Whats the Worst Post 1970s ACM platform

F-16ADF · by **F-16ADF** » 19 Apr 2018, 16:18

I wonder if any flew the -23MLD (most consider the ultimate Flogger) and the 21 at the same time. And if they still opted to keep the -21 over the -23MLD?

SpudmanWP · by **SpudmanWP** » 19 Apr 2018, 16:30

ricnunes wrote:Alternatively the C-5 could also "launch" M-1 Abrams MBTs. I would like to see any fighter aircraft surviving after being smashed by a M-1 Abrams

Just have a Stinger team jump out the back and launch on the way down. With a C-5 you can have a massive "magazine" of Stingers.

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 19 Apr 2018, 18:31

SpudmanWP wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Alternatively the C-5 could also "launch" M-1 Abrams MBTs. I would like to see any fighter aircraft surviving after being smashed by a M-1 Abrams

Just have a Stinger team jump out the back and launch on the way down. With a C-5 you can have a massive "magazine" of Stingers.

Or take an F-89 and swap out those Might Mouse rockets for Stingers. 104 Stinger in the wing tip pods, couple of nuke Genies under the wings. . .

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 19 Apr 2018, 20:54

geforcerfx wrote:
Hmm never saw that one.

The P1154 still looked like a harrier to me.

The P.1154 wasnt even a viable concept - not enough was known about PCB engines at the time it was cancelled in 1965.

That was slowly developed over many iterations into the P.1216 of the 1980s - and some of that work ended up in the JSF program apparently.

ricnunes · by **ricnunes** » 19 Apr 2018, 23:04

f-16adf wrote:I wonder if any flew the -23MLD (most consider the ultimate Flogger) and the 21 at the same time. And if they still opted to keep the -21 over the -23MLD?

The only country that partially match what you asked that I found is Bulgaria.
Bulgaria operated the Mig-23MLD (the only country that I found to have flown and retired the -23MLD outside Russia and/or other ex-Soviet states) and the Mig-21 at the same time and apparently kept the Mig-21 flying longer than the Mig-23MLD but then again Bulgaria also had (and still operates) the Mig-29 as well.
Therefore Bulgaria had a "good reason" to retire their Mig-23MLD since they already operated Mig-29s (which should be superior, of course).

ricnunes · by **ricnunes** » 19 Apr 2018, 23:06

SpudmanWP wrote:Just have a Stinger team jump out the back and launch on the way down. With a C-5 you can have a massive "magazine" of Stingers.

sferrin wrote:Or take an F-89 and swap out those Might Mouse rockets for Stingers. 104 Stinger in the wing tip pods, couple of nuke Genies under the wings. . .

LOL, both ideas would give the "flying porcupine" term a whole new meaning :mrgreen:

madrat · by **madrat** » 20 Apr 2018, 21:54

MiG-23MLD just never inspired upgrades. MiG-23-93 was a nice expansion in capabilities. And MiG-23-2000 would have been even better. Something tells me the vertical stab on top had too many problems to bother fixing. And that big stab under the tail was an eyesore. Upgrades just didn't fix a bad design. I always liked the premise of MiG-23, but the reality is it just was more mythical promise than practical experience. My favourite what if of the MiG-23 looked vaguely like a crossbreed with the F-14, with canted pylons to hold an SARH and a heatseeker missile, and a droptank under each intake.

But it doesn't fix the awful vertical stabs.

botsing · by **botsing** » 20 Apr 2018, 22:03

madrat wrote:<broken image link>

FTFY:

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 20 Apr 2018, 22:06

basher54321 wrote:That was slowly developed over many iterations into the P.1216 of the 1980s - and some of that work ended up in the JSF program apparently.

PCB was not used by any of the three JSF competitors.

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 20 Apr 2018, 23:27

sferrin wrote:
PCB was not used by any of the three JSF competitors.

That's right - knowledge and experience from the entire program apparently "provided key UK buy in to the JSF demonstration and dev stages" - what specifically don't know.

hythelday · by **hythelday** » 22 Feb 2019, 18:01

F-111 pilot says "Flogger turned worse and couldn't out accelerate us. It also had tiny cockpit with poor visibility".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLjOcpsrLsI

According to wiki 4477th TES had BN (export ground attack) and FS (export fighter) versions. The question is what engines did "Red Eagle" birds have.

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 22 Feb 2019, 18:45

The single seater they used is the MiG-23MS Flogger E and is stated as 27,600 lbs max SLS thrust R-29-300.

Good sources:

Red Eagles (Steve Davies)
Americas Secret MiG Squadron (Gail Peck)

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 24 Feb 2019, 16:18

hythelday wrote:F-111 pilot says "Flogger turned worse and couldn't out accelerate us. It also had tiny cockpit with poor visibility".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLjOcpsrLsI

According to wiki 4477th TES had BN (export ground attack) and FS (export fighter) versions. The question is what engines did "Red Eagle" birds have.

Quite a remarkable "accomplishment", LOL. The story I heard was that Soviet front line units that got Mig-23's wanted their Mig-21's back, pronto. It was a (much) worse turner, couldn't see out of the cockpit worth a damn and a nightmare to maintain. The pilot/radar/weapons interface left much to be desired too.

And then of course, we have its combat record. Like most Russian fighters, it has been thoroughly trounced by American jets. It was superb however, at intercepting American AIM-54 A and AIM-7 Sparrow missiles. On one instance, an Iranian F-14 destroyed 3 Mig-23's flying in tight formation with a single Phoenix. In another, 3 Mig-23's were downed by AIM-7 Sparrows from American F-15's. Mercifully, the fourth Mig-23 that was slated to be part of that flight had to turn back, suffering mechanical difficulties. Israeli F-15's and 16's also had a field day with it, adding to the carnage.

It seems as if no matter who was flying it and what model, the Mig-23 was a born loser...

milosh · by **milosh** » 24 Feb 2019, 21:49

Iranians done lot of propaganda BS about war, one of those it three MiG-23 down by one AIM-54 :roll:

I think even Tom Copper start doubting in what he wrote after he talked with iraq's pilots.

mixelflick · by **mixelflick** » 25 Feb 2019, 15:22

milosh wrote:Iranians done lot of propaganda BS about war, one of those it three MiG-23 down by one AIM-54

I think even Tom Copper start doubting in what he wrote after he talked with iraq's pilots.

That may be true. But it speaks volumes Mig-23's (and other aircraft) would bug out when painted by the AWG-9. You can also look at the remaining stock of F-14's in Iran and Mig's in Iraq after the war.

If I'm not mistaken, Mig-23's have fallen to F-4's, F-14's, F-15's and F-16's. I'm not aware of any F-18's with MIg-23 kills. Only those 2 Mig-21's in ODS. I would certainly hope if presented the opportunity, they could finish off Mig-23's if necessary.

It did some things well (acceleration), but too many things were sub-par to make it an effective combat aircraft. Perhaps as this thread says, the worst post 70's ACM platform there is/was. Also, I think it speaks volumes the Chinese never sprang for the type. At the time, China went all in on Mig-21's and the Chinese derivative (F-6?). I would have thought the Mig-23 was enviable, at least in terms of range. The reason I speculate they never bought the Mig-29 either, as the Flanker is much better suited to the SCS theater.