5 MiG-23s vs 2 F-16s

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

Viperalltheway

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2005, 14:16

Unread post07 May 2005, 20:51

2 against 5 would not have been easy for sure..

But winning doesn't mean that you kill the 2 F-16s or the 5 migs. The F-16s could have killed a couple of migs and got the hell out of here.. still a victory..
Offline

agilefalcon16

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 401
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2005, 20:59

Unread post07 May 2005, 22:01

I also believe that the 2 Vipers could win. The Mig-23 doesn't even come close to the agility of the F-16, and pilot training also plays an important role. American pilots are trained to be the best in the world, and as a result an American Viper has never been shot out of the sky by enemy aircraft.
Offline

LebaneseAce

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 06 May 2005, 18:55
  • Location: Eskilstuna, Sweden.

Unread post08 May 2005, 09:19

parrothead wrote:
LebaneseAce wrote:
parrothead wrote:How do you figure :? ? Why wouldn't the F-16 kill the Floggers BVR with the help of the AWACS in the area?


5 Floggers versus 2 Falcons... The F-16's are outnumbered. There are countless ways to bust 2 Falcons.


If there are countless ways to bust 2 Falcons, as you say, could you please elaborate?

Now, I still say the Viper wins due to superior pilot training (not dependant on GCI), superior tactics (developed through flying against actual MiGs in the Nevada desert), and a dose of good ole Yankee Ingineuity. I highly doubt the Vipers are going to go head to head in a neutral merge knowing that the MiGs have longer ranged weapons? I think the intel shop at the squadron would have this type of info and would be working with the pilots to develop counter tactics.


It's obvious. :lol:

Examples of busting Falcons
  1. Triple A.
  2. AAM
  3. Close in with ARCHER missiles (Air-To-Air Combat!!)
  4. Rapier Missile System.
The F-16´s initial climb rate is 15,239 meters, while the Floggers initial climb rate is 15,300 metres.

Source : http://www.milavia.net/users/fighterjet ... falcon.php

But the F-16 has an 9+ G-Force limit, and the Flogger only has 7,5+.

Now, the Falcon has a bit of an advantage, it can perform harder turns and such, but still, if the Falcons takes one Flogger, they still have 4 left to worry about.

Who knows what formation the Floggers can take, but its not likely to happen. The yanks wouldn't send up a C.A.P. without AWACS, and they will won´t send up 2 planes.

Guess : They'll probably send up 4 aircraft.
Offline

LebaneseAce

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 06 May 2005, 18:55
  • Location: Eskilstuna, Sweden.

Unread post08 May 2005, 09:22

agilefalcon16 wrote:
LebaneseAce wrote:5 floggers VS 2 F-16´s?
The Falcons will lose in a matter of minutes.
If the Floggers are armed with Archer missiles, if even they are capable of wielding such missile systems, the Falcons will lose on the double.


Just curious, but do you at all like the F-16? It seems that most of you posts talk about how the F-16 would loose against particular aircraft.


Naah, we're just comparing them with other aircraft.
Offline

Viperalltheway

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2005, 14:16

Unread post08 May 2005, 11:20

3. Close in with ARCHER missiles (Air-To-Air Combat!!)


There was no Archer in 1980. And the 9L was much better than the aphid.
Offline

LebaneseAce

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 06 May 2005, 18:55
  • Location: Eskilstuna, Sweden.

Unread post08 May 2005, 16:57

Viperalltheway wrote:
3. Close in with ARCHER missiles (Air-To-Air Combat!!)


There was no Archer in 1980. And the 9L was much better than the aphid.



Okay, thanks for correcting it. But we are talking about the of 2005. I am sure that the russians upgraded the weapon control system so the Flogger can guide Archers. Who knows?
Offline

Viperalltheway

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2005, 14:16

Unread post08 May 2005, 17:50

Check the first post, the guy was asking for 1980 over central europe..

If it was for now, the vipers would beat the crap out of them..
Offline

PN79

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 08 May 2005, 18:26

Unread post08 May 2005, 18:50

Just for info:
WarPac had large numerical superiority over NATO in airforce and I think that it is possible that some NATO aircrafts lost support from AWACS. There will be (in 1980) many WarPac fighters and bombers and probably AWACS can not watch for all.

So some 2 F-16A can be attacked by 5 MiG-23.
If that MiG-23 are soviet than it can be MiG-23ML with 2 R-23R ( AA-7 ) and 4 R-60 ( AA-8 ). If F-16 fly without any ECM pod than MiG's radar can trace them and probably MiGs will shoot down the first F-16 in BVR and the second in dogfight (if proper tactics). Sure some MiGs will go down - I think 2 or 3.
(How many AIM-9L F-16 have?)

However if F-16s have modern ECM pods than probably all R-23R will miss and in dogfight may be one F-16 will be shotdown but all MiGs.

There is also possibility of non-soviet WP MiGs - MiG-23MF with 2 R-23R and 2 R-3S. BVR probably the same result as above but in dogfight - R-3S is useless and even one F-16 have chance.
Offline

Pumpkin

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post08 May 2005, 22:50

PN79 wrote:Just for info:
WarPac had large numerical superiority over NATO in airforce and I think that it is possible that some NATO aircrafts lost support from AWACS. There will be (in 1980) many WarPac fighters and bombers and probably AWACS can not watch for all.

So some 2 F-16A can be attacked by 5 MiG-23.
If that MiG-23 are soviet than it can be MiG-23ML with 2 R-23R ( AA-7 ) and 4 R-60 ( AA-8 ). If F-16 fly without any ECM pod than MiG's radar can trace them and probably MiGs will shoot down the first F-16 in BVR and the second in dogfight (if proper tactics). Sure some MiGs will go down - I think 2 or 3.
(How many AIM-9L F-16 have?)

However if F-16s have modern ECM pods than probably all R-23R will miss and in dogfight may be one F-16 will be shotdown but all MiGs.

There is also possibility of non-soviet WP MiGs - MiG-23MF with 2 R-23R and 2 R-3S. BVR probably the same result as above but in dogfight - R-3S is useless and even one F-16 have chance.


PN79, it is nice to have an unbiased opinion here. Thanks for sharing.

USAF record advocates WP had an advantage of 2.07:1 aircraft in 1989. An alternate source has around the same figure (~8,000 of combat aircraft). I guess NATO's commanders believed the quality of training and equipment should have closed the quantity gap.

For the BVR advantage, AA-10/R-27 has less than satisfactory result in Ethiopian-Eritrean conflict, not sure if the predecessor had better pk. In addition, NATO air power too had some BVR shooter then, I agree the newly acquaired F-16 would not be allowed to be in such bad situation. But, in the confusion of war, the above scenario was possible.

Lastly, I believe R-73 was introduced in ~1984 and the MLD in ~1985. Not sure if the 2 systems were integrated. I stand to be corrected, the MLD employed in Afghanistan was not carrying the R-73. Perhaps you can fill us in here on the combi.

cheers,
Desmond
Offline

PN79

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 08 May 2005, 18:26

Unread post08 May 2005, 23:55

Hallo
I am not sure but I think that MiG-23MLD can carry R-73 (I am from the Czech Rep. - we didn't have it), many people say that can. But problem is: How many fighter regiments with MiG-23MLD received R-73s during Cold War? When Czechoslovakia received MiG-29 there were small numbers of R-27R and R-73E with it. Peace time CAP flew with one R-27R and two R-60MK.
So I think that soviet MiG-23MLD in Afghanistan haven't any R-73.

Something about western technological superiority during Cold War. US had great advantage with F-15 and F-16 but look at west german air force in '80. They still flew with F-4F and F-104G. In my opinion confrontation between west and east (about 1985) would also resolve to 'vietnam era' air battles between F-4F without any BVR and MiG-21F-13 :)

Regards
Offline

dionis

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2005, 16:59

Unread post24 Aug 2005, 19:24

The Russians don't use the Mig-23 anymore. And since the Mig-29SMT upgrade has been dropped (not permanently, though it seems like it) all that the F-16s are going to face are Su-35BMs. (Designation to a heavily upgraded Su-27SK Flanker B, the upgrade the RuAF is taking now). Scary plane.
Previous

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests