MiG-23 MLD vs F-16 and contemporary fighter aircraft

[MiG-29SMT]

They certainly didn't have any issue when admitting F-18 got shot down by Mig-25 or when F-16 got shot down by SA-3. And friendly fire aren't an exactly rare occurrences on the battlefield, for example: AH-64 did destroy a friendly APC, F-16 did launch HARM at a PAC-2 site, India did shot down their own Mi-17 ..etc
. Besides, talking about propaganda would be the pot calling the kettle black, let not pretend like Soviet sources have no propaganda themselves. Let say Pak was indeed got shootdown by friendly force, do you seriously think Soviet won't claim they shot it down? I think not. The bottom line is that the incident still have much controversy around it till today unlike most other cases where both sides confirms.
For the sake of the argument, let say that PaK F-16A was indeed shot down by Mig-23MLD, it still doesn't show the superiority of Mig-23MLD over F-16A, because in the 2 incident in that war when they meet, Mig-23MLD did have significant number superiority
April 1987 => 2 F-16A vs 4 Mig-23 MLD => 1 F-16A lost
September 1988 => 2 F-16A vs 12 Mig-23 MLD => 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged but managed to return to base
Does that look like Mig-23 MLD was superior? I don't think so.




Now compare those to what often on Sputnik.

The west sells airplanes thus they say our aircraft only can fall under some circumstances, basically SAMs, further more the MiG-23MLD was a much better aircraft than even MiG-23MLA, it had 2 dogtooth pairs on the wing and the wings were set to sweep at 33 angle of swept, so it had better lift/drag coefficient than MiG-23MLA.

The fact is they lost an F-16, they admit that, the only thing is they say they are so good that only they say they are so good that it was fratricide.

The Zero was much better than the Hellcat or wildcat under some circumstances, but still the wildcat could beat the Zero, same is the MiG-23, it had R-24s vs AIM-9L, and R-60 for close combat so i will be honest western sources do not accept air to air loses because that is a propaganda tool, but in reality they do lose aircraft .

The question is in Afghanistan was not the same situation of Bekka Valley in fact the only aircraft really being downed were strike fighters like Su-22 or Su-25s

 

[StealthFlanker]

The west sells airplanes thus they say our aircraft only can fall under some circumstances, basically SAMs, further more the MiG-23MLD was a much better aircraft than even MiG-23MLA, it had 2 dogtooth pairs on the wing and the wings were set to sweep at 33 angle of swept, so it had better lift/drag coefficient than MiG-23MLA.

The fact is they lost an F-16, they admit that, the only thing is they say they are so good that only they say they are so good that it was fratricide.

The Zero was much better than the Hellcat or wildcat under some circumstances, but still the wildcat could beat the Zero, same is the MiG-23, it had R-24s vs AIM-9L, and R-60 for close combat so i will be honest western sources do not accept air to air loses because that is a propaganda tool, but in reality they do lose aircraft .

The question is in Afghanistan was not the same situation of Bekka Valley in fact the only aircraft really being downed were strike fighters like Su-22 or Su-25s

The soviet sell their aircraft as well so that argument is null, to say Soviet have no propaganda is just being dishonest. And yes, Mig-23 MLD is a better fighter than Mig-23 MLA, it is an upgrade of MLA after all so not really a big surprise there. The key point is that Soviet also admit Mig-23 MLD maneuverability is inferior to F-16 and F-15, and we don't really have an EM chart of Mig-23 MLD to prove otherwise, I will take their words for that.
If western source don't accept air to air lose, then why are they so comfortable telling stories about the F-18 that got shot down by Mig-25? seem to me that they are quite open about it

Iraqi MiG-25 Foxbat Pilot explains how he was able to shoot down Lt Cdr Speicher’s F/A-18 Hornet the first night of Operation Desert Storm - The Aviation Geek Club

Iraqi MiG-25 Foxbat Pilot explains how he was able to shoot down Lt Cdr Speicher’s F/A-18 Hornet the first night of Operation Desert Storm

theaviationgeekclub.com

Why the Soviet's Supersonic MiG-25 "Foxbat" Interceptor Looked Deadlier Than It Really Was

Not very state-of-the-art.

nationalinterest.org

Meet the MiG-25 Foxbat: The Soviet's Mach 2.8 Jet Fighter

A match for the SR-71 Blackbird?

nationalinterest.org

Also Zero was not better than Hellcat, Zero could turn better, but the much better acceleration and speed of Hell cat could allow it to get out of the engagement range of Zero's cannon very quickly, so every time Zero get into Hell cat's tail, Hell cat pilot can just zoom aways. Then the armor of Hell cat was better, so if they were go head to head, then a small burst from Hell cat cannon will make Zero go down in flame. Now you gonna argue that Mig-23 MLD can zoom climb faster than F-16A so it can do the same thing that Hell cat did to Zero. Well no, because in WW II, the main aircraft weapon were 0.5 cal cannons and 7.62 mm machine gun with effective range any where from 300-600 meters, it is very easy to just accelerate outside that range, and if your aircraft were decently armored, then you can tank hundreds of cannon and machine gun round with no issue. It is no longer the same situation when F-16A and Mig-23 MLD were in services, the main close range weapon were IR missiles and SARH missiles, you can't out-accelerate them and get outside of the engagement range, and you certainly can't tank their warhead. Secondly, like I said earlier, Mig-23 super good acceleration at high speed came from the fact that it can fully sweep its wing back at 72°, it is basically an arrow at that point, however, doing so will reduce CL significantly, it will turn much worse. So you can either choose decent turn capability when wing sweep is at 16-33-45° or quick acceleration when wing at 72°, but not both at the same time, and it take sometime to change the sweep angle . Unlike F-16A which have both super good STR and acceleration at the same time

 

[StealthFlanker]

F-16 is not better in everything to MiG-23MLD, wings are not set for all speeds, F-16 was designed for 0.7-0.9 mach ranges, at higher speeds the MiG-23 can fly better, is it better? no because the MiG-23 can not supercruise thus it has to fight at lower speeds, in general terms what the manual said is fly faster than the F-16 because at those speeds the F-16 will fly worse, but not at the speeds the F-16 has better performance or handling.

The MiG-23MLD attacked by F-16 in Afghanistan knew it, fly faster the F-16 will not fly better, it saved the MiG-23MLD several times.
Same applies to any aircraft, any aircraft has to bring the opposition where it has more advantages, in Bekka Valley, the F-16 flew in a way harder for the MiG-23MF to overwhelm the F-15 or F-16, in Afghanistan they flew in a way the F-16 could not succeed, and remember Pakistan admitted an air to air kill regardless is fratricide, the soviets do not admit any MiG-23MLD loses on air to air.

Did I say F-16 was better than Mig-23 at all speed regime? No I didn't. At high Mach speed, the 72° wing sweep would give Mig-23MLD super good acceleration, plausibly better than F-16, F-15, Mig-29 and Su-27, but the problem is that firstly, no one dogfight at very high speed, because that will just increase their turn radius dramatically and they don't have enough fuel to sustain that.

Secondly, while in theory, good acceleration at high speed will be good for BVR combat, Mig-23MLD doesn't really have a mean to utilize it against F-16A. Their radar were equally powerful but F-16'RCS were much smaller and it can also carry a jammer while Mig-23MLD can't and TP-26-Sh IRST is pretty much unusable against head on target (10 km detection range against tail on target with AB on). It takes F-16 no times to close the distance to WVR combat

You will need good evidence to prove the MiG-23 were downed by F-16 and that evidence does not exists

What do you mean by " they don't exist"? consider only confirmed kill by both side, F-16 shoot down Mig-23 plenty of times:
21 April 1982, Israel F-16 shot down 2 Syrian Mig-23
9 June 1982, Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Nazakh was shot down by Israel F-16A
9 June 1982, Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Sofie was shot down by Israel F-16A
9 June 1982,Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Yasin was shot down by Israel F-16A
23 March 2014 Turkey F-16 downed a Syrian Arab Air Force MiG-23 ML
17 January 1993, a USAF F-16C destroyed an Iraqi MiG-23
If we only consider the clash between the earliest F-16 aka F-16A with the latest Mig-23 aka Mig-23 MLD, then sure F-16 didn't shot down Mig-23, however, it still managed to damage it while at a number disadvantage
12 September 1988, 2 F-16A clash with 12 Mig-23 MLD result in 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged. The fact that these 2 F-16 didn't got shot down immediately is already a great feat by itself.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

Did I say F-16 was better than Mig-23 at all speed regime? No I didn't. At high Mach speed, the 72° wing sweep would give Mig-23MLD super good acceleration, plausibly better than F-16, F-15, Mig-29 and Su-27, but the problem is that firstly, no one dogfight at very high speed, because that will just increase their turn radius dramatically and they don't have enough fuel to sustain that.

Secondly, while in theory, good acceleration at high speed will be good for BVR combat, Mig-23MLD doesn't really have a mean to utilize it against F-16A. Their radar were equally powerful but F-16'RCS were much smaller and it can also carry a jammer while Mig-23MLD can't and TP-26-Sh IRST is pretty much unusable against head on target (10 km detection range against tail on target with AB on). It takes F-16 no times to close the distance to WVR combat



What do you mean by " they don't exist"? consider only confirmed kill by both side, F-16 shoot down Mig-23 plenty of times:
21 April 1982, Israel F-16 shot down 2 Syrian Mig-23
9 June 1982, Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Nazakh was shot down by Israel F-16A
9 June 1982, Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Sofie was shot down by Israel F-16A
9 June 1982,Syrian MiG-23MF piloted by Yasin was shot down by Israel F-16A
23 March 2014 Turkey F-16 downed a Syrian Arab Air Force MiG-23 ML
17 January 1993, a USAF F-16C destroyed an Iraqi MiG-23
If we only consider the clash between the earliest F-16 aka F-16A with the latest Mig-23 aka Mig-23 MLD, then sure F-16 didn't shot down Mig-23, however, it still managed to damage it while at a number disadvantage
12 September 1988, 2 F-16A clash with 12 Mig-23 MLD result in 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged. The fact that these 2 F-16 didn't got shot down immediately is already a great feat by itself.

what do you consider confirmed kill?

because a nation claims it shot down a fighter?

Confirmed kills very few times are really confirmed with real evidence, unless the other side admits the kill.

Have you presented evidence like these of the F-16 downing the MiG-23MLD?

No you only have presented a claim.

This picture shows a MiG-21 being downed. have you presented a picture of the MiG-23MLD like that? Have the Pakistanies done it?

No they did not

have they presented evidence like these

I know in the bekka Valley Syria lost 26 MiG-23s because the Syrians acknowledged.
They said 6 MiG-23MFs were downed

4 MiG-23MS were downed, and 16 MiG-23BNs were downed



Pakistan never presented evidence beyond a claim since it never showed evidence and the soviet denied it.


You should already see that by the MiG-23 sweeping its wings at 33 degrees or 72 degrees its ability to fly at some speeds allowed to have some parity with F-16 even superiority, the manual says at high speeds the F-16 will not fly better you simply think the F-16 has a fixed intake at speeds beyond Mach 1.5 pressure recovery will reduce the engine thrust potential and it will deliver less than 100% of its max thrust at afterburner, with the wings at 72 degrees the MiG-23MLD will have less drag, and with variable geometry intakes will have more thrust, that applies to MiG-23MF too.
Israel used remember AWACS, and you also forget Syria claimed it downed F-16s and F-15s and Iraq did the same with MiG-23s.

Kfir downed in 1983

Tornado downed in 1991 Iraq claimed a MiG-23 downed a Panavia Tornado

Now I suggest you, I created another thread that deals with the MiG-23 combat record please post there your opinions we are annoying people here this is for PAKFA not for MiG-23


post here your opinions about MiG-23 because people should read about Su-57 here not unrelated stuff of MiG-23 combat record

MiG-23 combat record and capabilities

A new attempt to use the MiG-23 followed in the autumn of 1983, when the fighters of the 735th regiment were given the task of working out the possibility of using the MiG-23 from Afghan airfields. More recently, this regiment was also in the air defense system. With the change of subordination...

defenceforumindia.com

 

[StealthFlanker]

what do you consider confirmed kill?
because a nation claims it shot down a fighter?
Confirmed kills very few times are really confirmed with real evidence, unless the other side admits the kill.

I consider a confirmed kill as both side admits the kill or there are undeniable evidence, simple as that.

Have you presented evidence like these of the F-16 downing the MiG-23MLD?
No you only have presented a claim.
This picture shows a MiG-21 being downed. have you presented a picture of the MiG-23MLD like that? Have the Pakistanies done it?
have they presented evidence like these
No they did not
View attachment 47184
I know in the bekka Valley Syria lost 26 MiG-23s because the Syrians acknowledged.
They said 6 MiG-23MFs were downed
4 MiG-23MS were downed, and 16 MiG-23BNs were downed
Pakistan never presented evidence beyond a claim since it never showed evidence and the soviet denied it.
Israel used remember AWACS, and you also forget Syria claimed it downed F-16s and F-15s and Iraq did the same with MiG-23s.

Firstly, I already said F-16A didn't shotdown Mig-23MLD, there was only one case where 2 F-16A clashes with 12 Mig-23MLD and managed to damage 1, and this was confirmed by both the Pakistan side and the Soviet side.
Secondly, let play it your way then, among all these claimed F-16 kills by Syria and Soviet, can you present any HUD photos of an F-16 being downed? I bet you can't given that they don't exist.
Last but not least, among all Mig-23 kills that I gave earlier, none were done by Pakistan.

You should already see that by the MiG-23 sweeping its wings at 33 degrees or 72 degrees its ability to fly at some speeds allowed to have some parity with F-16 even superiority, the manual says at high speeds the F-16 will not fly better you simply think the F-16 has a fixed intake at speeds beyond Mach 1.5 pressure recovery will reduce the engine thrust potential and it will deliver less than 100% of its max thrust at afterburner, with the wings at 72 degrees the MiG-23MLD will have less drag, and with variable geometry intakes will have more thrust, that applies to MiG-23MF too.

I don't see anywhere in the manual where they claimed Mig-23 MLD have superior dogfighting characteristics to F-16, on the contrary, they are quite openly admit that Mig-23MLD dogfighting parameter is inferior
Beyond mach 1.5 then sure, Mig-23 gain some advantage in acceleration and top speed, but so what?. No one dogfight at that speed, and the combination of radar , irst and missile of Mig-23MLD weren't advance enough for it to engage F-16 at long distance enough for the high speed acceleration to be useful.

Now I suggest you, I created another thread that deals with the MiG-23 combat record please post there your opinions we are annoying people here this is for PAKFA not for MiG-23
post here your opinions about MiG-23 because people should read about Su-57 here not unrelated stuff of MiG-23 combat record

MiG-23 combat record and capabilities

A new attempt to use the MiG-23 followed in the autumn of 1983, when the fighters of the 735th regiment were given the task of working out the possibility of using the MiG-23 from Afghan airfields. More recently, this regiment was also in the air defense system. With the change of subordination...

defenceforumindia.com

Well, I am not the one who first brought Mig-23 into this thread was I, I was replying to your comment, that is all.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

Well, I am not the one who first brought Mig-23 into this thread was I, I was replying to your comment, that is all.

I will answer you in the other thread for respect to others if you do not want just we agree to disagree but i will not derail further this thread

 

[MiG-29SMT]

I consider a confirmed kill as both side admits the kill or there are undeniable evidence, simple as that.




Firstly, I already said F-16A didn't shotdown Mig-23MLD, there was only one case where 2 F-16A clashes with 12 Mig-23MLD and managed to damage 1, and this was confirmed by both the Pakistan side and the Soviet side.
Secondly, let play it your way then, among all these claimed F-16 kills by Syria and Soviet, can you present any HUD photos of an F-16 being downed? I bet you can't given that they don't exist.
Last but not least, among all Mig-23 kills that I gave earlier, none were done by Pakistan.



I don't see anywhere in the manual where they claimed Mig-23 MLD have superior dogfighting characteristics to F-16, on the contrary, they are quite openly admit that Mig-23MLD dogfighting parameter is inferior
Beyond mach 1.5 then sure, Mig-23 gain some advantage in acceleration and top speed, but so what?. No one dogfight at that speed, and the combination of radar , irst and missile of Mig-23MLD weren't advance enough for it to engage F-16 at long distance enough for the high speed acceleration to be useful.




Well, I am not the one who first brought Mig-23 into this thread was I, I was replying to your comment, that is all.

In Bekka Valley the MiG-23MF only suffered 6 losses

and MiG-23MS 4 losses both confirmed by Syria and the Soviets


Since Syria has not upgraded the MiG-23s it is a mute point compare a MiG-23ML of 1980 vintage to a modernized F-16 of Turkey.


Did Israel suffered loses? yes they did, however the only loses admitted like always were the ones either there was evidence undeniable or POW.

For example this Gazelle helicopter downed in 1980

Did Israel showed 80 wreckages or gun sights? no they did not.

In fact the only evidence you will find is very few pictures of that time or video you will never present 90 kills as the western press claims.

in fact this thread has probably the most of pictures of MiG-23 downed on the bekka Valley.


In 1982 or 1987 the MiG-23 and F-16A were contemporary fighters, thus you have to have a real comparasion.


The MiG-23MLD in soviet service used AA-11 Archers.


But against the F-16A of Pakistan only used R-60.


So only we can compare these jets because Syria has not upgraded the MiG-23MLDs to MiG-23-98 standard.


You have no evidence of all the pictures of MiG-23 over bekka are of the MiG-23MF variant, so i conclude we use the confirmed kills of only 6 MiG-23MF downed, which amount of only 10% of the admitted losses by Syria.


In soviet use no air to air F-16 victory over the MiG-23MLD was admitted by the Soviet Union, and Pakistan lost an F-16 confirmed by Pakistan.


Over Afghanistan there was parity because the 1980s F-16A did not have AIM-120 so it was a BVR fighter with some agility versus a dogfighter with no AIM-120.


The MiG-23MLD was at that time an upgraded fighter.


If you want to compare a modern F-16 with a MiG-23 you will need aesa radar and new missiles

 

[Neptune]

The second incident is also quite famous, there are a few photo of the damaged Mig-23MLD Bort 55 around the net, while you can argue that Bort 55 didn't get destroyed, therefore, that doesn't count as a lost. However, we can't deny that it did get damaged by the AIM-9 warhead, and the fact that it did survive the warhead is more or less base on luck. Then the very important fact that we shouldn't ignore is that 2 F-16 engaged a Mig-23 MLD formation with significant number superiority, 2 F-16 vs 12 Mig-23 MLD

View attachment 47089

This argument can go either way. Yes Bort 55 was fortunate to make it back safely after having an AIM-9 explode above it but the F-16s were equally as lucky since Mig-23s had F-16s locked, not to mention they had the range advantage.


The F-16 hastily fire two missiles after performing a 135 ° turn. This was within 1,500 meter. Those F-16 were indeed lucky.

Then that isn't very strong proof, given that from the Pakistan perspective, it was a friendly fire incident where the F-16 got hit by his wing men's AIM-9

How Pakistan’s F-16s Fought Russian Jets (And Shot Down the Future VP of Russia)

What happened?

nationalinterest.org

It’s

Another incident involved F-16A and Mig-23 MLD is on September 1987

How Pakistan’s F-16s Fought Russian Jets (And Shot Down the Future VP of Russia)

What happened?

nationalinterest.org

Those sources mostly parrot Pakistani talking points, which are not know to be reliable . Even though you already know, bort 55 never “crash landed” that was Pakistani propaganda. It landed normally, we have photos after it landed as well as pilot interviews. There were interviews with MiG-23 pilots that clashed with Pakistani F-16s,in many instances the Mig-23s had the upper over F-16s, in fact they could have downed a few but were forbidden to fire on Pakistani aircraft. Pakistani F-16 only had advantage in as far as they knew Soviet pilots were forbidden to fire on Pakistani aircraft, now couple that F-16s using mountainous terrain to hide their failed ambushes. So F-16s definitely were all around better fighters but not necessarily Pakistani clown F-16s.


From Russian source:

Истребители МиГ-23 в Афганистане

Первыми в Афганистан прибыли истребители МиГ-23 талды-курганского 905-го полкаАфганская война стала наиболее масштабным вооруженным конфликтом с участием МиГ-23, однако в ВВС 40-й армии эти самолеты появились лишь через четыре года после ее начала. Поначалу предполагалось достаточным лишь участия

amp.topwar.ru

The rest is English translation from the same source:


Here we can see those F-16s were easy targets but Mig-23 pilots were forbidden to fire.

Both couples of cover rushed to the place of the skirmish on the afterburner, a scream and a mate aired. The Pakistani was in serious trouble - the R-24R missile launch range was enough to defeat him even before the border, they even heard an exclamation on the ground: “Let me bang him!” However, it was not possible to equalize the score - they ordered everyone to hastily leave the KP,

Here is something interesting. It a marking on a Mig-23, certainly appears to be a kill mark, or perhaps just a symbolic gesture during the time F-16s were locked and ready to be dispatched:

Here are some of the Soviet pilots after encountering Pakistani F-16s (they sure don’t look like they got shot down)...

A month after the September skirmish, it again nearly came to an air battle between Soviet and Pakistani fighters. This time, the Pakistanis acted openly defiant, apparently intending to repeat the recent "success". On October 15, the strike group of Soviet aircraft reached the border strip for striking when F-16s appeared near. The enemy was definitely looking for a battle: a pair of alien planes were found in close proximity - passing right under the strike group. The cover at that time was carried out by a MiG-23 unit under the command of Colonel G.P. Khaustov from the Air Force Directorate of the 40th Army. The slave already asked for permission to shoot, but the leader of the group did not rush into a retaliatory attack in a frankly unfavorable tactical situation, choosing a different option - crowding out the enemy deliberately with assertive counter-actions,The commander went to the threatened flank of the group and from the sun went to rapprochement, demonstrating readiness for attack. Cutting off the enemy from his group, the “cover” fettered his maneuvers, warning of any active urges. Foreign fighters were continuously captured by radar sights, warning of being at risk. Deciding not to tempt fate, the Pakistanis turned their backs on their territory, and the situation for both sides was resolved by the principle "the best fight is the one that did not take place.

Interesting part here is the Pakistanis were surprised how well the Mig-23s maneuvered. Moreover one of the the Pakistani pilots acknowledged confusion during the downing of one F-16, it seems like the Pakistani just went for the ‘friendly fire’ narrative to save face. At the time even western press and the Afghan government acknowledged the F-16 was definitely shot down. Russian sources seem to indicate it most likely was hit by bomblets. This makes sense considering that on many occasions F-16 were right underneath Mig-23s. This would technically be a kill for the Mig as most western air forces simply count enemy aircraft crashing due to pilot error in combat as a kill.

"Played" and the Pakistanis. Their official sources through gritted teeth reported the loss of an “F-16 in flight”. As a result, there was no one to draw an asterisk on board. And five years later, in a private conversation, one Pakistani pilot said that even in their midst there was no complete clarity. According to him, the reason was still a “goal in their own goal”, and then the blame was laid on the leading couple. Pilots, baffled by the unexpected MiG maneuver, unsuccessfully completed the rebuilding, as a result, the commander who was ready to shoot was behind the wingman and he was hit.

They certainly didn't have any issue when admitting F-18 got shot down by Mig-25 or when F-16 got shot down by SA-3. And friendly fire aren't an exactly rare occurrences on the battlefield, for example: AH-64 did destroy a friendly APC, F-16 did launch HARM at a PAC-2 site, India did shot down their own Mi-17 ..etc

There was a big cover up involving Scott Spicher’s downing.The Navy and Pentagon covered up the F-18 loss for years knowing full well it was downed by a Mig-25. The only reason the truth came out was because the pilot was missing and the CIA was investigating his whereabouts, later on a declassified report came out. If it wasn’t for the CIA and and freedom of information act the Pentagon and NAVY would have kept lying that the F-18 was downed by ground fire. Most aircraft downing are difficult to prove and many ‘kills’ are simply fabricated. I think pretty much every country has done it, some more then others.

. Besides, talking about propaganda would be the pot calling the kettle black, let not pretend like Soviet sources have no propaganda themselves
Let say Pak was indeed got shootdown by friendly force, do you seriously think Soviet won't claim they shot it down? I think not. The bottom line is that the incident still have much controversy around it till today unlike most other cases where both sides confirms.
For the sake of the argument, let say that PaK F-16A was indeed shot down by Mig-23MLD, it still doesn't show the superiority of Mig-23MLD over F-16A, because in the 2 incident in that war when they meet, Mig-23MLD did have significant number superiority
April 1987 => 2 F-16A vs 4 Mig-23 MLD => 1 F-16A lost
September 1988 => 2 F-16A vs 12 Mig-23 MLD => 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged but managed to return to base
Does that look like Mig-23 MLD was superior? I don't think so.

Absolutely not. Again, Soviet pilots were forbidden to shoot at Pakistani aircraft, on several occasions they could have scored F-16 kills but were denied permission. You also are forgetting how Soviet pilots mauled NATO aircraft over Korea, with one Soviet pilot having what is believed to be around 21 kills, Soviet Union kept it secret for years. The Soviet Union had shot down many enemy aircraft from around the world, they mostly kept it a secret unlike some other countries.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Great discussion @MiG-29SMT @StealthFlanker @Neptune

Since the "mig 23 combat record" thread is mostly informational (and let's keep it that way) I've forked off a thread. Please continue here

 

[StealthFlanker]

In Bekka Valley the MiG-23MF only suffered 6 losses
and MiG-23MS 4 losses both confirmed by Syria and the Soviets
Since Syria has not upgraded the MiG-23s it is a mute point compare a MiG-23ML of 1980 vintage to a modernized F-16 of Turkey.
You have no evidence of all the pictures of MiG-23 over bekka are of the MiG-23MF variant, so i conclude we use the confirmed kills of only 6 MiG-23MF downed, which amount of only 10% of the admitted losses by Syria.

