MiG-23MLD vs F-16

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

nastle2000

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2004, 20:18

Unread post27 Nov 2004, 23:30

the MLD version is supposed to be a better dogfighter than the original MiG-23 ,as far as I know in the mid 1990s they were fitted with the AA-10and AA-11s ...some articles quote testpilots that this version was as good as the F-16 in agility ....
Offline

Dammerung

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 23:17

Unread post27 Nov 2004, 23:37

The MiG-23 MLD has a Gsh-23, can carry four R-60 and two R-24 Missiles. The R-24(AA-7?) is slightly superior to the AIM-7L, and it also has an IR Guided version, R-24T. Don't know about other versions. But It's safe to say it would get whacked by an F-16, as the AIM-120 out performs the R-24, and the AIM-9 Outperforms the R-60, and I'd assume the F-16 is more agile as well... It's probably a very good aircraft none the less, but it is 0 and 13...
Offline

fighter_pilot

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 10:20

Unread post28 Nov 2004, 10:20

The SAAF (South African Air Force) had a Mirage F1 badly damaged in a dogfight engagement against 1 MIG 23. The Mirage was vectored onto the MIG and proceeded into a storm climb to catch the bandit 6 o'clock relative to him. The MIG at the last moment saw him; turned toward and fired a short range missile (8nm- missile=?). The Mirage was hit by the missile's fragmentation, limped home with 1 system failing after the next. The superb South African pilot landed the aircraft, but unfortunately had brake failure. The resulting impact made the ejection seat fire and he was left paralysed.

It is true that the standard of the Mirage F1 in ground and air engagements against Soviet aircraft was extremely high- this example being one exception.
(This all happened during South Africa's war with Angola in the 80's)

David
Offline

pucara70

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2003, 21:24

Unread post28 Nov 2004, 15:09

Well, the MiG-23 MLD or Flogger-G, is a superb fighter and interceptor, but the F-16 is more agile and can do more manouvers in the sky. The AA-8 Aphid (R-60) is similar to any sidewinder version, except the brand new AIM-9X, and the AA-11 Archer and AA-10 Alamo are better than all the Sidewinder and Sparrow missiles, only the AMRAAM is better. In a real engagement the pilot would decide the combat, the machines are quite similar in possibilities, specialy if the MiG has the AA-11 and AA-10 missiles.
Offline

nastle2000

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2004, 20:18

Unread post28 Nov 2004, 17:13

Alright... so the MIG-23MLD is outclassed by the Falcon, but it would still be a match for the F-4E... right? Considering its improved avionics and AA-10 AA-11 missles.
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post29 Nov 2004, 20:45

MiG-23 & MiG-27 family = Junk

MiG-23 is fast and then when you start reading off all the disadvantages the deck is stacked against it.
  • Poor visibility outside the cockpit. Maybe even worse than a MiG-21. Anyway, it sucks big time. Poor vis like this inhibits your ability to tally enemy aircraft. this all by itself will get you killed.
  • The radars ( pick any model / kit ) never lived up to the reliability needed. With out sensors, guess what? You are back to that visibility thing again.
  • Poor to terrible man-machine interface. Lots of switchology to do one simple thing like lock up and fire a missile or gun or radar mode. Things taken for granted with the HOTAS setup on the F-16.
  • MiG-23 and MiG-27 were a maintenance nightmare. Customers will tell you this. Want to do a strike job? Users that had both the SU-22 family and MiG-27 will tell you that the Su-22 has it all over the MiG-27 on strike mission up times and usefulness. Period dot.
The MiG-23 was good when it was put in the mission of PVO interceptor for the soviets... Go out via the GCI and intercept a incoming bandit. Take away the GCI and you would have to depend on the problems the MiG-23 has from the git on S.A. and oh by the way the pilot of it was from the 80's would get murdered because they didn't practice modern DACT as we know it today.

You want to put an MiG-23 force up against F-16s. Even F-16s without BVR. ( BVR is highly over-rated in combat history especially if your sensor kit sux like the MiG-23 rep) ..... GOOD LUCK. I'll take a force of A model F-16s against any MiG-23 force and beat it like a pinata.
- ELP -
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1038
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77006

Unread post29 Nov 2004, 20:56

elp, Monday morning blues, ey?
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 901
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2003, 21:12

Unread post29 Nov 2004, 21:01

elp wrote:-Poor visibility outside the cockpit. Maybe even worse than a MiG-21. Anyway, it sucks big time. Poor vis like this inhibits your ability to tally enemy aircraft. this all by itself will get you killed.


sorry guys, off-topic again.... elp would really like to hear your opinion on IAI Lahav upgraded Mig-21 2000. Thanks in advance.

8)
Desmond
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post29 Nov 2004, 21:54

Add the MLD flavor to the MiG-23 and all you have is a polished turd.

Hate to be hard but the facts speak for themselves. Poor visibility has put MiG-23s at risk in the past ( soviet incursions into pakistan in the 80's ( oops didnt see that pak jet wiz by because my vis / sensors sucked ).....

