Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 78

Thread: MiG-23MS and Mirage III/5

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Limousin France
    Posts
    970
    Quote Originally Posted by Sens View Post
    The combat took place at low level with weapons, where the Mirage III/5 had no speed advantage and the use of an AB for a little speed gain becomes prohibitive in terms of endurance or range. The Sea Harrier could loiter higher up to dive for the attackers when alerted. The attackers had just raw data about their surface target they had to engage and overcome the AD of that too. The defenders were well informed what the had to defend and to what sectors are the attackers were limited. None party had time for some maneuvring. The closing speed was >1800 km/h and so not much time was left for SH to engage the attackers in time or to distract them. Many times they managed to extract a toll from the disengaging force only. There was no time left to chase the attackers after weapon-release, because an unknown flight may have slipped in for the next attack on the target the SHs had to defend from that at first.
    The British had a typical problem of that time scale as well. The surface defences and the Harriers could not be operated in the same cube of space at the same time.
    The other way around, when the British had operated the Mirage III in the role of the SH they had come out even worse.
    I have said it before and I will say it again Argentina had a month to extend the runway as the British did after the war to operate the F-4's this would have allowed fighter operations and at the end of the day Argentina chose when to start the war and failed to plan propley for it i.e. a lack of exocet missiles the Runway at Stanley the lack of readiness of naval assets and so on and so on

    as for Sea Harrier it proved its self not only in combat but on a number of Ex's against a number of types including F-15 to be very good in A2A combat the reason no one builds subsonic fighter any more is that most air-forces have one type and need to use it as an interceptor first

    anyway this is not a Sea harrier v Mirage thread I only used Sea harrier to prove that speed is not the be all and end all of A2A combat

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    303
    No question that the British planning and execution was superior to the Argentine. My protest was merely to point out that it had nothing to do with the Mirage as such.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Was the Argentine command ever trialed for treason for failure of preparing air base on Falklands ?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Multirole View Post
    From what I understand the South African F-1s were inferior to the MiG-23 in radar and missiles due to the arms embargo against South Africa. F-1 also had inferior acceleration which reflected the lack of success the Iraqis had using it against Iranian F-14 compared to the MiG-23. The F-1 should be a better air superiority fighter with the right avionics and weapons, but with half the thrust it could not be the rough field capable pure interceptor the MiG was designed to be.
    looking at the iran-iraq war kills on ACIG..
    the Mirage F-1 was able to shoot down the F-14.
    no Mig-23 ever shot down an F-14. But dozens of Mig-23s shot down by F-14s instead

    Mig-23 saw more losses than Mirage F-1

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    402
    ^ many of them are mig-23BN

    and again this thread is mig-23 vs mirage deltas

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
    Posts
    1,214
    In combat, fighters "Mirage-3 'and MiG-21SMT - equal. Both aircraft are not able to conduct long-range air combat.
    In the melee, the MiG-23 is better by 18%.

    Name:  comparison.jpg
Views: 946
Size:  174.5 KB

    http://paralay.com/paralay_tab.xls
    Last edited by paralay; 1st February 2014 at 19:26.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Y-20 Bacon View Post
    looking at the iran-iraq war kills on ACIG..
    the Mirage F-1 was able to shoot down the F-14.
    no Mig-23 ever shot down an F-14. But dozens of Mig-23s shot down by F-14s instead

    Mig-23 saw more losses than Mirage F-1
    MiG-23 has two confirmed kills against F-14A, one on 11-Aug-1984, the other one on 17-Jan-1987

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    Was the Argentine command ever trialed for treason for failure of preparing air base on Falklands ?
    Argentina chose military means to solve a diplomatic dispute and hoped that the UK would not fight back, so no need to build the runway. They gambled and lost. Poor objectives from the junta and poor planning resulted.

    IF Argentinia had really been focussed on fighting and winning a war there are scores of things they should/could have done differently. The runway extension at Stanley is likely near the top of the list. Other things include waiting for more Super entendards/Exocets, more air to air refuelers, better employment of submarines, more targeting on support ship/oilers.....

    Anyway back to the MiG-23, ok it had a few victories, but I am just not seeing getting above an "average" ranking in the most impotant fighter characteristics except accelleration and top speed. Much like a F-104. Yes these are important characteristics for the intended role as a point defense interceptor, where the interceptor is scrambled, directed to the target (usually a bomber with limited manueverability) by ground based radar, and a slashing attack is made with missiles. When you get out of that scenario, most would score the MiG-23 with either poor or average grades in other fighting categories: maneuverabilty (poor), range (average), visibility (very poor), avionics (average?), armament (average?) Secondary categories of affordability rank well (often "free" to Warsaw pact client states), servicibilty (depends of whom you ask, western sources claim poor engine life, but likely a different philosopshy, and it could live out in the open with limited support), rough field capabilty (neat concept, but was it really ever used to advantage?).

    My conclusion is the MIII gets the edge in most categories over the MiG-23.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    .de
    Posts
    2,685
    Quote Originally Posted by paralay View Post
    In combat, fighters "Mirage-3 'and MiG-21SMT - equal. Both aircraft are not able to conduct long-range air combat.
    In the melee, the MiG-23 is better by 18%.
    why are you comparing the Mirage III with a more obscure later version of the MiG-21 - was the SMT ever exported?
    Surely it would be better to compare Mirage III with MiG-21 produced from the late 1950s end of 1960s - MiG-21F, PF or FL even?
    Last edited by Levsha; 3rd February 2014 at 15:52.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
    Posts
    1,214
    I was so comfortable. Significant difference will not : О

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Levsha View Post
    More or less true - the AIM-9L missile was the best out there at the time - although I don't think many AIM-9Ls were fired from the frontal aspect, or were they?
    None. IIRC all the AIM-9Ls which hit were fired from within the envelope of the UK's older Sidewinders.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  12. #42
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,495
    I confirm from playing Falcon on my Atari ST that you better fire the AIM9-L from the rear. Front shots very rarely worked, no matter what they said.

    AIM-9M works flawlessly from the front sector though, according to F16 combat pilot.

    Nic

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,933
    Quote Originally Posted by sandiego89 View Post
    Argentina chose military means to solve a diplomatic dispute and hoped that the UK would not fight back, so no need to build the runway. They gambled and lost. Poor objectives from the junta and poor planning resulted.
    ..
    My conclusion is the MIII gets the edge in most categories over the MiG-23.
    Remind me, please, which version of the MiG-23 are you talking about now?

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    MiG-23 has two confirmed kills against F-14A, one on 11-Aug-1984, the other one on 17-Jan-1987
    if unconfirmed, I've read up to 4-5!!

    although still.. in comparison

    Mirage F.1 killed more and lost less..

    the Mirage was Iraq's best cat killer. (relatively speaking)

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,919
    The Mirage F1EQ had ECCM to counter the AWG-9. It took Israeli help to overcome that hurdle and that was a good 16-18 months after F1EQ was operational. The pendellum didn't swing to the Iraqi side, it just turned into a high attrition game for the Iranians, a game they couldn't afford.
    Go Huskers!

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Quote Originally Posted by sandiego89 View Post
    Argentina chose military means to solve a diplomatic dispute and hoped that the UK would not fight back, so no need to build the runway. They gambled and lost. Poor objectives from the junta and poor planning resulted.
    I've always found history entertaining, but this has got to take the cake of all time,
    So Argentine rulers were betting that UK, one of 5 great powers, would shrug and carry on,
    i'm surprised a political parody wasn't made on this stuff, such as the brilliant ' Yes Minister '
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FRVvjGL2C0

  17. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Y-20 Bacon View Post
    if unconfirmed, I've read up to 4-5!!
    although still.. in comparison
    Mirage F.1 killed more and lost less..
    the Mirage was Iraq's best cat killer. (relatively speaking)
    The charts of the MiG-23 are greatly spoiled by the radar-less BNs which were primarily tasked with ground attack and did not have any serious means to cope with any enemy fighters, let alone an F-14A. OTOH, the advanced MiG-23ML was far from hopeless even against the Cat, the confirmed score against each other was 2:2, I think. In the end, it all comes down to equipment, force multipliers, tactics, situation and piloting skills.
    Last edited by MSphere; 4th February 2014 at 12:37.

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,919
    The Iraqis had good situational awareness from GCI officers, what they lacked were RWRs to cope with Hawk, Sparrow and Pheonix illuminators when operating on the fringe of their radar stations. Aircraft with RWRs faired very well against these systems.
    Go Huskers!

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,933
    What Iraqi aircraft except Mirage fielded RWR systems? As far as I am aware, F1EQ-1 thru F1EQ-4 used older Thomson BF system with pen-style fairings, while F1EQ-5 and F1EQ-6 had Sherloc with rectangular fairings on the fin. What about Iraqi aircraft of Russian design, did they have any SPO-15 or similar device in operation?
    Last edited by MSphere; 4th February 2014 at 14:45.

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    I've always found history entertaining, but this has got to take the cake of all time,
    So Argentine rulers were betting that UK, one of 5 great powers, would shrug and carry on,
    My original post on the Falklands was very brief, as this was a thread on the Mig-23, but there is quite a bit of more recent reserch indicating that the Junta was really hoping for a negotiated settlement- at least bring the Falklands/Malvinas debate to the worlds stage. Yes it was a diversion from problems at home, but analysis indicates that Argentina was hoping for a negotiated settlement. They were not planning on a full invasion, a full blown war with the UK or with a long term stay. This combined with a poor anaysis of the UK reaction and capability led to some poor planning and false assumptions, and a false analysis that the balence of power was in their favor. I did not mean to imply that they thought the UK would "shrug it off" (your words) and give up the Falklands without protest. I should not have said without a fight, but was trying to wrap up a complex conflict in a brief sentence- over simplified it. It is indeed a great case study of false thinking, poor allignement of goals and means, and other facots. One good overview is here: http://www.ironmaidencommentary.com/...lbums&lang=eng
    Last edited by sandiego89; 4th February 2014 at 14:51.

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Thanks @sandiego

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,527
    Quote Originally Posted by sandiego89 View Post
    ... It is indeed a great case study of false thinking, poor allignement of goals and means, and other facots. One good overview is here: http://www.ironmaidencommentary.com/...lbums&lang=eng
    False thinking indeed! For example,
    (1) To arrive before the 150th anniversary of British seizure of the Islands, to be celebrated in March 1983. Argentina hoped to thus avoid a burst of English nationalism.
    This alone shows the total failure of the Junta to understand what it was up against. The 150th anniversary would have passed by completely unnoticed in the UK. Nobody cared. Hardly anyone in the UK had heard of the Falkland Islands, let alone knew where they were, or how long they'd been British. The Junta projected their own thoughts & feelings onto Britain, instead of studying us. This is the greatest mistake one can make in any negotiation or struggle.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,896
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    [...]The Junta projected their own thoughts & feelings onto Britain, instead of studying us. This is the greatest mistake one can make in any negotiation or struggle.
    Excellent!

    Sadly, irrational thinking is not a copyrighted thing. Man can see some clear resurgence of the same type of erroneous behavior nowadays.

    But what are the points regarding the Mirage and the Mig?

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,527
    Sorry, I drifted off topic.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,919
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    What Iraqi aircraft except Mirage fielded RWR systems? As far as I am aware, F1EQ-1 thru F1EQ-4 used older Thomson BF system with pen-style fairings, while F1EQ-5 and F1EQ-6 had Sherloc with rectangular fairings on the fin. What about Iraqi aircraft of Russian design, did they have any SPO-15 or similar device in operation?
    I cannot find the sources yet, but IIRC the Su-20 and MiG-23ML had some form of hardwired rwr. The Iraqis also operated listening posts, which were critical for triangulation. The Iraqis were far more regimental in their methods whereas the Iranians were long on hardware but the leadership had a brain drain from internal purges.
    Go Huskers!

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    12,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest414 View Post
    I have said it before and I will say it again Argentina had a month to extend the runway as the British did after the war to operate the F-4's this would have allowed fighter operations and at the end of the day Argentina chose when to start the war and failed to plan propley for it i.e. a lack of exocet missiles the Runway at Stanley the lack of readiness of naval assets and so on and so on

    as for Sea Harrier it proved its self not only in combat but on a number of Ex's against a number of types including F-15 to be very good in A2A combat the reason no one builds subsonic fighter any more is that most air-forces have one type and need to use it as an interceptor first

    anyway this is not a Sea harrier v Mirage thread I only used Sea harrier to prove that speed is not the be all and end all of A2A combat
    Wishful thinking. The Argentinians did not, because they did not thought about something like British Force at Falklands in short notice. The British had several options to destroy a longer runway at Stanley if done by the Argentinians. The British traded time for lower losses, but it did not work always.

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,919
    Okay, I can only find sources showing SPO-3 and SPO-10 on MiG-23ML and Su-20. The MiG-25 and Su-22M3/4 had some SPO-15 which were capable of handling the Hawk and Phoenix illuminators. The F-1EQ-5/6 were the only models capable of handling the same illuminators. So only the heavier Russian aircraft were capable of detecting F-14 locking on.
    Go Huskers!

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Russia Evil Empire aka Mordor
    Posts
    157
    There is one BIG problem with this whole comparison the Mig23MS is a SEVERELY DOWNGRADED EXPORT VERSION AND MONKEY MODEL sold to non Warsaw pact non client states to foreign countries that cannot be trusted with keeping classified info on avionics because they also had relatively close ties with the West such countries such Iraq, Lybia ect. The weapons systems,radar,rwrand ecm of the Mig23MS are far inferior to a standard Soviet Airforce VVS or PVO Mig23 and should in no way be a generic measurement of Mig23 capabilities or worth as a fighter. The Mig23bis and later Mig23ML and Mig23MLD are much more capable than the far more primitive Mig23MS monkey model,its like comparing a F16A with F16E. The primitive Mirage 3/5 and F16A had no BVR capability while the Mig23bis,Mig23ML and Mig23MLD had a powerful radar with look down shoot down and IRST and excellent rwr and ecm systems and excellent BVR combat capability at which they could dominate primitive Mirage 3/5 and F16A with long range BVR hit and run attacks and superior speed of Mig23 and not even bother dogfighting with them.
    Even monkey version Mig23 that are far inferior to standard Soviet Airforce version that Syria used in 1982 war with Israel, those downgraded Syrain AF Mig23 performed quite well vs F16A
    Here are Syrian AF records http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig23

    On 7 June 1982, three MiG-23MFs (pilots – Hallyak, Said and Merza) attacked an F-16. Captain Merza detected the F-16 at a distance of 25 km and brought it down from 9 km. Two other F-16s then appeared. Merza fired a missile at one of them from 7–8 km and reported that the enemy was downed.
    On 8 June 1982, two MiG-23MFs again met with F-16s. Major Haw detected an F-16 at a distance of 20 km and shot it down from a distance of 7 km.
    On 9 June 1982, two MiG-23MFs, piloted by Captains Dib and Said, were sent to intercept targets east of Beirut. One of the pilots detected an F-16 and shot it down from a distance of 6 km.
    and records from Iran Iraq War were not bad either

    Iraqi MiG-23MS/MFs (fighters) were used in the first half of the war. They scored 8 confirmed kills and suffered 8 confirmed losses.
    MiG-23MLs (fighters) were used in the second half of the war. They scored 7 confirmed kills(include 2 F-14) and suffered 2 confirmed losses.
    MiG-23BNs (ground-attack variant) were successfully used against ground targets. In 22 September 1980, BNs were used in first combat sorties against Iran. Two F-4 Phantoms were destroyed at Mehrabad Air Base in BNs attack. In March 1986, more than 50 MiG-23BNs attack Iranian armored vehicles in the area Ahfaz, completely defeating the mechanized division. Iranians loss amounted to about 500 tanks and armored personnel carriers, mainly, M60 Patton and M113. However, up to 22 MiG-23BNs were downed by Iranian interceptors during the war. According to other sources, 16 BNs were lost during war, 13 of them in combat.
    Known Iraqi MiG-23 fighter pilot was captain Omar Goben. He shot down at least two Iranian planes flying a MiG-23 and three others with a MiG-21.

    If monkey models of Mig23 despite being far inferior to non export Soviet VVS models performed decently than the much more advanced Mig23bis,Mig23ML and Mig23MLD in the hands of much better trained Soviet VVS pilots would of performed much better vs those same adversaries. Also not all Mig23 have the same maneuverability, the Mig23MLD was much more manuverable than the early 70's model and export versions of the Mig23 and Mig23MLD maneuverability was much better than F14A and slightly better than F14D and better than the F35 at most speeds.
    Last edited by Tu 160; 7th February 2014 at 11:04.
    TU 160 STATISTICALLY IS THE LARGEST,HEAVIEST AND MOST POWERFUL COMBAT AIRCRAFT AND BOMBER EVER BUILT

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,527
    There were no Israeli F-16 losses on or near those dates.

    An A-4 was shot down on 6 Jun 82. Attributed to SAM by the Israelis.
    F-4 shot down 11 Jul 82.
    Ditto 24 Jul 82. Pilot PoW, WSO killed at ejection.
    Both attributed to SAM by the Israelis.

    I find it interesting that as far as I can discover, all the Syrian pilots who are claimed to have shot down Israeli F-16s in 1982 were themselves shot down immediately after their claimed kills.

    Given the history of information management under Hafez Assad & his son, I place much more trust in Israeli accounts of their own losses than Syrian accounts of Israeli losses.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by Tu 160 View Post
    those downgraded Syrain AF Mig23 performed quite well vs F16A
    Here are Syrian AF records http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig23

    On 7 June 1982, three MiG-23MFs (pilots – Hallyak, Said and Merza) attacked an F-16. Captain Merza detected the F-16 at a distance of 25 km and brought it down from 9 km. Two other F-16s then appeared. Merza fired a missile at one of them from 7–8 km and reported that the enemy was downed.
    On 8 June 1982, two MiG-23MFs again met with F-16s. Major Haw detected an F-16 at a distance of 20 km and shot it down from a distance of 7 km.
    On 9 June 1982, two MiG-23MFs, piloted by Captains Dib and Said, were sent to intercept targets east of Beirut. One of the pilots detected an F-16 and shot it down from a distance of 6 km.
    .
    I agree with swerve. Citing these wiki sources is suspect. The same wiki article states that there were numerous kills against F-16's and F-15's. I believe ACIG and other sources are more credible, but welcome other input. ACIG lists the F-16 claims as claimed/unconfirmed, and shows numerous Syrian MiG losses (all types). http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml
    Last edited by sandiego89; 7th February 2014 at 15:03.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES