 300-320 km/h. When ying through the distance, a speed
of around 400 km/h was recommended with a gradual loss of
speed. The MF had 290-300 km/h with SPS and about 500 liters
of fuel. The PFM was also nice. After landing, it was necessary
to stretch the airplane for aerodynamic braking. We held this
until halfway down the runway, when we passed the tower, and
then the nose wheel lowered itself. Those who rushed to lower
it only complicated further braking.
Crashlandings
Jaroslav Krýda
Year of birth: 1938
Joined the Air Force: 1957 VLU Prostějov, 1959 2nd Air
Force Base Hradec Králové
Air Force units he served in: 1959 5th Air Force Base Líně,
since 1969 test pilot
Aircraft he ew: C-105, C-11, MiG-15, MiG-19S and PM,
MiG-21 all versions, L-29, L-39
Total ight time: 3,500 hours in total, of which 2,100
hours were on MiG-21 all versions
As for the stability of the versions with and without a locator,
it diered slightly, but not as signicantly as with the MiG-19s.
The speed inputs for individual aerobatic elements were practi-
cally the same for both the MF and F versions. Of course, the
amount of fuel had to be taken into account. The F was denitely
more “lively” than the other versions, even though it had less
thrust on the afterburner. It did not have any tricky character-
istics when ying at high altitudes and speeds. This was due to
the adjustment of the ARU stabilizer arm. Therefore, it was not
possible to achieve a higher overload than 3 - 3.5G at speeds
from Mach 1.5 to 1.8. When maneuvering air combat exercises
were own, it was a “playground.” We ew at 50-100 m, and the
criterion was that 40% of the ight had to be above 5G. But we
ew with MF, which had SARPP, and it was possible to evaluate it.
From 1974, barospirographs were also installed on the Fs (they
could only record speed and altitude), and after each hopping,
the course of the ight was evaluated. The tricky part was when
someone got the wing into the so-called second mode, when the
airow broke away and became turbulent. This did not aect the
control forces in any way, but the aircraft stopped responding,
and the only thing that could be done was to change the angle
of attack to restore laminar ow. With the 21, you had to take
into account that below 700 km/h, it had to be handled more
gently, as the controls became softer. You could feel it, so you had
to ease up a little. And it didn’t disappoint; it was an excellent
aircraft. The limit was not to go below 400 km/h, but as long as
you didn’t switch to high angles of attack, it behaved like a Z-126
Trener. But switching to high angles of attack ended in disaster.
There was only one thing left to do – push the stick all the way
forward. The airfoils then cling to the wing.
But on the other hand, you could do various things with it. Once
I was supposed to y at M = 2.05 - 2.1. I took o and the dispatch-
er told me that there was no free space and that I should return
to base. I didn’t want to just burn fuel, so I tried to pull the plane
into a stall with afterburners and then turn o the afterburn-
ers. The 21 kept climbing until it reached zero speed, and then
it started to fall and roll over. Out of ve attempts to recover,
it rolled over twice into a loop and twice onto the right wing, but
I had to leave the stick loose so that the plane could catch itself.
It fell like this from about 9,000 to 5,000 m, where it caught itself,
and I let it run up to 900 km/h at 4,000 m, and the plane behaved
beautifully like a Trener. The plane could fall on its tail and noth-
ing happened. The engine was stable, nothing happened. I had
fun, it was wonderful. With the 21, you had to make friends with
it and try out in a reasonable way what you could and couldn’t do.
For example, you couldn’t take it at a speed of 550-600 and try
6G, it just wasn’t possible. It’s a great pity that we didn’t have
MiG-21bis in our country. I was very lucky to y as a test pilot for
the regiment. During short test ights (replacement of ailerons,
articial horizon, etc.), I had the rest of the fuel and ight time
to myself and could try out whatever I needed. But above all,
thanks to this position, I ew over 160 hours a year, which was
incomparable to the others.
When I ew the MiG-21F 0514 to Kunovice in 1983 I had fuel left
over, so I ew the entire demonstration set for them there. It’s
true that I drove the whole factory outside to watch. And at the
end of the demonstration, I tried to do a roll from a stall and land
from there, but I didn’t succeed, I couldn’t brake this F. Oh well,
so I nished the third turn and landed. Then I tried the same thing
at home in Líně with the MF, and there was an amazing dierence
between the two types. With the MF in a stall with the landing
gear up, I was chasing the stick all over the cockpit. The EF was
dierent, smoother. But even with the MF, I didn’t manage to
land like that; only Míra Lanči succeeded, he landed it. So that’s
how we played.
34
Sample from
the book
MiG-21F in Czechoslovak service
by Martin Janousek, included in
the kit No. 11190 / MiG-21F in 1/48.
For the kit ask your local or online retailer.
Please note that the book is written in Czech.
Only this sample article has been translated.
INFO Eduard34
September 2025