Egypt MiG-21s killed Libian MiG-23s ( again poor vis ( and the 21 is just better in a dogfight ).

Bekka Valley Syria v Israel.

Yup those arent MLD mods, but they come from the same cloth. When the iron curtain fell, we found out that except for the R73 HOBS helmet cued heatseeker..... the emperor had no clothes.

Yup MiG-23s look great in photos and on box artwork in the model shop. But then reality hits. Going againsts well trained_in_DACT_ hi-vis out of the cockpit, HOTAS, high mission up time F-16A force would get you killed in the MiG-23. In the drop of a hat.
- ELP -
Offline

Dammerung

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 192
  • Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 23:17

Unread post01 Dec 2004, 02:57

I've never seen a -23 with R-73s... Only R-60s. Also, the MiG-23 AFAIK does not carry the R-27(AA-10), only the R-24. Which, is only slightly superior to the Sparrow. But it only carries two of them, the 16 can carry 4 AIM-120s...

I don't know much about the inner workings of the MiG-23...
Offline

CheckSix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 102
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 23:49

Unread post01 Dec 2004, 12:17

@elp:

Where do you know about the MiG-23 comabt capabilities, especially in turnfight? AFAIK there was no data ever published, despite of the MiG-21 F-13 performance.

Please take into account, that Soviet export equipment, especially to no WP-nations are heaviely derated.

Mostly there are delivered without IFF, and Jamming gear, and simple RWRs. Even the East-German MiG-29 were far less capable than their Soviet counterparts.

And still it is the man, not the....
Especially in the middle east, pilot skills are always questionable.
Offline

elp

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3143
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2003, 20:08

Unread post01 Dec 2004, 17:30

CheckSix wrote:@elp:


Especially in the middle east, pilot skills are always questionable.


A broad brush statement that doesn't always ring true.


http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_271.shtml

Note the two MiG23 kills by MiG21s at the bottom. You can not get around the FACT that the MiG-23 has poor visibility from the cockpit. ( this was also a factor with Soviet / Pakistan encounters when the sovs flew out of afcrapistan. Without good vis. You are just dead meat.

The MiG-23 isnt even a matchup against an F-4 Phantom, in most situations even though it has knocked down a few ( april 74 http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml ). So any chance it has vs an F-16 would be weak. It would end up being a swing wing strafe target.

You are absolutely right about the avionics kit in the export model. However as we have seen from Soviet MiG-29s, Their BVR avionics was a joke. ( an analog clock to count off your illumination for a BVR shot ) and again that poor man-machine interface ( stuff we take for granted in an F-16 or 18 ) So any super improved MiG-23 I would take with a big grain of salt. More. The maintenance for the jet just sux ( That old saw about soviet reliabilty doesn't apply here, including when bringing up its avionics ).

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/cat_index_22.shtml

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_211.shtml

http://www.acig.org/books/

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_371.shtml
- ELP -
Offline

CheckSix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 102
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 23:49

Unread post01 Dec 2004, 23:43

Looks like some vipers fell pray to syrian MiG-23s (export variants):

http://users.accesscomm.ca/magnusfamily/82lebsyr.htm
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml
R-23 seem to be working.

This constellation represents F-16s AA capabilities to 1992. MiG-23 has a BVR advantage, F-16 is better in close combat...

Has anyone infos about MiG-23s turnrates?
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 901
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2003, 21:12

Unread post04 Dec 2004, 12:25

CheckSix wrote:Looks like some vipers fell pray to syrian MiG-23s (export variants):

http://users.accesscomm.ca/magnusfamily/82lebsyr.htm
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml
R-23 seem to be working.

This constellation represents F-16s AA capabilities to 1992. MiG-23 has a BVR advantage, F-16 is better in close combat...


hi CheckSix,

The entries state by acig.com are "Claims and uncomfirmed". Ain't familiar with 'Air Aces', hence, will reserve my opinions on the creditability.

Another source (official IAF website) states "Not a single Israeli plane was shot down in the course of the war".

In a nut shell, these are probably propaganda from both parties (IAF did record "69 IAF planes were hit, 46 of those were unsalvageable." during the Six Day War, in another page). I guess it's our pick on which to believe. I will take it with a pinch of salt.

cheers,
Last edited by Pumpkin on 04 Dec 2004, 17:46, edited 1 time in total.
Desmond
Offline

CheckSix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 102
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 23:49

Unread post04 Dec 2004, 15:27

Hi Pumpkin,

i regard any kill as a claim, as long as I haven't seen the crashside or video...

It seems that all Israeli kills are confirmed. Sometimes they dont even know which plane the used, or unit or what the victory actually was: MiG-2? ... lol

They myth that IAF did not lose a single F-16/F-15 in aircombat may be good for the manufactors or propaganda, but I am sure it is not the reality.

I've spent some time to verify WWII airkills, sometimes overclaims upt to 4 occur, on any side.
Last edited by CheckSix on 04 Dec 2004, 20:10, edited 1 time in total.
Next

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest