mig-23 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 Flogger - History, Design, Performance & Dissection (Updated 8/10/2021)

[Smin1080p_WT 60,444]

2 hours ago, Smoak741 said:

They wont give us r60m because american kids cries that russia is op which is not. 

 

The MiG-23MLD is currently the highest aircraft in efficiency at Rank VII. Whilst it remains as the top performer, it is in absolutely no need of any better weaponry or loadouts. 

 

R-60M was not introduced for this exact reason.

 

Whilst it remains the top aircraft, it will not be receiving R-60M as its current loadouts are evidently more than sufficient. 

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

Welcome to the first thread of this mini series on Soviet aircraft. This covers the fighter variants of the MiG-23. 

 

Some important notes:

1. all MiG-23s had a takeoff distance of 500 m on afterburner

2. all more or less shared the same bomb, rocket and AGM loadouts (except for the interceptor-only MiG-23P and bis)

3. the only design to use the R-23 and R-24 missiles

4. all had the SPO-10M Sirena-3 RWR (the MiG-21SMT has it and except for the MiG-23MLD with the SPO-15LE Beryoza)

5. all had slats (MiG-23M and beyond),

6. all had a 23mm GSh-23L with 200 rounds 

7. all had a speed limit of 1400 km/h IAS 

8. all had the same Mach 2.35 limit

9. of the list, only the MiG-23M, MiG-23ML. MiG-23MLA and MLD utilized the R-13M1 missile

10. aside from being able to load four R-60s and two R-23/R-24s, it could also replace the R-23/R-24s with other heat-seekers, such as the R-3S, R-13M and R-13M1, turning the loadout into 4 x R-60 + 2 x R-3S/R-13M/R-31M1

 

If you'd like to know more about the CAS models, you can read about them here:

 

 

Origins

 

(MiG-23 prototype, "23-11/1", under assembly, early 1960s after being painted)

 

The MiG-23's origins date back to 1961, when MiG OKB began working on a next-gen fighter which they had designated "MiG-23". An interesting fact is that its name (MiG-23) was meant to be assigned for a different jet had it entered production, called the Ye-8 . Anyway, the main purpose of the new fighter was interception and to make use of the R-23 missile they were developing at the time, which was a stopgap for the new and modern R-27. However, since the doctrine of the time was "supersonic interception didn't need a gun" (much like the F-4), the cannon was absent, but the first production (and pre-production that is) model had it. 

 

The first flight of the first prototype, designated, MiG-23 23-11/1, took place in September, 1962. On the 11th of that month and year, test pilot Mosolov suffered an injury following an accident that the plane was lost in. By that time, the Ye-8 plane and its second prototype (E-8/2) we briefly mentioned had been flying for two and a half years, but this did not mean they weren't going to design a jet more advanced than the Fishbed, and after the accident anyway they ceased its operations. 

 

Almost immediately after they ceased their work on the Ye-8, work continued on a frontline fighter and interceptor based on the original MiG-23 prototype. In summary, its development was long and protracted, and the first next prototype (MiG-23 23-11/2) made its maiden flight in 1967, followed by the MiG-23 23-11/3 and MiG-23 23-11/4. Two years later saw the introduction of the first pre-production model, the MiG-23S. 

 

(The same first prototype under assembly before undergoing painting)

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23PD (MiG-23 23-01/-31) - Rare Experimentation

 

 

In 1964, an order was issued for a ground attacker capable of operating from short runways. MiG OKB responded by modifying an existing MiG-21PFM with STOL engines (Short Takeoff And Landing) (less-capable VTOL essentially). Three years later, they also responded by designing and building the MiG-23PD, also known as MiG-23 23-01, and MiG-23 23-1 later. They were developed on the basis of the MiG-23 prototypes they were working on (MiG-23 23-11/1, /2, /3 and /4).

 

The first MiG-23PD, dubbed MiG-23 23-01, had no radar and no offensive weaponry. It was used for testing and to demonstrate the STOL design/idea, next to the MiG-21PD. Then, it was modified to carry radar and weaponry; this was the next MiG-23 23-31. It was armed with a 23mm GSh-23L with 200 rounds, and had provisions for 2 x R-3S air-to-air missiles . First flown in 1967, two years before the first production MiG-23 (MiG-23S, and more accurately it was a pre-production model) was introduced. Interestingly, the airbrake was located on the top of the fuselage, as opposed to being in the engine section of the tail on the production models .

 

This was a short-lived project, since STOL was not efficient enough, and the other MiG-23 in the works was more capable. The aircraft's reported maximum speed at high altitude was 1,600 km/h (995 mph). 

 

Not comparable to anything.

 

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 izdeliye 23-11 - Shaping The Flogger

 

(Extremely rare photograph of a MiG-23 prototype in flight, izdeliye 23-11-1, July 1967)

 

As with every production aircraft, there was a start. Usually a number of prototypes until the design is cleared for production. The MiG-23 is no exception.

 

In 1961, an issue from the Soviet Defense Ministry was released. The order was to design an interceptor with beyond-visual-range capabilities, capable of engaging enemy fighters and bombers from long distances. During this time, the Soviets were experimenting with Short Takeoff & Landing (STOL) which resulted in the MiG-21PD. Before the known MiG-23 was shaped up, there was the MiG-23PD tested for STOL in 1964. Because of this experimentation process, work on the Flogger's basis was delayed for five years.

 

In 1965, work commenced on the first MiG-23 prototype. The wing design was compromised; wing pivots were adjusted, after which the inner wing panels (also known as gloves) and their junctons were designed. A smooth airflow was necessary for the stability of the aircraft's prototype, especially at high angles of attack, landing and takeoff.

 

The prototype had three sweep configurations: 16° was used for take-off and landing, 45° was used for cruising and 72° for supersonic flight. 

 

The first prototype was designated MiG-23 izdeliye 23-11-01 (AKA MiG-23 23-11-01). It was not equipped with a radar, despite its loadout comprising of four R-23R air-to-air SARH missiles. It was anticipated that it would use the R-27F2-300 turbojet, however that powerplant's development was protracted and thus it was substitited by the Soyuz R27F-300 engine which produced 5,200 kgf of thrust on military power, and 7,800 kgf on afterburner. The next prototype was the MiG-23 23-11-1, which only differed in the shape of the rectangular intakes; on the first prototype they were semi-rectangular, while on the second one they were rectangular with large boundary splitter plates set 55mm in the fuselage and in the gap. 

 

(Here, the manufacturer decided to take an aesthetic photograph of the first prototype in grass)

 

The first flight of the first swing-wing prototype, the izdeliye 23-11-1, was made on the 26th of May, 1967 under the capable hands and chief test pilot of MiG OKB, Alexander Fedotov. Interestingly, instead of using 16 degrees of sweep for take-off and landing, Fedotov used fourteen during that first flight. After two test flights, Alexander Fedotov gave a brilliant airshow on the 6th of July, 1967 in the MiG-23 23-11-1 prototype. For the airshow appearance, the fighter had a grey camo scheme livened up by adding blue/white trimming on the air intake trunks and bright red for the movable outer wings.

 

(Izdeliye 23-11-1, the first prototype shown with red wings in a rare colorized photograph at the Domodedovo Airshow)

 

After the 44th flight, when the engine reached its 25-hour service life, the engine was change and in the hiatus, a three-axis type AP-155 autopilot was introduced, along with four missile pylons for the R-3S and R-23 missiles (APU-13 and APU-23 respectively), but at this point there was still no cannon fitted as it was envisioned that missile combat was the future, as on the earlier F-4 models. 

 

The MiG-23 23-11-1 completed 97 test flights, then the factory trials and state acceptance tests were completed in July 1968, altogether with a total of nine prototypes. Air-to-air missile tests were conducted on the 14th of April, 1968, but neither prototype (MiG-23 23-11-1, MiG-23 23-11-2) had radar installed. Speaking of which, the second prototype (izdeliye 23-11-2) differed from the first by only being was designed for missile testing at first. 

 

 

After the completion of all tests, the izdeliye 23-11-1 prototype was used to check up on new engines: the R-44, with 9,000 kgf of thrust wet, and the R-47 with 10,000 kgf. It was later retired, and is now at display on the Russian Air Force Museum, located in Monino.

 

The other significant prototypes were the MiG-23 23-11-2, 23-11-3 and 23-11-4. All of which used the more powerful Tumansky R-27F2-300 engine. The second prototype was used for missile testing, while the third one was used in order to test the Sapfir-23 (Sapfir RP-23) radar, which at the time was still being developed. Last but not least, the MiG-23 izdeliye 23-11-4 (fourth prototype) was used to test the aircraft in the fighter-bombing role by equipping it with bombs .

 

(The second prototype, izdeliye 23-11-2, demonstrating the firing sequence of an R-23 at an IL-18)

 

 

(The fourth prototype seen loaded with 2 x R-23R + 2 x R-23T)

 

One of the main issues with the izdeliye 23-11 prototypes was not just that they were not fitted with a gun and some didn't have radar, but the fact that their wing limit was abysmal. They had a wing G limit of just 3.1G! Despite Soviet engineers anticipating that this limit would be raised to 7G on the first production model, it was only raised to 5G (MiG-23S). 

 

As for the performance of the prototypes, tests showed that they were capable of 2,240 km/h (1,391 mph, Mach 2.12) at an altitude of 13,400 meters, clean. They have also showed that when armed with two R-23 missiles, it could achieve 2,255 km/h (1,401 mph, Mach 2.13) at an altitude of 13,600 meters, whilst with four R-23, it clocked at 2,025 km/h (1,256 mph, Mach 1.91) at 12,800 meters. Service ceiling was 17,200 meters (56,430 ft). Takeoff speed was 270 km/h (167.7 mph), landing speed was 230 km/h (143 mph) and landing run with brake chutes was 750 meters (2,460 ft). Clean weight was 9,290 kg (20,480 lbs), loaded takeoff weight was 12,860 kg (28,360 lbs) and with four R-23 missiles it was 13,330 kg (29,330 lbs). Internal fuel load weighed at 3,530 kg (7,780 lbs).

 

The next year, on the 28th of May, 1969, the prototype of the first production model made its maiden flight. After that, it became known as the MiG-23S (23-11S izdeliye 22S), or simply MiG-23S. It was armed with the radar of the MiG-21S, as a stopgap for the Sapfir RP-23 until it was ready. Quite interestingly, the prototypes had the BVR missiles, while the first production one couldn't utilize it yet. 

 

(Ninth prototype; MiG-23 izdeliye 23-11-9)

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 Obr.1969 izdeliye 23-11 - Rushed Production

 

(20-Blue, one of the first MiG-23s involved in State Acceptance Trials)

 

A very early production model, referred to as the "1969 MiG-23", this version existed because the production of the MiG-23 was being when the manufacturer's test flights had barely even begun. Production commenced at the MMZ No. 155 factory. 

 

The first production example of this model was outwardly identical to the early prototypes; retaining the original conical radome without the undernose FLIR fairing and, unfortunately, the original wings without the leading edge slats and the abysmal G load of just 3.1G. These wings were known as Edition 1 or Type 1 in other sources.

 

 

The first true production example of this version was the last aircraft in Batch 2, code in production being c/n 029000205. 

 

A total of six were produced, though other sources count some prototypes as part of Batch 1 - 3, putting the number to ten or twelve aircraft. 

 

The 1969-MiG-23 was not delivered to the Air Force because it was mainly a test-run model. The last example to be produced was used to test the R-3S air-to-air missiles. 

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23S izdeliye 23-11S - A Rocky Start

 

 

 

The first important production model, up to 69 models built (sources may vary). Actually a pre-production model, it was a sidegrade to the MiG-21S/SM/SMT. Its first flight was on the 28th of May, 1969, and its production commenced the next year. It had the radar of the MiG-21SM (RP-22SM), with 30 km of detection range, and 15 km of tracking because the look-down/shoot-down radar was still being developed, the first of which will become the Sapfir RP-23 series. It was capable of 1,350 km/h at sea level, 2,405 km/h at 12,800 m and 175 m/s of climb rate. It had a big flaw: its wings could not pull more than 5G, in fact in a test flight the plane almost disentegrated at 4.2G. This is because it had the Edition 2 wings, with little G resistance, and no slats as on the Edition 3 wings of the MiG-23M model and beyond. It was also equipped with the Lasour-S datalink, the RV-UM radio altimeter found on the MiG-21bis, SAU-23A flight control system, ARK-10 radio compass and a number of other avionics. 

 

Armed with one 23mm GSh-23L with 200 rounds, R-3S, R-3R (SARH model) and R-13M (Russian AIM-9G equivalent) missiles. It could also load one pair of either Kh-66 or Kh-23 air to ground missiles. Bombs alone include up to 16 x FAB-100, 4 x FAB-250 or 4 x FAB-500. As for rockets: two methods of loading S-5Ks, either 4 x UB-16-57UM or 2 x UB-32-57 rocketpods, 64 in total each type (so either 16 rockets per pod or 32 x 2 rocketpods). It could also load 20 x 80mm rockets or four tiny ivans.

 

 

The MiG-23S was a short-lived model due to its flaws for the time of its introduction. Had it been introduced in the early 60s, the absence of R-60s, the low wing G load etc would have been fine however. It also didn't utilize the R-23 missiles it was meant to have. Nonetheless, it was a production model which could serve a purpose in the game if BR decompression is given. Fitted with a Soyuz R-27F2-300 afterburning turbojet that produced 10,000 kgf (98.07 kN) on afterburner. 

 

It briefly served front-line VVS regiments, alongside the MiG-23SM (also known as MiG-23 Edition 1971 or simply known as "MiG-23), before the later MiG-23M began replacing them. In 1978, it was fully relegated to the training role. 

 

 

Game Equivalent: F-4C Phantom, MiG-21F-13

 

Pros:

• Fast, capable of 2,405 km/h at altitude and 1,350 km/h at sea level
• Decent acceleration
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• A good climb rate of 175 m/s
• Proven MiG-21SM/SMT, MiG-21bis radar
• Capable of firing R-13M missiles; up to 18G load in the air, 3.7G launch and 5G target maneuvering limit before fire, uncaged seeker with 40 degrees gimbal limit
• Versatile anti-ground loadouts; up to 16 x FAB-100, 4 x FAB-250/500 and numerous rockets in addition to guided AGMs
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3

 

Cons:

• Abysmal wing G overload; a maximum of 5G and danger at 4.2G
• Underwhelming missile loadout in comparison to the current top jets; the R-13M may be fine, but not enough. No R-60
• Sapfir RP-22SM radar: although proven, still lacked the detection range for the role the MiG-23 was designed, and lacked look-down/shoot-down (LD/SD)
• Energy retention may fall in comparison to the F-4 due to its engine power and T/W in general
• Lack of flares
• Lack of Infrared Search and Track (IRST) system as on the later models (MiG-23M+)
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• No leading-edge flaps as on the later models

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 Obr.1970 izdeliye 23-11 - A Continuation

 

 

 

In 1970, MMZ No. 30 produced the next interim modification of the MiG-23, which came to be known as the 1970 model of the MiG-23. Even though it followed the MiG-23S, it did not have a suffix to aid the number and was more of a continuation of the MiG-23 Obr.1969. 

 

The main difference from the 1969 model and the MiG-23S was the restyled nose, a new ogival radome with a cone angle of 35 degrees for the RP-23 radar (at this stage, it was a prototype) as tested on the original third, ninth and tenth prototypes. 

 

It retained the wing gloves of the 1969-MiG-23, however the TP-23 IRST was finally installed and the R-23 missiles were tested as well. Otherwise, everything remained the same: the same wings, airbrakes, engine etc. 

 

A total of 28 were produced, half of the number were examples used for test and development work, for things such as R-23T missile testing, new APU-25-23M missile pylons, engines, Type 2 wings and so on. 

 

(This "05-Blue" MiG-23 Obr.1970 became a ground instructional airframe, note the UB-32A FFAR pods under APU-23-11 pylons intended for the R-23 (!))

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23L (MiG-23 Edition 1971 / Model 1971 / Obr.1971) - A Slight Redeemer

 

 

 

The addition of the older and unintended Sapfir RP-22SM radar was in fact, an urgent / emergency feature. When the Sapfir-23L (also known as Sapfir RP-23L) became available, it was immediately introduced. Thus, it was (unofficially) desingated MiG-23L, it's also known as MiG-23 Edition 1971, but mostly and simply as "MiG-23" during its existence IRL.

 

With this radar came the LD/SD capability; that is being able to use the radar while diving and firing missiles during descent till a certain point, however it was extremely limited, meaning that its LD/SD range at low altitude wasn't very far, and the ability of firing R-23R/T missiles, but its look-down/shoot-down modes were limited. It had a detection range of up to 35 km. A new ASP-23D gun-sight/HUD was also introduced, alongside a IRST (Infrared Search and Track) system to warn about passive homing weapons called the TP-23 IRST and a more powerful engine. The new Soyuz R-29-300 engine boosted the MiG-23's climb rate to 195 m/s, in addition to the top speed's increase from 2,405 km/h to 2,500 km/h at 12,500 meters, using the significant change in thrust. In comparison, the older R-27F2-300 produced 10,000 kgf (98.07 kN), while the R-29-300 managed 12,500 kgf (122.58 kN) on afterburner.

 

It's also worth noting, that since the R-23 was introduced, it gave the plane a deadlier air-to-air loadout type, whose theme you see throughout the entire series; it could load two R-23R (SARH model) or two R-23T (heat-seeking model) missiles, in addition to four of any other heat-seeker. In this plane's case, it was either 2 x R-23R/T + 2 x R-3S, or 2 x R-23R/T + 2 x R-13M. 

 

 

At this point, you might be wondering how the R-23T performs. It's a large missile, capable of tracking at 12°/s (for reference, the AIM-9J does 16 °/s), its maximum range was 11 km (25 km for the radar-homing version) and its G loads are as follows: 

• 4G pylon launch limit; cannot fire it if pulling more than 4G
• 5G target launch limit; if the target is pulling more than 5G, it won't track well
• 20G in the air

 

Furthermore, it had a gimbal limit of 60°, the same as the AIM-9L. In the game, gimbal limit is presented as the large circle around the lock circle, meaning the wider it gets, the more and wider firing angles for the missile there are. For reference, the AIM-9J and R-60 have a gimbal limit of 40°. The R-23T's "circle" size is likely the same as the Magic 1's. 

 

The RP-23L radar's stats are as follows:

 

50 km search range at high altitude in head-on, 35 km in pursuit

18 km search range at low altitudes in head-on, 8 km in pursuit

35 km tracking range at high altitudes in head-on, 25 km in pursuit

15 km tracking range at low altitudes in head-on, 5 km in pursuit

 

 

It retained the Edition 2 / Type 2 wings from the MiG-23S, though they were actually tested with leading edge slats but they were deleted because there was no room for the slat guide rails in the thinner leading-edge section. This proved to be problematic because it delayed the onset of buffeting at 45 degrees of sweep, though it allowed the MiG-23 to pull higher Gs in a dogfight, it really messed up the stalling characteristics at 16 degrees of sweep. However, the wings were strengthened from 5G to 7G, but this also didn't matter much because the pivots and wing carry-through box were limited to 3.5G. 

 

Up to 102 units of the MiG-23L were built. Production lasted between 1969 and 1971. It briefly served several front-line fighter regiments of the VVS, such as the 168th IAP located in Starokonstantinov, Ukraine, before the model became a trainer in 1978.

 

Eventually, all those MiG-23s were retrofitted with the Type 3 wings of the MiG-23M, featuring a load of 8G and leading edge flaps. 

 

 

Game Equivalents: F-4C Phantom, Phantom FGR.2, MiG-21F-13

 

Pros:

• Top speed improved from 2,405 km/h to 2,500 km/h, remained 1,350 km/h at sea level
• Climb rate improved from 175 m/s to 195 m/s
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• R-23R and R-23T missiles added; decent missile models in general
• New radar with longer range and LD/SD capability
• Infrared Search and Track system (IRST) added; TP-23 model, the first MiG-23 variant with IRST
• Good CAS capabilities as the earlier MiG-23S
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Strengthened wing load from 5G to 7G

 

Cons:

• Wing G load strengthened but still low and impractical given the pivots were restricted to 3.5G
• The LD/SD capability of the radar was still limited and early
• Although 35 km is good for the game's standards, the radar still has an underwhelming detection range for an interceptor meant to utilize BVR
• Decent heat-seekers like the R-60s are still absent
• Lack of flares
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• No leading-edge slats as on the later models
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R, the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom
• Edition 2 wings not only meant it had a low wing loading of just 7G, it also meant that it had no slats as on the later models
• Not capable of loading six missiles as on the later models since it doesn't get dual pylons for the R-3S and R-13M (unlike the R-60)

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23M izdeliye 23-11M - The Good Start

 

(Blue-31 and Blue-23 flying in formation over the Black Sea)

 

First flown in 1972, the MiG-23M was the first good model, and the first mass-produced one with 1,353 examples built. Notable improvements over the MiG-23SM include the replacement of the Sapfir RP-23L with the RP-23D-III , which could track bomber-sized targets from 55 km, fighter-sized targets from 45 km (tested against a MiG-21) and had a tracking range of 35 km, while also giving the plane improved look-down/shoot-down capabilities, though it's important to note that the first production MiG-23Ms housed Sapfir-23Ls (RP-23Ls) at first, followed by the RP-23D before the RP-23D-III. The last radar to be used by the MiG-23M was the RP-23D-Sh which the Soviets had begun retrofitting it as a modernization program. The difference between each model is the effectiveness of LD/SD; while all of them could completely filter out ground clutter, the range data at low altitude differed between each one, thus affecting their look-down/shoot-down, hence the claim of "limited look-down/shoot-down". 

 

(Blue-coded "23" MiG-23M firing its gun)

 

Leading edge flaps were also added. The R-60 AAM was also added to complement the R-23 (though the R-60M was absent); this means that the MiG-23 was finally able to load four R-60s and two R-23s . Later, in 1976, it was retrofitted to carry the R-13M1, which was a Russian heat-sekeer that rivaled the AIM-9H in performance and looked quite similar to the AIM-9J due to the canards.

 

 

And quite importantly, the wings were reinforced to the Edition 3 standard to withstand 8G load instead of just 4.2 - 5G and to incorporate leading-edge flaps, to improve landing, takeoff and maneuverability performance. It retained the same speed and air-to-ground loadouts as the MiG-23S and SM, however, the Kh-23M was also included alongside the base Kh-23, and the standard wing sweep configuration was changed to 16°, 45°, 60°, 72° instead of 2.40°, 18°, 47.40°, 72.40°.

 

Thanks to the leading edge flaps and the better wing overload, the MiG-23 became more maneuverable than all F-4 Phantom variants without slats. 

 

 

Game Equivalent: MiG-21SMT, MiG-21MF, F-4E, F-4EJ etc (to a lesser extent, mostly an equivalent to the F-4C and F-4M)

 

Pros:

• New radar with better LD/SD (more resistant towards ground clutter)
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• R-13M1 and R-60 heat-seekers added
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Good maneuverability with flaps deployed 
• Wing strength improved from 5G to 8G
• CAS improved with the addition of the Kh-23M
• Infrared Search and Track system (IRST) added; TP-23 model 
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability
• R-23R BVR missiles with decent performance

 

Cons:

• Radar, although still powerful, was still lacking in range and prone to ground clutter at low altitude (particularly at 500 m)
• 8G wing load was still mediocre
• Despite the Edition 3 wing with leading edge flaps, it was still not a good dogfighter, notoriously known for having chances at losing a sustained dogfight with an F-4E (slats)
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Lack of flares (although SPS-141 pod possible)
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R, the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom
• The R-60 was available, the limited-aspect R-60M however wasn't

 

(Red-coded squadron of MiG-23Ms)

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MF izdeliye 2A / izdeliye 2B - Export Standards

 

 

 

In order to export the new MiG-23M, the USSR ordered the development of the MiG-23MF. The new model had worse IFF and comm equipment, and on some examples it lacked ECM resistance and the on-board Lasour-SMA datalink equipment. Furthermore, the Sapfir-23D-III (RP-23D-III) was replaced with the worse Sapfir-23E (RP-23E), and until 1981, only the R-13M was delivered as its top weapon of choice; the R-13M1 was not included as it was only used in limited service inside the USSR, and the R-60 was deemed too advanced for export at the time.

 

(Romanian MiG-23MF in 1984, the Romanian Floggers were typically loaded with two A-91 and two R-23R/T air-to-air missiles)

 

The model dedicated to Warsaw Pact countries was designated as MiG-23MF izdeliye 2A and was virtually indistinguishable from the MiG-23M, especially externally, but internally it had worse, different avionics as previously mentioned. On the other hand, the MiG-23MF izdeliye 2B was dedicated to Third World countries such as Libya, Cuba, Syria, Iraq and India; it lacked ECM resistance and was very different in radar. Despite this, the izdeliye 2B subversion was deemed too advanced for such countries, and thus the MiG-23MS was developed.

 

 All of this was done to meet the export standards that the USSR required all of its design bureaus to meet in order to ship their newest base designs to other countries. Exported to East Germany, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia and Poland. First introduced in 1977, 278 built.

 

They are also known as MiG-23MF izdeliye 23-11A and izdeliye 23-11B. 

 

 

Game Equivalent: F-4C, Phantom FG Mk 1, FGR.2, MiG-21F-13, etc

 

Pros:

• Retained the CAS loadouts
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• Speed and climb rate remained impressive
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Good maneuverability with flaps deployed
• Could carry air-to-air six missiles at once 
• Multiple nations received this model; Germany could get it in the game
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability
• Despite being an exported MiG-23, it retained the BVR R-23R missiles with decent performance
• Retrofitted R-60 IR missiles starting from 1981

 

Cons:

• R-13M1 and R-60 deleted; top heat-seekers were the R-13M and R-23T, though the R-60 was a late retrofit the standard loadout for a while was 2 x R-13M + 2 x R-23R/T until 1981
• The limited-aspect R-60M was not included in the retrofit
• Downgraded radar, IFF and communication equipment and systems
• On some examples, datalink (Lasour-SMA in this case) was deleted
• Lack of ECM resistance
• Lasour-SMA datalink removed on some examples
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Lack of flares
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R, the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MS izdeliye 23MS - The Third World

 

(Libyan MiG-23MS "0916" armed with 4 x R-3S)

 

Because the MiG-23MF was deemed too advanced for developing nations such as Syria, Iraq, Libya, Cuba and India, it was further dumbed down. It shared the same airframe as the MiG-23M and MiG-23MF, however its avionics and weapons were changed to that of the MiG-21S and MiG-21SM.  It had the Almaz-23 radar and ASP-PFD-21 gun-sight/HUD. The undernose IRST was deleted. Its air to air missiles were only the R-3S and R-3R, though the R-13M was added later. Produced between 1973 and 1978. You can easily distinguish it from the MiG-23M/MF by the shorter nose radome.

 

 

 

 

The incredibly sanitised MiG-23M entered production in 1973 at the Znamya Truda plant and its production lasted for 5 years (until 1978). 

 

In the Soviet Air Force, it was used by the 715th UAP training regiment stationed at Lugovaya Airfield located in the Kazakh SFSR. A notable MiG-23MS of the USSR Air Force is "Red-44".

 

 

Game Equivalent: F-4C Phantom, MiG-21F-13

 

Pros:

• High top speed
• Good climb rate and acceleration
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Decent maneuverability with the leading edge flaps, as with the MiG-23M/MF
• Well-armed for the opponents its meant to face (in the game), four missiles and one GSh-23L
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability

 

Cons:

• No R-13M, R-13M1, R-23R/T or R-60 (though the R-13M was retrofitted later)
• Underwhelming radar and avionics
• IRST was removed
• The worst MiG-23 model, very basic and straightforward, given its terrible and lackluster missile loadout and equipment, they were easy targets IRL
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Lack of flares
• No BVR missiles
• Top missile loadout was 4 x R-3S (later 4 x R-13M), because BVR was not available, it meant that this variant could only load four missiles as opposed to six on most MiG-23s

 

 

(Soviet MiG-23MS, "Red-44")

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23P / MiG-23bis izdeliye 23-14 - Serious Interceptor

 

 

 

Back in 1977, the Sukhoi Su-9 and Su-11 were becoming very old. They were the Soviet's front-line air defense aircraft / interceptor to defend their airspace from incoming threats imposed by possible US strategic bombers and their escort aircraft. Even at that point in the late 70s, their air defense fleets were still comprised largely of MiG-19PM, Su-9 and Su-11 aircraft. In order to redeem this, the MiG-23P model was designed to modernize the interceptor fleet. This was a dedicated interceptor based on the MiG-23M. By dedicated and serious interceptor, they meant it; it did not have any form of CAS or air-to-ground capabilities. Even though it was a converted MiG-23M, it did not have the TP-23 IRST system, but its radar was the improved Sapfir-23P / RP-23P which replaced the older RP-23D-III; it further improved the LD/SD feature. Later on in their service life (in 1982), the MiG-23P and MiG-23bis received the R-60M and R-24R/T air-to-air missiles with fantastic tracking capabilities and made its arsenal deadlier, given the retrofit made it possible for the aircraft to load 2 x R-24R/T (the R-24's stats are given in the MiG-23MLA section) and 4 x R-60M. This is thanks to retrofitting the aircraft with the Sapfir RP-23MLA radar used by the MiG-23MLA.

 

Speaking of which, the only difference between the MiG-23P and MiG-23bis is that the latter had IRST and a HUD display with information. Some sources may also indicate that the MiG-23bis is also the designation give to the MiG-23Ps which were retrofitted with the RP-23P (RP-23MLA) radar and R-24 missiles.

 

 

Technically, it had CAS capabilities, but they were operationally ommitted. The PVO did in fact arm them with Kh-23 air-to-ground missiles, but only to train their pilots. In 1989, the Soviet government made an agreement to reduce tactical nuclear forces, so the Kh-23 was formally deleted from the MiG-23P's inventory. 

 

The MiG-23P was serially produced between 1978 and 1983, and was included in the PVO's inventory as soon as possible. In 1978 and 1979, it immediately began displacing the relatively outdated Su-9 and Su-11 from PVO service, becoming the backbone of the PVO alongside the Su-15TM at that time. 

 

Outwardly, it heavily resembled the MiG-23ML because it was also built at the Znamya-Truda plant located in Moscow. 

 

 

Game Equivalent: MiG-21SMT, MiG-21MF, F-4E, F-4EJ etc (to a lesser extent, mostly an equivalent to the F-4C and F-4M)

 

Pros:

• Fast in top speed, acceleration and climb rate
• Well-armed against air targets
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• Retrofitted R-24R BVR missiles and their R-24T heat-seeking counterparts in the late 1980s, superior to the AIM-7E in all aspects and rivals to the AIM-7F
• Thanks to the leading edge flaps, it was more maneuverable than all non-slatted F-4s
• Newer Sapfir-23P / RP-23P radar
• R-13M1 and R-60 re-added
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability

 

Cons:

• Zero CAS capabilities: bombs, rockets and AGMs all depleted although the Kh-23 was used for training still
• Can be beaten in maneuverability in comparison with slatted F-4s 
• IRST system deleted (but later retrofitted, designated MiG-23bis)
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Lack of flares
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R, the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23ML izdeliye 23-12 - The First Definer

 

(Soviet VVS squadron walking past their MiG-23MLs)

 

The MiG-23ML is considered the first MiG-23 to define the series. It featured numerous improvements, such as the first proper and decent look-down/shoot-down radar: the Sapfir-23ML (RP-23ML). It was considerably better and more reliable in comparison to the earlier models. Its detection range was at least 70 km and its LD/SD capability was powerful and improved. The new TP-23ML IRST system replaced the older TP-23, then the TP-23ML was replaced with the TP-26 as an upgrade in the field (retrofit). Range was vastly improved and its arsenal was enriched with the addition of a loadout comprising two 23mm GSh-23s in two UPK-23-250 gunpods (one gun in each) with 250 rpg. The acceleration time from 600 to 1000 kmh was twelve seconds at full afterburner, absolute maximum AoA of 30° (with full sweep) and the maximum turn rate was 16.7° per second at 780 km/h. Furthermore, the wing received another upgrade, giving it resistance to 8.5G below mach 0.85, and above mach 0.85 it could pull 7.5G. Previously, the maximum G limit was 8G on the MiG-23M/MF/MS and MiG-23P/bis. The engine was also replaced with a more powerful one, boosting the climb rate from 195 m/s to 215 m/s, which in turn also improved its energy retention and acceleration. This new turbojet was the Tumansky R-35-300, with up to 13,000 kgf (127.5 kN) of thrust on afterburner, as opposed to 12,500 kgf (122.58 kN on the previous R-29-300.

 

 

The R-13M1, R-60 and R-60M were added, the Polyot-21-23 navigation suite was introduced, significantly better than its predecessor, Lasour-23SML datalink, SAU-23AM flight control system and the RV-5R radar altimeter. Up until the MiG-23ML, the service ceiling of all MiG-23s was 17,500 m. With this model, it was increased to 18,500 m. Its first flight was on the 21st of January, 1975, while production lasted between 1976 - 1981 for the USSR, and 1981 - 1983 for export. No fewer than 1,100 were built (MiG-23ML + MiG-23MLA). 

 

In addition, the radar scanning modes were: 30 / 60 / 90 km

 

In accordance to Victor Markovsky's book on the MiG-23 (Истребитель МиГ-23 - На защите неба Родины / MiG-23 Fighter - To protect the skies of the Motherland, Eksmo, 2017), Soviet MiG-23ML, MLA, MLD and even UB aircraft could have been fitted with bolt-on BVP-50-60 flare dispensers.

 

Although, two PKVP-23 chaff/flare dispensers with 6 x KDS-23 cartridges each was a lot more common. 

 

Exported MiG-23MLs typically had worse avionics, and its operators were most WP members.

 

 

Game Equivalent: challenges the F-4E, MiG-21SMT, Mirage IIIC and the other top jets quite well

 

Pros:

• New Sapfir-23ML (RP-23ML) radar with considerable more range, reliability and LD/SD capabilities in comparison to the older radars
• High top speed and acceleration
• Climb rate improved from 195 m/s (MiG-23M/MF/MS) to 215 m/s due to the new powerplant
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• Superior to all non-slatted F-4s in maneuverability
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• The first MiG-23 model with a wing G load of 8.5G, improved from 8G
• R-13M, R-13M1, R-60 and R-60M were available (in addition to the obvious R-23R and R-23T)
• IRST system was improved from the TP-23 to the TP-23ML model, later retrofitted with the better TP-26
• Introduced the optional gunpod loadout of 2 x UPK-23-250 gunpods (one 23mm GSh-23 w/250 rounds each)
• Decent CAS loadouts as the MiG-23M
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability
• BVP-50-60 flare dispensers; possibly retrofitted in the Soviet-Afghan War but definitely had KDS-23s

 

Cons:

• Underwhelming sustained maneuverability as with every MiG-23
• Designed for BVR, but still limited in that aspect, as the R-23 missile still lacked the desired range
• Fast, but in the game it would not the fastest at sea level (1,350 km/h)
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R (its top BVR missile), the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom
• KDS-23 flare dispensers only had twelve cartridges in total (2x6)

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MLA izdeliye 23-16 - The Final Of The Last Generation
 

 

 

The MiG-23MLA is the last model to feature the generation before modernity, and also the unofficial designation applied to upgraded MiG-23ML aircraft; as the upgrades are classified as retrofitting, especially since most MiG-23MLA units were originally converted MiG-23MLs.

 

Its radar was upgraded from the MiG-23ML's Sapfir-23ML (RP-23ML) to the Sapfir-23MLA (RP-23MLA) (or Ametist RP-23MLA, hence the "A"), with even more resistance to ground clutter yet similar range to the previous RP-23ML. Standard detection range capped at 70 km, although in some cases it could reach as far as 85 - 90 km given that the target's size is as big as something like a Stratofortress. Tracking ranges are similar to its successor, the RP-23MLA-II. 

 

Perhaps the most important addition is the R-24R and R-24T missiles, thanks to the new radar. These are a development of the R-23R/T, featuring higher track rate, G loads, range and warhead weight.

 

R-23 vs R-24 Missiles

 

• Track rate: 12°/s ---> 20°/s
• Air G limit: 20G ---> 24G
• Launch G limit: 4G ---> 7G
• Launch G limit (target must not be pulling more than provided before missile fire): 5G ---> 7G
• Range (SARH models): 8-10 km (rear quarter), 25 km forward quarter for the (R-23R) ---> 20 km (rear quarter, and 35 km (forward quarter) (R-24R)
• Range (IR models): 8-10 km (rear quarter), 11 km (forward quarter) (R-23T) ---> 20 km (rear quarter), 12 km (forward quarter) (R-24T)
• Warhead weight: 25 kg ---> 35 kg

 

However, the ranges provided for the R-24s are based on the maximum practical engagement distance(s) against slow-flying targets. They could keep flying up to 50 km before self-destructing. 

 

According to Victor Markovsky's book "MiG-23 - To Protect the Skies of the Motherland", and accounts from pilots and technicians which RAZBAM (DCS module developer) contacted, it was also retrofitted with BVP-50-60 internal flare dispensers later on in its service life during the Soviet-Afghan War, These were bolt-on racks which could be removed at any given time. The MiG-23ML, MiG-23MLD and MiG-23UB also had it. And considering that the MiG-23UB is a dual-seat MF essentially, and the UM is an ML with two seats, it seems that there is no doubt that ML and MLAs had flares, aside from text proof. There's photographic evidence of MiG-23UMs equipped with BVP-50-60s. 

 

In addition, Yefim Gordon's "MiG-23/27: Famous Russian Aircraft" provides information on some examples of the MiG-23ML and MLA variants being retrofitted with the SPO-15LE Beryoza RWR. In Gordon's other book, the KDS-23 flare dispensers are mentioned.

 

This is the most advanced model the game is capable of receiving at the moment. Further beyond, you see tier 7 missiles and avionics, UNLESS they add the MiG-23MLD without the R-60M and R-73A. 

 

This is also the best fitting model for the current meta. If added, it will be capable of loading 2 x R-24T + 4 x R-60. The R-24Ts are proven to be deadly (as I explained when I mentioned the stats) and its radar is the best at competing with the radars of the Phantoms. 

 

Exported to Warsaw Pact nations and other countries such as Iraq.

 

 

Game Equivalent: seriously challenging the F-4E, Mirage IIIC, J35D Draken, MiG-21SMT and all other top jets

 

Pros:

• Impressive R-24 missiles with decent performance and range
• Wide variety of air-to-air missiles: R-3S, R-3R, R-13M, R-13M1, R-23R, R-23T, R-24R, R-24T, R-60, R-60M
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Pulse-Doppler Sapfir-23MLA (RP-23MLA) radar with a detection range of 75 km and 52 km of tracking range (at high altitude) against bomber-sized targets
• Powerful look-down/shoot-down capability (LD/SD) 
• BVP-50-60 internal flare dispensers retrofit
• Better ECM resistance than the previous models
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds in comparison to the MiG-21
• Deadly air-to-air loadouts, notably two R-24s and six R-60/Ms
• New R-24 missiles with 25G load, the R-24R BVR SARH model being superior to the AIM-7E and a deadly rival to the AIM-7F, the R-24T heat-seeking model with tremendous range for an IR missile and high maneuverability
• Superior to all non-slatted F-4s in maneuverability
• Decent CAS loadouts as on the MiG-23M and MiG-23ML
• Same speed characteristics as the MiG-23ML, impressively fast
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3, later replaced with the SPO-15LE Beryoza
• The new Type 26Sh-1 IRST system replaced the older TP-23ML
• Considering "MLA is the unofficial designation given to retrofitted MiG-23MLs, it can be added as a researchable modification for the MiG-23ML like the T-72B3's UBH mod
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability

 

Cons:

• Underwhelming sustained maneuverability as with most MiG-23s, the F-4 has a chance at beating it in a sustained dogfight as long as it has slats
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Although pretty fast, at sea level the Mirage, Draken and the Phantoms will still outrun it in the game
• In comparison to the counterpart of the R-23R, the AIM-7E, it was less maneuverable (20G vs 25G)
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom
• Despite the radar being powerful, it was not immune to ground clutter, and its contemporary the F-4 had a radar with more range

 

 

 

(Bulgarian MiG-23MLA loadout showcase)                                                                                                            

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MLD izdeliye 23-18 / izdeliye 23-19 / izdeliye 23-22A - A Fearful Opponent

 

 

In 1982, a significant upgrade program was assigned to the MiG-23. New type of slats were added called dog-toothed or saw-toothed slats, which gave the plane considerably more maneuverability when deployed in comparison to the previous MiG-23s with normal slats. With the addition of the new slats, and the wing sweep configuration at 45° was being reduced to 36°, the wings became known as Edition 4 (also known as Type 4 in other sources).

 

The new Sapfir-23MLA-II radar, also known as N008, was introduced, with better and more powerful LD/SD.  At high altitude it was capable of up to 75 km of detection range for bomber-sized targets, 52 km for fighter-sized targets while also capable of tracking from distances up to 39 - 52 km depending on the target's size at high altitude, in addition to 23 km of detection at low altitude for all target sizes, 23 km of tracking large targets and 15 km for fighter-sized targets such as a MiG-21 or an F-4 (at low altitude), better ECM resistance and look-down modes. The Type 26Sh infrared search and track system was upgraded to the Type 26Sh-1 standard with more range. Furthermore, later in 1982, the MiG-23MLD was further improved to the izdeliye 23-19 standard; which saw the older SPO-10M Sirena-3 radar-warning-receiver (RWR) replaced with the new SPO-15LE Beryoza, which is similar to the better SPO-15LM used on the MiG-29 and Su-27, the difference is that the SPO-15 was capable of identifying threats rather than just warn you about aircraft nearby (either friendly or foe) and from more angles.

 

With the new and more powerful engine, it could reach 1,400 km/h in a straight line at sea level, but it risked wing failure, and the climb rate was improved from 215 m/s to 225 m/s. Its service ceiling was improved by just 100 meters in comparison to the MiG-23ML and MLA. The wing sweep at 45° was reduced to 36°. Arguably the most influential change it received was the addition of the R-73, which was a 40-60G missile capable of tracking 60°/s! The base model had a gimbal limit of 40°, the R-73M with 60° (like the AIM-9L) and R-74 with 75° (gimbal limit is represented as the larger circle around the lock in the game, the larger it is the more firing angles), but only the base model (R-73A) was included. This is a tier 7 weapon, if added the MiG-23MLD will be capable enough to deal with F-14s and F-15s as long as the dogfights are short.

 

 

Furthermore, it was fitted with PVKP-23 two six-round flare dispensers, making the count 12 cartridges in total. This setup was quickly replaced by the much heavier and more expensive BVP-50-60s with 60 flares in total, combined with the PVKP-23 (also known as KDS-23) which brought the count to 72 cartridges. 

 

Exported MiG-23MLDs typically had worse equipment. For example the Syrian MiG-23MLD had the Sapfir-23MLA / N003E radar instead, lacked the dog-tooth edges. The Syrian MiG-23MLDs are of the first exported models designed, designated MiG-23MLD izdeliye 23-19B. 50 of such models were delivered to Syria. The export models regained the R-3S, R-3R, R-13M and R-60 air-to-air missiles despite export policies.

 

The other export model was the MiG-23MLD izdeliye 23-22A, which was specifically built for Bulgaria and a delivery of 16 examples took place. It again lacked the vortex generators, the additional dog-tooths on the wing gloves and the overwing chaff/flare dispensers but the avionics suite remained the same. 

 

(Captured Syrian MiG-23MLD izdeliye 23-19B, extensively evaluated by Israel)

 

66 built, in addition to 560 conversions from the MiG-23P and MiG-23ML combined. The 66 examples were the ones built for export; 50 for Syria and 16 for Bulgaria.

 

Despite the MiG-23MLD gaining the R-73 missile, it retained all the previous loadouts (R-3S, R-13M, R-13M1, R-23R, R-23T, R-24R, R-24T and R-60). Given that, Gaijin could add the MiG-23MLD with only those, and when more advanced missiles become a thing in the game, it has expansion potential. 

 

Maneuverability and speed compared to some other aircraft:

 

Interestingly, a 32 page document supplemented to the standard Air Combat Manual concluded that the export Syrian MiG-23MLD was far superior to the Kfir C.2 in maneuverability at all speeds below 4000 m, slightly superior to the F-4 and slightly inferior to the F-15A and F-16A. Presumably against the non-slatted F-4E, the Eksport MiG-23MLD (bear in mind it did not have the new slats and vortex generator plates also) surpassed the Phantom in maneuverability below 400 km/h at speeds between 700 and 1,000 km/h. It also outclassed the F-4 in zoom climbing under all conditions except between 900 and 1,200 km/h at 6,400 m. 

 

In addition, it was actually capable of outclimbing the F-15A in zoom climbs at speeds higher than 1,150 km/h, and the F-16A was inferior in sustained turns at near maximum speeds above 5,000 m, and in zoom climbs at speeds in excess of 1,100 km/h. Finally, the Kfir C.2 was assed to be inferior in maneuverability at all speeds below 4,000 m and in zoom climbing below 1,000 km/h. 

 

Game Equivalent: F-4E, F-4EJ (balanced loadouts) OR currently out of bounds (if R-60M and R-73A are included)

 

Pros:

• R-73 missile, capable of 40~60G overload and a track rate of 60°/s
• With the new R-73, it could load an even deadlier loadout of 2 x R-24R/T + 2 x R-73
• Fast in general and faster than the previous models; its top speed at sea level was increased from 1,350 km/h to 1,400 km/h and its climb rate from 215 m/s to 225 m/s
• Outruns the Mirage and F-4
• Type 26Sh-1 IRST
• Retained all the previous AAM loadouts: R-3S, R-13M, R-13M1, R-23R, R-23T, R-24R, R-24T and R-60
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Sapfir-23MLA-II radar with improved LD/SD and more range
• RWR was improved; SPO-10M Sirena-3 replaced with SPO-15LE Beryoza with more angles of enemy aircraft detection and capability if identifying threat (previously it only simply warned about aircraft, friendly or foe)
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds in comparison to the MiG-21
• Regular leading-edge slats improved to the saw-toothed standard, giving the aircraft more maneuverability than usual
• BVP-50-60 internal flare dispensers with 72 rounds of PPI-50 OR PVKP-23 flare dispensers with 12 rounds
• Very good at CAS
• Highly maneuverable thanks to the new leading edge slats and vortex generator plates; superior to Israeli Mirages (Kfir C.2) at all speeds below 4000 m 

 

Cons: 

• The R-73 missile puts the plane out of bounds for the game (currently, if added)
• Its 1,400 km/h IAS wing rip speed puts it at danger considering it's capable of reaching that then ripping in a straight line
• Radar still prone to ground clutter despite being powerful
• Radar's detection range underwhelming compared to that of the F-4 Phantom
• Capable of loading only two radar-homing BVR missiles as opposed to four on the F-4 Phantom

 

 

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23-98-1 / MiG-23-98-2 / MiG-23-98-3 - The Modern Floggers

 

 

In the mid 90's, Mikoyan-Gurevich OKB together with Phazotron-NIIR and GosNIIAS, launched work on the modernization of the MiG-23, focusing on potential foreign demand. The main area of work was the renewal of avionics of the aircraft, primarily the radar. Initially, the replacement of the Sapfir-23 type station with the newer Super Spear was considered. However, in the future it was decided to equip the MiG-23 with more modern Moskit-23 (Mosquito-23) radar, and with that the MiG-23-98-1 was born. Thanks to the addition of this system, the MiG-23 now has a detection range of up to 100 km (62 mi) in head-on and pursuit modes against fighter-sized targets, and provides the possibility of introducing modern air-to-air missiles, such as the R-73, R-27R / R-27ER, R-27T / R-27ET and the famed R-77 into the armament of the fighter, as well as anti-ship missiles such as Kh-31A and adjustable bombs with the television-homing KAB-500KR bombs. In order to work out the decisions of the aircraft modernization program, in 1999 an experimental prototype was created, which received the designation MiG-23-98.

In addition, the MiG-23 layout allows it to be equipped with the Topaz radar, the same radar in use with the MiG-29SMT. At the same time, the upgraded MiG-23 receives almost the same capabalities as the MiG-29 in conducting BVR air missile combat without visual contact with the enemy, as well as in actions against land and sea targets. Insufficient visibility from the cockpit of the MiG-23 is supposed to be improved by installing a bezel-free visor for the light of the cockpit (as on the MiG-21-93). The use of overhead containers with optoelectronic equipment allows the introduction of laser-guided missiles such as the Kh-25ML, Kh-25L and Kh-29L, in addition to the KAB-500L bombs. At the request of the customer, it's possible to equip the exported units with guided weapons of foreign manufacturing. The combat capabilities of the MiG-23 are significantly improved due to the introduction of new avionics, in particular, the multifunctional MFI-68 color indicators on liquid crystals, already tested for the MiG-29SMT. It's also capable of supplementing the navigation equipment with the receiver of the GLONASS / GPS satellite navigation system.

 

There have also been other alternatives around this design; the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23-98-2 housed a weaker Moskit-21 radar with up to 60 km (37 mi) of detection range against fighter-sized targets, however it could still fire the same missiles as the previous MiG-23-98-1, but also worked around with a new digital computer, a new weapons control system as well as new inertial navigation & GPS systems and enhanced electronic warfare.

 

The last subversion is the MiG-23-98-3, developed mainly for Third World countries. This is essentially the severely downgraded MiG-23MS that was exported to Syria, Iraq, India, Libya and Cuba, but with the Sapfir RP-23E radar and an improved antenna, as opposed to the RP-22SM. This radar allowed the detection range to be capped at 50 km (31 mi) max in head-on mode, and 40 km (25 mi) in pursuit. A major downfall is that the radar weighed a hefty 360 kg (794 lbs). 

 

As a conclusion, the MiG-23-98-1 is the most modern variant of the MiG-23, followed by the MiG-23-98-2, with modern missiles used by the MiG-29, Su-27 and every modern Russian jet fighter. The MiG-23-98-3 is left out in the modern category as it was considered for developing countries; it is comparable to the MiG-23ML and MLA in combat efficiency.

 

Only one built apparently, a conversion from the MiG-23MLD, but modified three times for potential future developments. 

 

The MiG-23-98-1 and 98-2 are only applicable for tier 7. 

 

 

Game Equivalent: None, currently seriously out of bounds

 

Pros: 

• Highly deadly missile loadouts
• Same high-speed characteristics as the MiG-23MLD
• Highly improved radar in comparison to the MiG-23MLD; up to 100 km (67 mi) of detection range with the Moskit-23 radar vs 75 km of the RP-23MLA-II on the MiG-23mLD
• Impressive new and modern avionics
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Has the SPO-15LE Beryoza RWR
• The same saw-toothed leading edge-slats as the MiG-23MLD
• Quite fast especially at high altitude
• BVP-50-60 internal flare dispensers 
• Very good at CAS
• Capable of anti-ship warfare utilizing the Kh-31A anti-ship missiles

 

Cons:

• Seriously currently out of bounds for the game, given the modern missiles and avionics
• Impressive radar, but typical modern radars such as the TO19M Topaz are marginally better
• Limited customized combinations of missiles; for example it can load up to 4 x R-73, but not 6 x R-73 as on the MiG-29 and up to ten on the Su-27
• The MiG-23-98-3 subversion is underwhelming
• Same sustained maneuverability as the MiG-23MLD
• Older airframe

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

do you have any infos on the different type of RWR ? it could help to understand why this one is better than the older one

[Sir Rebral Palsy 2,423]

Only if BR decompression is fixed first.

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

1 hour ago, Gorge_S_Fatton said:

Only if BR decompression is fixed first.

Why would that matter, the initial production variant could easily be 10.0

 

But yeah, compression isn't going to stop Gaijin from spamming new content, and if the F-4E can be in game I see no reason why the MiG-23 couldn't be.

 

edit: misread the AAMs available to MiG-23S, I realize it can't be lower than 10.0 now

Edited July 13, 2020 by watch_your_fire

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

On 13/07/2020 at 02:09, MonkeyBussiness said:

do you have any infos on the different type of RWR ? it could help to understand why this one is better than the older one

 

The newer SPO-15L has more coverage than the SPO-10M in terms of range and various types of angles of detection 

 

On 13/07/2020 at 04:13, watch_your_fire said:

On 13/07/2020 at 02:35, Gorge_S_Fatton said:

Only if BR decompression is fixed first.

Why would that matter, the initial production variant could easily be 10.0

 

Not only that.. you have the MiG-23M, ML and MLA to pick from. No need for the earliest model, it's a little too late for it anyway.

 

In my opinion we should get the MiG-23MLA first as it's the most compatible and the best variant for the current meta. After many players get accustomed and introduced to the MiG-23 with (very) positive impressions of it, should get the earlier models.

 

I think if you introduce an earlier model like the MiG-23SM, it might turn out to be underwhelming and many or some players will generalize the whole family as "bad" because the first treatment they got wasn't good. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

Couple of small updates for more info and to make things clearer

[TeaParty4622 301]

I really don't know why you labelled Mig-23 variants with *sigh* 'MIG-21F-13'!!!!!!!

 

You equalized jet of early 1960s that never had any advanced armaments unlikely of F-4C. It ended service there, and sold, or converted to other late variants of Mig-21s. 

 

I know. Equalizing and making comparison is quita hard. I agree with your post equalizing Mig-23S to Mig-23SM variant with F-4C but not the Mig-21F-13. Even if we count them as only with the jets that are in the game.

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

1 hour ago, Neptune42 said:

I really don't know why you labelled Mig-23 variants with *sigh* 'MIG-21F-13'!!!!!!!

 

You equalized jet of early 1960s that never had any advanced armaments unlikely of F-4C. It ended service there, and sold, or converted to other late variants of Mig-21s. 

 

I know. Equalizing and making comparison is quita hard. I agree with your post equalizing Mig-23S to Mig-23SM variant with F-4C but not the Mig-21F-13. Even if we count them as only with the jets that are in the game.

 

The MiG-23S climbed and accelerated slightly worse than the MiG-21F-13 at speeds below mach 1, in fact on paper it felt short of 29 m/s in climb rate, shared early missiles too, and felt in comparison when it came to maneuvering. They're in the same class of "early mach 2 armed with early missiles". 

 

It's a sidegrade; trading some T/W and maneuverability for two more early missiles and more raw speed. 

 

Besides the MiG-21F-13 is wildly underestimated and forgotten because the MiG-21SMT is a lot easier to fly. That's not to say the F-13 can't perform and isn't fun, because I do enjoy it and don't feel like it's stressful, but that's off topic. 

Edited July 14, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[TeaParty4622 301]

26 minutes ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

 

The MiG-23S climbed and accelerated slightly worse than the MiG-21F-13 at speeds below mach 1, in fact on paper it felt short of 29 m/s in climb rate, shared early missiles too, and felt in comparison when it came to maneuvering. They're in the same class of "early mach 2 armed with early missiles". 

 

It's a sidegrade; trading some T/W and maneuverability for two more early missiles and more raw speed. 

 

Besides the MiG-21F-13 is wildly underestimated and forgotten because the MiG-21SMT is a lot easier to fly. That's not to say the F-13 can't perform and isn't fun, because I do enjoy it and don't feel like it's stressful, but that's off topic. 

'Shared early missiles'

 

The only system what Mig-21F-13 used with was R-3S. I personally, stressed with its poor armament as well as real soviet and other mig-21 used armed forces and pilots so they MADE Mig-21PFM with gunpods, AND made Mig-21S and SM. Mig-21F-13 was purposed on short-but fast intercepter role but not a decent fighter. It deserves forgotten the reason it came out too early and soviets had plans to withdrawn its service with more capable fighters. 

 

North vietnamese used those in a degree of suceess because they used as of INTERCEPTERS. Hit and run tactic on the tails of long-ranged bombing attempt on USAF jets came from thailand and guam, da nang(actually da nang and tan son nhut was fouces with in-south vietnamese territorial CAS mission)

 

Mig-21F-13 itself is somewhat challenging jet to fly and i admit if you got a kill with it it is fruitful. But frustration kicks in more than that.

 

Outdated-discarded jet = shiny jet that came out somewhat about 10 years after the outdated jet.

 

Yeah your logic is 100% accurate.

1 minute ago, Neptune42 said:

'Shared early missiles'

 

The only system what Mig-21F-13 used with was R-3S. I personally, stressed with its poor armament as well as real soviet and other mig-21 used armed forces and pilots so they MADE Mig-21PFM with gunpods, AND made Mig-21S and SM. Mig-21F-13 was purposed on short-but fast intercepter role but not a decent fighter. It deserves forgotten the reason it came out too early and soviets had plans to withdrawn its service with more capable fighters. 

 

North vietnamese used those in a degree of suceess because they used as of INTERCEPTERS. Hit and run tactic on the tails of long-ranged bombing attempt on USAF jets came from thailand and guam, da nang(actually da nang and tan son nhut was fouces with in-south vietnamese territorial CAS mission)

 

Mig-21F-13 itself is somewhat challenging jet to fly and i admit if you got a kill with it it is fruitful. But frustration kicks in more than that.

 

Outdated-discarded jet = shiny jet that came out somewhat about 10 years after the outdated jet.

 

Yeah your logic is 100% accurate.

Gaijin actually ***** up its mig trees with ignoring Mig-21S/SM and what more, Mig-21PFM. And skipped soviet tech level up right to the 1970s. They skipped 1960s tech and AAM!!

 

We need early Mig-21 variants prior of Mig-23 FIRST. 

[TeaParty4622 301]

Btw. Mig-23 have inferior interface RWR compared to western RWR sets. Which both western and eastern RWR screen is not entirly implemented to the game, rather, current WT's RWR implementation is too poor. Just copy-pasted SPO-10 RWR screen of Mig-21SMT to every jet having RWR.

 

SPO-10 RWR screen.

AN/APR-25 RWR screen. 24/25/26/30/35/36... all early western RWRs shared this screen. Shows the pilot where the radar is located and the specific direction where radar is coming from. 

AN/APR-25's threat warning indicator. Western RWRs could give you as specific as they can what are the threats expected from those radar bend frequencies. 

 

AN/APR-25 fielded on 1967. As well as ballistics computer mounted F-4D which provided CCIP&CCRP for the pilot. Which WT players of this forum believed it came with as modifications of 1980s.

 

You want me to continue what i've seen in this forum tons of BS believed as of truth and trustable? 

Edited July 14, 2020 by Neptune42

[TeaParty4622 301]

This is the front page of SPO-10 installation manual what i've got. There was no sign of 'extra' threat indicator alonged with that RWR screen. 

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

12 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

'Shared early missiles'

 

The only system what Mig-21F-13 used with was R-3S. I personally, stressed with its poor armament as well as real soviet and other mig-21 used armed forces and pilots so they MADE Mig-21PFM with gunpods, AND made Mig-21S and SM. Mig-21F-13 was purposed on short-but fast intercepter role but not a decent fighter. It deserves forgotten the reason it came out too early and soviets had plans to withdrawn its service with more capable fighters. 

 

12 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

Outdated-discarded jet = shiny jet that came out somewhat about 10 years after the outdated jet.

 

Yeah your logic is 100% accurate.

 

 

Ok, I think you're making the mistake of assuming I am comparing them IRL. I am not, I added the small comparison/"game equivalent" section to help those who are interested understand what kind of aircraft they are reading, because judgment is often based on "how will this vehicle do against that one". It's an in-game type of comparison, not a real life one. 

 

12 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

Gaijin actually ***** up its mig trees with ignoring Mig-21S/SM and what more, Mig-21PFM. And skipped soviet tech level up right to the 1970s. They skipped 1960s tech and AAM!!

 

We need early Mig-21 variants prior of Mig-23 FIRST. 

 

I would've also liked the MiG-21PFM but considering all it offered over the MiG-21F-13 was two more R-3S missiles (later retrofitted with the R-13M which we're supposed to have for the SMT right now) and a radar system I wasn't going to get really hyped over it. 

 

We're not missing out on 60s tech, we already have it. In fact, the MiG-21SMT has all of it and with a bonus, considering the MiG-21SM was introduced in 1968 and later retrofitted with the R-60, much like the SMT which is derived from it. 

 

Early MiG-21s have significant history, but it's already late for the time being until they decompress the matchmaker. We should look for Russian jets significant towards gameplay, not in history.

 

12 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

Btw. Mig-23 have inferior interface RWR compared to western RWR sets. Which both western and eastern RWR screen is not entirly implemented to the game, rather, current WT's RWR implementation is too poor. Just copy-pasted SPO-10 RWR screen of Mig-21SMT to every jet having RWR.

 

Yeah, I'm aware and it's obvious. They're all modeled the same with no difference. Hopefully that gets fixed, but I'm not sure how that's relevant here.

 

12 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

AN/APR-25's threat warning indicator. Western RWRs could give you as specific as they can what are the threats expected from those radar bend frequencies. 

 

AN/APR-25 fielded on 1967. As well as ballistics computer mounted F-4D which provided CCIP&CCRP for the pilot. Which WT players of this forum believed it came with as modifications of 1980s.

 

You want me to continue what i've seen in this forum tons of BS believed as of truth and trustable? 

 

Which part of this has anything to do with the thread?

 

Try making separate threads for each issue you have instead of ranting everything off your mind in one place that's irrelevant to the thoughts you want to share. I'm not sure why I should discuss how RWR is inaccurate in the game and how or why there's BS in the forum when this is a thread specifically for the models of the MiG-23. Don't get carried away please. 

Edited July 14, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[TeaParty4622 301]

34 minutes ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Early MiG-21s have significant history, but it's already late for the time being until they decompress the matchmaker. We should look for Russian jets significant towards gameplay, not in history.

The GAMEPLAY of WT is the history. The reason why gaijin's early tree conduction was firm and somewhat little balanced making players come and play were they conducted the each planes place in TT according to its historical position of its era and its performances. I want to point out the all TTs came out after the rank 6's introduction became somwhat poorly conducted. There are holes everywhere,unhabitable to progress due to lack of abundant vecs to support the player actually participate smoothly and deeply into the game.

 

Didn't you played this game long enough to understand this?

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

5 minutes ago, Neptune42 said:

The GAMEPLAY of WT is the history. The reason why gaijin's early tree conduction was firm and somewhat little balanced making players come and play were they conducted the each planes place in TT according to its historical position of its era and its performances. I want to point out the all TTs came out after the rank 6's introduction became somwhat poorly conducted. There are holes everywhere,unhabitable to progress due to lack of abundant vecs to support the player actually participate smoothly and deeply into the game.

 

Didn't you played this game long enough to understand this?

 

There's more than one way to interpret how history affects War Thunder's gameplay. The way I like to look at it is that a vehicle should only be added if it's historical performance will make it significant enough in the matchmaker; like how the F-4E historical significance in air to air capabilities was added to counter the MiG-21SMT. 

 

That view is a lot more important than the variant simply being historically important, disregarding how it would affect the game. Because while the MiG-21PFM was mass produced with over 900 examples built and was the first good MiG-21 model, that doesn't mean it should still be added to the game soon because the current standards for a significant new 10.3 BR addition is a fast jet armed with good missiles.

 

This is off topic, please don't get carried away. But if you want to discuss the MiG-23 (and strictly that is, because it's the point of this thread), I'll be happy to engage.

[TeaParty4622 301]

16 minutes ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

This is off topic, please don't get carried away. But if you want to discuss the MiG-23 (and strictly that is, because it's the point of this thread), I'll be happy to engage.

Yes. Let's talk assumption of how Mig-23 variants be in the game.

 

How you think about Mig-23BN/Mig-27 in the game? Will it placed after the IL-28 line as it also performed role of tactical-bomber? I'm looking forward of it as well as normal Mig-23ML. And as East german's Luftstreikrafte as well, used Mig-23BN. Will german TT get the Mig-23BN as well after the Me262A-1/U-2? Or after the G.91R/3? 

 

And i think Mig-23BN will satisfy what soviet tankers kept on claiming about aerial CAS denial assets as well as CAS assets were lacking for them. As it can hav as many AAM as it can equals of 4xAAMs(R-60/60M), and 2 additional soviet bullpups with it.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Neptune42

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

21 minutes ago, Neptune42 said:

How you think about Mig-23BN/Mig-27 in the game? Will it placed after the IL-28 line as it also performed role of tactical-bomber? I'm looking forward of it as well as normal Mig-23ML. And as East german's Luftstreikrafte as well, used Mig-23BN. Will german TT get the Mig-23BN as well after the Me262A-1/U-2? Or after the G.91R/3? 

 

Those will be pretty good additions and the ground-attack models really interest me. 

 

I think the Germans should get the Su-20 or Su-22, because they won't be copy pasted like if the Russians get the MiG-23BN too, but either way they will probably place those attackers after the Me 262 A-1/U4.

 

I have this illustration of the MiG-27D

 

Spoiler

 

It's slightly off topic since the ground attack variants are kind of a different family so I plan to make a separate post for them, but it's fine. 

Edited July 14, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[TeaParty4622 301]

1 hour ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

 

I think the Germans should get the Su-20 or Su-22, because they won't be copy pasted like if the Russians get the MiG-23BN too, but either way they will probably place those attackers after the Me 262 A-1/U4.

As far as i know, Su-22 series were better at ground attacking role. 

 

And as of Normal Mig-23 variants, Will we have Mig-23ML and Mig-23MLA, or Mig-23SM and Mig-23MLA, or Mig-23MLA in sole? I started to feel soviet jet fighter line should go seperated as like of american tree. Or having a mass-folder to include all the other but significant variants of Mig-21s and right next to Mig-23.(folder or sole) 

 

I'm worried about as like of F-4E in WT, We might get frankenstein Mig-23 as modeling of late 1980's MLA, having MLA's flare dispenser, but 4x R-60 AAMs and be called 'Mig-23ML'. 

[ColdMatches 943]

2 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

late 1980's

*late 70s- Mid 80s

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

2 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

And as of Normal Mig-23 variants, Will we have Mig-23ML and Mig-23MLA, or Mig-23SM and Mig-23MLA, or Mig-23MLA in sole? I started to feel soviet jet fighter line should go seperated as like of american tree. Or having a mass-folder to include all the other but significant variants of Mig-21s and right next to Mig-23.(folder or sole) 

 

In my opinion the USSR should get the MiG-23MLA first, then the MiG-23M. The differences between the MiG-23ML and MLA are not big, so they would provide almost the same experience. The MiG-23M on the other hand is different enough although worse. They should not get the MiG-23S and SM either, until the matchmaker is decompressed enough. 

 

The MiG-23s could go after the MiG-21 no problem, no need for another line unless progression starts to become really long and tedious. 

2 hours ago, Neptune42 said:

I'm worried about as like of F-4E in WT, We might get frankenstein Mig-23 as modeling of late 1980's MLA, having MLA's flare dispenser, but 4x R-60 AAMs and be called 'Mig-23ML'. 

 

I don't know what you mean exactly, but the MLA also has the designation of "MiG-23ML late", with flare dispensers, the new radar and the R-24s, it wouldn't be that inaccurate. 

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

MiG-23PD section added + more info 

[Zetaris 267]

Very nice post, seems very thorough!

 

A few things though:

 

On 13/07/2020 at 01:56, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

First flown in 1972, the MiG-23M was the first good model, and the first mass-produced one with 1,353 examples built.

...

Pros:

• New radar with better LD/SD (more resistant towards ground clutter)
• Better optimized for supersonic speeds compared to the MiG-21
• R-13M1 and R-60 heat-seekers added
• Variable wings like all MiG-23s, giving the aircraft more control over the its visuals, desired speed, and wing G forces
• Wing strength improved from 5G to 8G
• CAS improved with the addition of the Kh-23M
• Had RWR; SPO-10M Sirena-3
• Leading-edge slats, giving it good instantaneous maneuverability

 

Cons:

• Radar was still lacking in range and prone to ground clutter
• 8G wing load was still mediocre
• 1,400 km/h IAS rip speed
• Lack of flares (although SPS-141 pod possible)

 

I don't know if you know this, but maximum aircraft G loads are generally multiplied by 1.5 for War Thunder. E.g. 7G becomes 10.5G (which is why most full-fuel F-86s tend to rip at about 11). So 8G for the MiG-23M (or 12G in War Thunder) is actually pretty good. Admittedly, this would probably be closer to 10.5 or 11G once you stick a bunch of missiles on it, but it's still decent compared to most other current top tier jets.

 

Also, could you put sources at the bottom when you get time?

[Raldi92 2,923]

On 12/07/2020 at 17:56, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

 

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MLA - The Final Of The Last Generation
 

 

 

 

 

Red '' 09 '' Sovier MIG-23  is not an MLA  but an MLD as it can be attested here  https://www.16va.be/page_mig-23mld_tanks.html .

 

I have explained you that no Soviet MLA has received ASO-2 flare dispenser , those are characteristic of MLD ( and later UM which is a standalone trainer )  .

 

About time you start getting your facts straight  !

 

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

On 24/07/2020 at 14:06, Raldi92 said:

I have explained you that no Soviet MLA has received ASO-2 flare dispenser , those are characteristic of MLD ( and later UM which is a standalone trainer )  .

About time you start getting your facts straight  !

 

No one claimed that Soviet MiG-23MLAs received ASO-2 flare dispensers. Now it seems like back in that thread you were arguing with a wall because you replied to claims no one ever made.

 

Multiple places claim that Soviet MLAs BVP-50-60 received flare dispensers during the Soviet-Afghan War, especially before 1982 since the MLD wasn't available at the time and flares were needed during those hot risk missions. 

 

Retrofitting was a common practice back then, even some MiG-23MLs were upgraded to MLAs to fire R-24s. Some MiG-23MLs have recorded R-24 kills over Lebanon in 1982. Even the MiG-21bis didn't have ASO-2s at first and the SPS-141 pod was also a retrofit. Many weapons were also retrofitted to Soviet aircraft such as the R-13M, R-13M1 and R-60/M. 

 

Better yet, Yefim Gordon's "MiG-23/27" book from the Famous Russian Aircraft series claims in the MLA chapter that many MLAs received MLD kits as upgrades. Some received the flare dispensers alone, some received the newer RWR, some received the RP-23MLA-II radar and some received a mix.

 

You haven't provided any source against this but I'm not willing to discuss anymore. After I got to see that attitude of yours in the rumor roundup discussion thread I became demotivated from arguing with a stubborn person whose arguments are entirely based on personal conclusions of "what if / I think so" because they discovered the topic a few hours earlier / they have no background on the subject (I know you were doing quick google searches as you were writing your replies) before completely bailing out on arguing to start attacking me passively. It felt to me you were disrespectful towards the end and that you only cared about proving yourself right. I've seen enough of the way you engage in an argument so I'm going to leave it here, and don't tell me again I didn't provide any source, especially now since I quoted Yefim Gordon's book. If you dismiss that then you're essentially implying you have some sort of godlike source to argue against the most respected author and historian on Soviet aviation. Have a good day  

 

On 24/07/2020 at 13:00, Zetaris said:

Very nice post, seems very thorough!

 

 

Thanks!

 

On 24/07/2020 at 13:00, Zetaris said:

I don't know if you know this, but maximum aircraft G loads are generally multiplied by 1.5 for War Thunder. E.g. 7G becomes 10.5G (which is why most full-fuel F-86s tend to rip at about 11). So 8G for the MiG-23M (or 12G in War Thunder) is actually pretty good. Admittedly, this would probably be closer to 10.5 or 11G once you stick a bunch of missiles on it, but it's still decent compared to most other current top tier jets.

 

Also, could you put sources at the bottom when you get time?

 

Yes I know they have a simple formula for that. The pros and cons section is meant to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of the model IRL while also giving an easier understanding of the plane, because bulleted points are usually easier to read for some people compared to a paragraph, it's more organized  

Edited July 25, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[Raldi92 2,923]

On 25/07/2020 at 19:59, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

No one claimed that Soviet MiG-23MLAs received ASO-2 flare dispensers. Now it seems like back in that thread you were arguing with a wall because you replied to claims no one ever made.

 

Sorry what ?  The MLA section of your post had a  photo of a MiG-23 ''red 09''  with ASO-2 flare dispenser as headline which you now replaced after being corrected by me ( yet again )   , yet on the same breath you pretend you never claimed such a thing ..........  so either you had no idea what ASO-2 flare dispenser was prior to me correcting you or you are simply being dishonest/lying yet again .....  go figure !

 

 

On 25/07/2020 at 19:59, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Better yet, Yefim Gordon's "MiG-23/27" book from the Famous Russian Aircraft series claims in the MLA chapter that many MLAs received MLD kits as upgrades. Some received the flare dispensers alone, some received the newer RWR, some received the RP-23MLA-II radar and some received a mix.

 

Soviet MLAs that recived MLD kits as upgrades  became standalone MLDs . Soviets MLAs that recieved partial MLD upgrades  were destined to export !   Please go ahead and share  where  Yefim Gordon in his  "MiG-23/27" book  claims : '' Standalone MLAs in Soviet service where retrofited with MLD package ( fully or partially ) and still served as standalone MLAs in Soviet airfleet !

 

On 25/07/2020 at 19:59, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

You haven't provided any source against this but I'm not willing to discuss anymore.

 

Funny considering not only im the only one in this debate that has provided evidence stating  ALL soviet MLAs that recieved ''full'' MLD upgrade package served as MLDs and only export variants received ''partial'' package but on top of this you are the only one here that has never provided any evidence of standalone MLAs in Soviet service that have been retrofited with MLD upgrades  !  Irony or hypocrisy ??? You tell me !

 

On 25/07/2020 at 19:59, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

After I got to see that attitude of yours in the rumor roundup discussion thread I became demotivated from arguing with a stubborn person whose arguments are entirely based on personal conclusions of "what if / I think so" because they discovered the topic a few hours earlier / they have no background on the subject (I know you were doing quick google searches as you were writing your replies) before completely bailing out on arguing to start attacking me passively. It felt to me you were disrespectful towards the end and that you only cared about proving yourself right. I've seen enough of the way you engage in an argument so I'm going to leave it here, and don't tell me again I didn't provide any source, especially now since I quoted Yefim Gordon's book. If you dismiss that then you're essentially implying you have some sort of godlike source to argue against the most respected author and historian on Soviet aviation. Have a good day

 

Not only this is biggest pile of BS i've ever read on these forums ( seriously you have the nerve to claim that i discovered the topic hours earlier and that i have no background  when i've been making bug reports on planes before you even knew what MiG meant .... )  but on top of this  it can't be further from the reality !

 

If what you said there was even remotely true you would have 0 reason to run for moderators to delete our conversation like you did  , you know reality it's quite the oposite , i showed you that you had 0 clue on the subject ( you went as far as confusing UM with MLA ) and since you can't handle criticism you started deforming the reality and spreading BS much like you do now , then run for moderators to delete everything . So yeah if you blame me being  disrespectfull ( which i wasn't untill you started lying )  towards dishonest liers of your kind then so be it , i have no respect for peoples like you !

 

Have a good one aswell

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by Raldi92

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

15 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

Sorry what ?  The MLA section of your post had a  photo of a MiG-23 ''red 09''  with ASO-2 flare dispenser as headline which you now replaced after being corrected by me ( yet again )   , yet on the same breath you pretend you never claimed such a thing ..........  so either you had no idea what ASO-2 flare dispenser was prior to me correcting you or you are simply being dishonest/lying yet again .....  go figure !

 

Of course I know the damn ASO-2 flare dispenser! It's the one famously used on the MiG-21bis. 

 

I never claimed such a thing, I always preached the BVP-50-60 / KDS-155 flare dispensers which you obviously either can't tell that, or can't tell the difference between them and the ASO-2. 

 

It's a coincidence that the MLA picture I had was of an MLD with ASO-2s if you're speaking the truth, I never paid attention to that and I never knew. The pictures are meant for visuals only.

 

15 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

Soviet MLAs that recived MLD kits as upgrades  became standalone MLDs . Soviets MLAs that recieved partial MLD upgrades  were destined to export !   Please go ahead and share  where  Yefim Gordon in his  "MiG-23/27" book  claims : '' Standalone MLAs in Soviet service where retrofited with MLD package ( fully or partially ) and still served as standalone MLAs in Soviet airfleet !

 

You claimed that Soviet MLAs that received partial MLD upgrades were destined for export, yet at the same time in the last bit of this comment you also claimed that standalone MLAs in Soviet service with MLD received either partial or full MLD packages and served as standalone MLAs! Are you even listening to yourself? It seems that your skills in listening are not just poor to others but to yourself too! If not, you would be rationally arguing in a topic especially without fabricating claims the opposing side never made and you wouldn't be a huge headache. 

 

I'm sure there are many websites where you can find books and rent or download them for free (as is what I usually use when I don't have the money to order a hard copy), use those to read Yefim Gordon's MiG-23/27 book of his Famous Russian Aircraft series, hover over to the MLA section where it talks about its field upgrades during the Soviet-Afghan War! Other than that place there are numerous other places that claim the same whereas your statements have no backup yet you're so confident! Flares became a standard retrofit in the late 70s and early 80s when it became important to load flare dispensers. It was especially important to equip the MLA with flares considering for the first 3 years of the war there was no MLD! There are even pictures of the MLA's trainer conversions with flares and you still denied the claim, amazing how inflexible your mind can be! Even the ASO-2 of the MiG-21bis is a retrofit and there are almost no sources (if there aren't any at all) that support the idea of the F-4E's flare retrofit and I don't see you blabbering about it! 

 

Other than sources that back up the claim of the MLA receiving upgrade packages and not becoming full-on MiG-23MLDs, it's a well-known fact that the flare dispenser retrofit for already existing jets was a common and famous idea back in the late stages of the Cold War that you don't need sources to prove it! It's like asking for proof that water boils at 100 degrees, you don't really need citation, it's a fact! 

 

15 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

Funny considering not only im the only one in this debate that has provided evidence stating  ALL soviet MLAs that recieved ''full'' MLD upgrade package served as MLDs and only export variants received ''partial'' package but on top of this you are the only one here that has never provided any evidence of standalone MLAs in Soviet service that have been retrofited with MLD upgrades  !  Irony or hypocrisy ??? You tell me !

 

I have provided evidence, if only you were a good listener who wasn't stubborn and not thick-headed! 

 

15 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

Not only this is biggest pile of BS i've ever read on these forums ( seriously you have the nerve to claim that i discovered the topic hours earlier and that i have no background  when i've been making bug reports on planes before you even knew what MiG meant .... )  but on top of this  it can't be further from the reality !

 

I do have the nerve because it's true! The only bug report you made on any MiG, a quick search tells me that it's only on the MiG-21F-13 that could be found easily and it's not even a MiG-23. 

 

You do also have the nerve to claim that you knew MiGs before I did, even though it's so obvious you are average-knowledged in them and I've been into MiGs since my childhood, buying books ever since! How do you even think I made this topic and the one on Russian air to air missiles? I didn't discover those overnight. It took months of faithful learning and motivation to know better! 

 

Anybody who is well-versed in a topic can tell if the opposing side is pretentious or not. And you're calling me dishonest! As you were writing your comment you were doing quick google searches and a lot of your claims are based on your own personal conclusions and beliefs! For example claiming that RAZBAM dropped the MLA to work on the MLD because supposedly it did not have flare dispensers. 

 

15 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

If what you said there was even remotely true you would have 0 reason to run for moderators to delete our conversation like you did  , you know reality it's quite the oposite , i showed you that you had 0 clue on the subject ( you went as far as confusing UM with MLA ) and since you can't handle criticism you started deforming the reality and spreading BS much like you do now , then run for moderators to delete everything . So yeah if you blame me being  disrespectfull ( which i wasn't untill you started lying )  towards dishonest liers of your kind then so be it , i have no respect for peoples like you !

 

Have a good one aswell

 

Here you show yet again how uneducated you are on the subject! 

 

MiG-23UMs were the standard trainers for the ML/MLA that were especially used in the trainer role for their one-seater counterparts in the Soviet-Afghan War. If they were fitted with flare dispensers then sure as hell the more important (because they were meant for combat) one-seaters had flares too! This is one of the many arguments you were presented with that could be backed up that you still denied out of having a thick head. 

 

I asked the moderators to delete the conversation because it was getting out of hand on your part. You were passively attacking me because you realized you couldn't argue back with solid arguments backed up by any form of source whatsoever, and ironically enough that was exactly when you showed you had 0 clue because you had nothing better to say than to attack me! It was getting ridiculous from your comments. 

 

Me not handling criticism is a pile of joke, I've been to many debates where I handled criticism and the opposing side was friendly. You on the other hand have a passive, hostile attitude in the way you argue and in general especially considering you weren't even criticising me to begin with, but passively attacking. You're really funny. 

 

Have a good one.