You said F-16 never shot down Mig-23, and I only showed you that it indeed did.

Did Israel suffered loses? yes they did, however the only loses admitted like always were the ones either there was evidence undeniable or POW.

That a moot point because the same argument can be made against Soviet's losses. Unless, you pretend like Soviet themselves doesn't use propaganda tool

Did Israel showed 80 wreckages or gun sights? no they did not.
In fact the only evidence you will find is very few pictures of that time or video you will never present 90 kills as the western press claims.
in fact this thread has probably the most of pictures of MiG-23 downed on the bekka Valley.

Ok so let have it your way then
You claimed " five F-16s and two F-4s and one BQM-34 unmanned aircraft were shot down during the Lebanon war by MiG-23MS and MiG-23MF, In Afghanistan, 1 F-16A was shot down by Mig-23 MLD, and in the air battles in the Middle East from 1982 to 1985. MiG-23 destroyed 12 enemy aircraft (including at least five F-16s and three F-15)"
So a total of 11 F-16, let apply your logic, can you show any photos of these F-16 taken by Mig-23's gun sight? you can't because they don't exist, yet you still willingly believe them. Yet on the other hand, Israel claims shouldn't be trusted because there were no gun sight photos?. That a bit of double standard is it not?.

In 1982 or 1987 the MiG-23 and F-16A were contemporary fighters, thus you have to have a real comparasion.
The MiG-23MLD in soviet service used AA-11 Archers.
But against the F-16A of Pakistan only used R-60.
So only we can compare these jets because Syria has not upgraded the MiG-23MLDs to MiG-23-98 standard.

By that logic, F-16C/D block 25 first flew on June 19, 1984 and was delivered to the USAF one month later, this version has AN/APG-68 radar with much better range than APG-66 radar along with the capability to launch AIM-7 and later the AIM-120. So why are we stuck comparing Mig-23 MLD and F-16A then? why not the F-16C/D?
And yes, Mig-23 did have ability to launch R-73 but it never has the helmet mounted system to take advantage of R-73 HOBS capability, so essentially it was the same as AIM-9L, and we all know F-16 have quite a significant WVR advantage with not just its turn rate and acceleration but also much better visibility

In soviet use no air to air F-16 victory over the MiG-23MLD was admitted by the Soviet Union, and Pakistan lost an F-16 confirmed by Pakistan.
Over Afghanistan there was parity because the 1980s F-16A did not have AIM-120 so it was a BVR fighter with some agility versus a dogfighter with no AIM-120.
The MiG-23MLD was at that time an upgraded fighter..

Like I said before:
Consider the 2 cases:
Case 1: We believe Pakistan's words that the incident on April 1987 was a friendly fire
Case 2: we don't believe Pakistan's words and Mig-23MLD did indeed shoot down F-16A on April 1987
In both case, Pakistan F-16A was at quite a number disadvantage
April 1987 => 2 F-16A vs 4 Mig-23 MLD => 1 F-16A lost
September 1988 => 2 F-16A vs 12 Mig-23 MLD => 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged but managed to return to base
Consider the conditions there, it doesn't make the case that Mig-23MLD were superior if not the contrary.
Sure, F-16A of that time didn't have BVR capability and Mig-23MLD did, so if they were both intercept a bomber then Mig-23 MLD would probably more useful. However, while F-16A didn't have ability to carry AIM-7 and AIM-120, it did have ability to carry ALQ-119 along with lower RCS than Mig-23, it can deny the BVR capability of Mig-23MLD.

If you want to compare a modern F-16 with a MiG-23 you will need aesa radar and new missiles
View attachment 47190

I am not sure if I get what you saying correctly but Mig-23 MLD even with R-77 is simply out classed by F-16 C/D even before they got AESA.
N008E Sapfir23 MLA is barely comparable to APG-66 on F-16A/B and both far worse than APG-68 on later F-16C/D
Production Mig-23MLD never have any type of jammer internal or external while F-16 did get equipped with various jamming pod type from ALQ-119, ALQ-131, ALQ-184, as well as internal jammer like ALQ-178v5, ALQ-211 and with the addition of ALE-50 towed decoys

The addition of RVV-AE on Mig-23 was nice, but it has shorter reach than AIM-120B

 

[StealthFlanker]

This argument can go either way. Yes Bort 55 was fortunate to make it back safely after having an AIM-9 explode above it but the F-16s were equally as lucky since Mig-23s had F-16s locked, not to mention they had the range advantage.
The F-16 hastily fire two missiles after performing a 135 ° turn. This was within 1,500 meter. Those F-16 were indeed lucky.
View attachment 47207View attachment 47206
Those sources mostly parrot Pakistani talking points, which are not know to be reliable . Even though you already know, bort 55 never “crash landed” that was Pakistani propaganda. It landed normally, we have photos after it landed as well as pilot interviews. There were interviews with MiG-23 pilots that clashed with Pakistani F-16s,in many instances the Mig-23s had the upper over F-16s, in fact they could have downed a few but were forbidden to fire on Pakistani aircraft. Pakistani F-16 only had advantage in as far as they knew Soviet pilots were forbidden to fire on Pakistani aircraft, now couple that F-16s using mountainous terrain to hide their failed ambushes. So F-16s definitely were all around better fighters but not necessarily Pakistani clown F-16s.
From Russian source:

Истребители МиГ-23 в Афганистане

Первыми в Афганистан прибыли истребители МиГ-23 талды-курганского 905-го полкаАфганская война стала наиболее масштабным вооруженным конфликтом с участием МиГ-23, однако в ВВС 40-й армии эти самолеты появились лишь через четыре года после ее начала. Поначалу предполагалось достаточным лишь участия

amp.topwar.ru

View attachment 47199


The rest is English translation from the same source:
Here we can see those F-16s were easy targets but Mig-23 pilots were forbidden to fire.
Here is something interesting. It a marking on a Mig-23, certainly appears to be a kill mark, or perhaps just a symbolic gesture during the time F-16s were locked and ready to be dispatched:
View attachment 47209
Here are some of the Soviet pilots after encountering Pakistani F-16s (they sure don’t look like they got shot down)...
View attachment 47210
Interesting part here is the Pakistanis were surprised how well the Mig-23s maneuvered. Moreover one of the the Pakistani pilots acknowledged confusion during the downing of one F-16, it seems like the Pakistani just went for the ‘friendly fire’ narrative to save face. At the time even western press and the Afghan government acknowledged the F-16 was definitely shot down. Russian sources seem to indicate it most likely was hit by bomblets. This makes sense considering that on many occasions F-16 were right underneath Mig-23s. This would technically be a kill for the Mig as most western air forces simply count enemy aircraft crashing due to pilot error in combat as a kill.
There was a big cover up involving Scott Spicher’s downing.The Navy and Pentagon covered up the F-18 loss for years knowing full well it was downed by a Mig-25. The only reason the truth came out was because the pilot was missing and the CIA was investigating his whereabouts, later on a declassified report came out. If it wasn’t for the CIA and and freedom of information act the Pentagon and NAVY would have kept lying that the F-18 was downed by ground fire. Most aircraft downing are difficult to prove and many ‘kills’ are simply fabricated. I think pretty much every country has done it, some more then others.
Absolutely not. Again, Soviet pilots were forbidden to shoot at Pakistani aircraft, on several occasions they could have scored F-16 kills but were denied permission. You also are forgetting how Soviet pilots mauled NATO aircraft over Korea, with one Soviet pilot having what is believed to be around 21 kills, Soviet Union kept it secret for years. The Soviet Union had shot down many enemy aircraft from around the world, they mostly kept it a secret unlike some other countries.

So that can be summed up into:
1- We don't trust anything the Paki says because they are untrustworthy Paki, unlike the Soviet comrade?
2- On 12 September 1988, Pak F-16A was able to damage 1 Mig-23MLD in the formation of 12 Mig-23MLD without being totally destroyed by the rest of the Mig-23 squadron because lucky for them, Soviet pilots were forbidden from attacking Pakistan F-16, BUT the PaK F-16A that got destroyed on April 1987 was definitely got shot down by Soviet Mig-23MLD and not the result of another F-16A friendly fire ?????????????? Do you not see the huge contradiction between these 2 claims????? If Soviet pilot was indeed forbidden from attacking Pak F-16 then it is even more likely that the incident on April 1987 was a friendly fire incident
3- Others countries such as Israel, Usa and Pakistan always exaggerate their kill ratio and achievement but Soviet comrades do the opposite?????
If those are the assumptions then why bothered discussing?

 

[MiG-29SMT]

You said F-16 never shot down Mig-23, and I only showed you that it indeed did.



That a moot point because the same argument can be made against Soviet's losses. Unless, you pretend like Soviet themselves doesn't use propaganda tool




Ok so let have it your way then
You claimed " five F-16s and two F-4s and one BQM-34 unmanned aircraft were shot down during the Lebanon war by MiG-23MS and MiG-23MF, In Afghanistan, 1 F-16A was shot down by Mig-23 MLD, and in the air battles in the Middle East from 1982 to 1985. MiG-23 destroyed 12 enemy aircraft (including at least five F-16s and three F-15)"
So a total of 11 F-16, let apply your logic, can you show any photos of these F-16 taken by Mig-23's gun sight? you can't because they don't exist, yet you still willingly believe them. Yet on the other hand, Israel claims shouldn't be trusted because there were no gun sight photos?. That a bit of double standard is it not?.







Like I said before:
Consider the 2 cases:
Case 1: We believe Pakistan's words that the incident on April 1987 was a friendly fire
Case 2: we don't believe Pakistan's words and Mig-23MLD did indeed shoot down F-16A on April 1987
In both case, Pakistan F-16A was at quite a number disadvantage

Israel as the USA never admit loses unless they are shown with POW or the aircraft fall in their enemy`s territory

The pictures of israeli losses do exist.

Downed Israeli Helicopters of the bekka Valley battlefield

Downed Israeli A-4 over Lebanon in 1982

One of the A-4N aircraft, which hit on June 6 a stronghold of militants in the n. Nabatiya was hit by a Strela-2 MANPADS missile. Pilot captain Aharon Akhyaz catapulted over the village of Arnun and was detained by local residents. He was later taken into custody by the PLO security forces (responsible - Colonel Abu Zaim) and taken to Beirut. Only 75 days later, as a result of the exchange of prisoners at the Fahami office, the pilot returned home. Being held captive - in the Sabra hospital, Akhyaz told reporters: “This was my first combat mission in the operation that began. I was supposed to attack artillery positions in the area of the old Buford fortress, but I could not find the target, and my plane was shot down. When the parachute landed in one of the villages, certain problems arose. Angry peasants, the third time subjected to bombing, began to beat me. But after the people from the Palestine Liberation Organization arrived, there was no more bullying. ”

Бои в Ливане - Авиация в локальных конфликтах - www.skywar.ru


Show me the MiG-25s claimed by Israel?
is it? tell me the id of this aircraft that was filmed and was downed in 1982 over Lebanon

remember wars are propaganda you will not find the at least 140 pictures of all the downed aircraft claimed by both sides 90 of Israel and 52 of Syria so please do not try to claim western freedom and honesty versus Soviet Russian lies


The AIM-9L are not comparable to AA-11 even without the HMS, the archer are better missiles.

 

[Neptune]

So that can be summed up into:
1- We don't trust anything the Paki says because they are untrustworthy Paki, unlike the Soviet comrade?
2- On 12 September 1988, Pak F-16A was able to damage 1 Mig-23MLD in the formation of 12 Mig-23MLD without being totally destroyed by the rest of the Mig-23 squadron because lucky for them, Soviet pilots were forbidden from attacking Pakistan F-16, BUT the PaK F-16A that got destroyed on April 1987 was definitely got shot down by Soviet Mig-23MLD and not the result of another F-16A friendly fire ?????????????? Do you not see the huge contradiction between these 2 claims????? If Soviet pilot was indeed forbidden from attacking Pak F-16 then it is even more likely that the incident on April 1987 was a friendly fire incident
3- Others countries such as Israel, Usa and Pakistan always exaggerate their kill ratio and achievement but Soviet comrades do the opposite?????
If those are the assumptions then why bothered discussing?

Did you not read my post before getting defensive and making false and contradictory accusations about what I wrote. I clearly said all countries exaggerate claims, I was also very careful when I said the F-16 was downed likely by bomblets from Mig-23s not from a missile, either way no one can definitively prove anything. My reasoning for a probable F-16 downing from Mig-23 bomblets was I cited multiple instance were Pakistan F-16 have flown underneath Mig-23s so the probability is high. The F-16 friendly fire theory seems very much a stretch in my opinion, for many reasons. You are free to believe any version you like, at the end of the day F-16s were downed and Mig-23s were not.

Next, point Soviet pilots were forbidden to fire on Pakistani aircraft there is overwhelming evidence here. It’s a FACT and not opinion so no need to argue.

Now you ask why we should not take Soviet claims over Pakistani claims? Where to start?

•Pakistanis lies about Bort 55 being shot down.
Soviets provided photo evidence proving it landed just fine along with Sergei Privalov.

•Pakistanis boasted they could have shot down 12 Mig-23s (they were arrogant).
Pakistanis could not even down a single Mig-23.

•Pakistanis claimed Mig-23s could not detect them at low altitudes.
Fact interviewers with Soviet pilots disproved that and in fact Soviets claimed they regularly detected and tangled with Pakistani pilots

Do I need to keep going why Pakistani claims are unreliable and why Soviet claims are not in these instances? One side was humble and quiet for years and admitted losing many aircraft to Stingers, AAA and while the other side is notorious for being belligerent propagandists. By the way where is the second Mig-23 the Pakistani claimed to have downed?

 

[LurkerBaba]

Upgrade done. Going to restore some posts manually. FYI notifications will show my name

 

[MiG-29SMT]

So that can be summed up into:

1- We don't trust anything the Paki says because they are untrustworthy Paki, unlike the Soviet comrade?

2- On 12 September 1988, Pak F-16A was able to damage 1 Mig-23MLD in the formation of 12 Mig-23MLD without being totally destroyed by the rest of the Mig-23 squadron because lucky for them, Soviet pilots were forbidden from attacking Pakistan F-16, BUT the PaK F-16A that got destroyed on April 1987 was definitely got shot down by Soviet Mig-23MLD and not the result of another F-16A friendly fire ?????????????? Do you not see the huge contradiction between these 2 claims????? If Soviet pilot was indeed forbidden from attacking Pak F-16 then it is even more likely that the incident on April 1987 was a friendly fire incident

3- Others countries such as Israel, Usa and Pakistan always exaggerate their kill ratio and achievement but Soviet comrades do the opposite?????

If those are the assumptions then why bothered discussing?

The former Dutch Air Force pilot, Mr. Leon van Maurer. According to the retired pilot (total flying time - more than 3,000 hours, of which 1,200 hours on the F-16) claimed that the MiG-23MLD had "overwhelming superiority over the F-16A on the verticals and in no way inferior to this aircraft in turns. " In addition, "a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances." According to van Maurer, "when we (in the Netherlands) received the American Fighting Falcons, I thought I was piloting the best fighter, but, after landing in the cockpit of a Russian plane, I realized that I was mistaken ...". It should be noted that the Dutch pilot first got acquainted with the MiG-23 (probably the former Egyptian MiG-23MS) back in the late 80s; and at the American Nellis Air Force Base (Texas). Later, in the early 90s, he studied the MiG-23ML at one of the German air bases, and the MiG-23MLD while flying as a mercenary pilot for the Angolan air force.

http://airwar.ru/history/locwar/africa/mig23/mig23.html

 

[StealthFlanker]

The former Dutch Air Force pilot, Mr. Leon van Maurer. According to the retired pilot (total flying time - more than 3,000 hours, of which 1,200 hours on the F-16) claimed that the MiG-23MLD had "overwhelming superiority over the F-16A on the verticals and in no way inferior to this aircraft in turns. " In addition, "a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances." According to van Maurer, "when we (in the Netherlands) received the American Fighting Falcons, I thought I was piloting the best fighter, but, after landing in the cockpit of a Russian plane, I realized that I was mistaken ...". It should be noted that the Dutch pilot first got acquainted with the MiG-23 (probably the former Egyptian MiG-23MS) back in the late 80s; and at the American Nellis Air Force Base (Texas). Later, in the early 90s, he studied the MiG-23ML at one of the German air bases, and the MiG-23MLD while flying as a mercenary pilot for the Angolan air force.

http://airwar.ru/history/locwar/africa/mig23/mig23.html

That would have been a good reference story if it wasn't more fake than a Nigerian prince scam
Firstly, normally when they interview a pilot, it is often possible for us to find the transcript of the interview or at the very least, if they given a name of the pilot, it is more often than not, we can find some information about who he is on Google. However, when we search for this Leon van Maurer , the only results coming back are for this exact story, words for words, as if they all copied each other and all come from the same source. Now that is the first red flag.
Secondly, he talked about how "a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances", yet just a few sentences later, they claimed that
"It should be noted that the MiG-23MLD radars of the Angolan Air Force were inoperable, and radio navigation equipment did not function "
If he only get acquainted with Mig-23MLD while flying for Angolan air force and the radar of Angolan Mig-23 were inoperable, then how could he possibly know if Mig-23MLD radar is more powerful or not? that the second red flag.
Thirdly, let get a bit more technical, in the link, Maurer told us that: " In addition, a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances". Well, lucky for us, we do have the Aide-Memoire for the MiG-23MLD Pilot on Air Combat vs F-15A, F-I6A, F-4E and Kfir C.2 manual , where the Soviet compared the performance of MiG-23MLD's N008E Sapfir23 MLA and F-16A's APG-66. Keep in mind that Soviet didn't have an F-16A at that time, so this is only their estimation (we come back to that later)

So as we see, in Soviet estimation, the fighter detection range at high altitude of N008E Sapfir23 MLA is 55 km while APG-66 can only detect fighter from 45 km, now before you say : "Look, N008E Sapfir23 has 20% better detection range than APG-66", you should pay attention to the next two rows: detection range in look down mode -forward quarter and rear quarter, we see the fighter detection range of N008E Sapfir23 is 23-25 km compared to 30-35 km of APG-66. So why does the Soviet estimated that N008E Sapfir23 will have shorter look down detection range than APG-66? this comes from the fact that N008E Sapfir23MLA uses a twisted Cassegrain antenna whereas APG-66 uses a slotted array antenna:
N008E:

APG-66:

A Cassegrain antenna in the core is basically the simple satellite antenna that you see on every house now and then, it is very cheap and simple to manufacture so it was quite popular in the past. A twisted Cassegrain is a Cassegrain with a polarizer to address sub-reflector blockage issue. A slotted array in the core is a wave guider with many holes on it and it will radiate from each of those holes, kinda like a PESA without electric steering ability. The advantage of slotted array over Cassegrain antenna is much lower (weaker) side lobes because the beam is made up of many smaller elements. A weaker sidelobes give you better detection range because target return stand out from clutter easier

Now back to what I said earlier, Soviet didn't have an F-16A at that time, so the performance of APG-66 is only their prediction/estimation. In fact, the real APG-66 has much better detection range than N008E Sapfir23 MLA

APG-66 can reliably detect Mig-23 from 40 nm - 74 km in look up mode and 30 nm - 55.5 km in lock down mode. While N008E Sapfir23 MLA is limited at 52 km for look up and 23 km for look down mode against fighter target (if their standard for fighter target is an F-4 or F-15 then the detection range against F-16 is even shorter). To make matter worse, all Dutch F-16 went through the MLU program, so they actually use APG-66v2 which actually have 25% better detection range than the basic APG-66.
Then we shouldn't forget the fact that Mig-23 has higher RCS than F-16, so just to be on equal footing, MIG-23MLD must have a more powerful radar than F-16, which is unfortunately not the case here. Mig-23 not only hase a weaker radar, but also bigger RCS and inability to carry a jammer.
In short, even if I ignore his nonse about how Mig-23mld is superior in the vertical, Mr. Leon van Maurer's story still has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Israel as the USA never admit loses unless they are shown with POW or the aircraft fall in their enemy`s territory
The pictures of israeli losses do exist.
Downed Israeli Helicopters of the bekka Valley battlefield
View attachment 47222
View attachment 47224
Downed Israeli A-4 over Lebanon in 1982
View attachment 47223

One of the A-4N aircraft, which hit on June 6 a stronghold of militants in the n. Nabatiya was hit by a Strela-2 MANPADS missile. Pilot captain Aharon Akhyaz catapulted over the village of Arnun and was detained by local residents. He was later taken into custody by the PLO security forces (responsible - Colonel Abu Zaim) and taken to Beirut. Only 75 days later, as a result of the exchange of prisoners at the Fahami office, the pilot returned home. Being held captive - in the Sabra hospital, Akhyaz told reporters: “This was my first combat mission in the operation that began. I was supposed to attack artillery positions in the area of the old Buford fortress, but I could not find the target, and my plane was shot down. When the parachute landed in one of the villages, certain problems arose. Angry peasants, the third time subjected to bombing, began to beat me. But after the people from the Palestine Liberation Organization arrived, there was no more bullying. ”
Бои в Ливане - Авиация в локальных конфликтах - www.skywar.ru
Show me the MiG-25s claimed by Israel?
is it? tell me the id of this aircraft that was filmed and was downed in 1982 over Lebanon
View attachment 47225
remember wars are propaganda you will not find the at least 140 pictures of all the downed aircraft claimed by both sides 90 of Israel and 52 of Syria so please do not try to claim western freedom and honesty versus Soviet Russian lies
The AIM-9L are not comparable to AA-11 even without the HMS, the archer are better missiles.

I didn't say Israel lose no aircraft. I said, if we don't believe the kill ratio of Israel because we don't have gun sight video or photo, then the same standard must be applied to Soviet's claims as well. That why I said I only count kills that is confirmed by both sides.

 

[Neptune]

If we only consider the clash between the earliest F-16 aka F-16A with the latest Mig-23 aka Mig-23 MLD, then sure F-16 didn't shot down Mig-23, however, it still managed to damage it while at a number disadvantage
12 September 1988, 2 F-16A clash with 12 Mig-23 MLD result in 1 Mig-23 MLD damaged. The fact that these 2 F-16 didn't got shot down immediately is already a great feat by itself.

Way to twist reality. It was never 2 F-16 verses 12 Mig-23s. It was 2 F-16s verses 2 Mig-23s, the other Mig-23s were loaded with bombs and tasked with attacking ground targets; if anything they were easy targets for F-16s considering the Pakistanis had many easy targets to choose from and in fact they always had the element of surprises, the mountainous terrain to conceal their attacks and the reassurance that Soviet pilots were forbidden to fire on Pakistani pilots. All these factors gave the F-16s an enormous tactical advantage. Imagine if it were the other way around and F-16 were denied permission to fire on Soviet Mig-23s while Soviet Mig-23s were tasked with hunting down enemy aircraft, imagine if Mig-23s used terrain to conceal their attacks against large formations of F-16s that were armed with only dumb bombs. Would you also give Mig-23s the same boasting rights that they survived so many F-16s?

So no it’s not a “great feat” F-16s didn’t get shot down when Soviet pilots literally had F-16s locked up and ready to be shot down only to be denied permission every time. Pakistanis found themselves in a one and a million lifetime opportunity (except it happened every time they faced Soviets) where they could fire on Soviets and Soviets could not return fire because of bonehead Communist policy makers.

If we use your criteria for numbers we can also say it was a great feat more Iraqi aircraft did not get shot down because during the Gulf War the allies had 2,250 combat aircraft. Even in Scott Spicher’s case he was flying in a formation of 25 aircraft, (10 F-18s, 4 F-14s, 8 A-6E, and 3 AE-6B) not even counting AWACS which was in itself an unfair advantage plus the advantage of having electric warfare platforms. Yet a lonely Mig-25 downed a state of the art F-18 and was about to shoot down an A-6 when the Iraqi pilot was told to call off the attack and return to base.

 

[MiG-29SMT]

That would have been a good reference story if it wasn't more fake than a Nigerian prince scam
Firstly, normally when they interview a pilot, it is often possible for us to find the transcript of the interview or at the very least, if they given a name of the pilot, it is more often than not, we can find some information about who he is on Google. However, when we search for this Leon van Maurer , the only results coming back are for this exact story, words for words, as if they all copied each other and all come from the same source. Now that is the first red flag.
Secondly, he talked about how "a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances", yet just a few sentences later, they claimed that
"It should be noted that the MiG-23MLD radars of the Angolan Air Force were inoperable, and radio navigation equipment did not function "
If he only get acquainted with Mig-23MLD while flying for Angolan air force and the radar of Angolan Mig-23 were inoperable, then how could he possibly know if Mig-23MLD radar is more powerful or not? that the second red flag.
Thirdly, let get a bit more technical, in the link, Maurer told us that: " In addition, a more powerful radar gives the Russian fighter significant advantages when engaging in combat at long distances". Well, lucky for us, we do have the Aide-Memoire for the MiG-23MLD Pilot on Air Combat vs F-15A, F-I6A, F-4E and Kfir C.2 manual , where the Soviet compared the performance of MiG-23MLD's N008E Sapfir23 MLA and F-16A's APG-66. Keep in mind that Soviet didn't have an F-16A at that time, so this is only their estimation (we come back to that later)
View attachment 47307

So as we see, in Soviet estimation, the fighter detection range at high altitude of N008E Sapfir23 MLA is 55 km while APG-66 can only detect fighter from 45 km, now before you say : "Look, N008E Sapfir23 has 20% better detection range than APG-66", you should pay attention to the next two rows: detection range in look down mode -forward quarter and rear quarter, we see the fighter detection range of N008E Sapfir23 is 23-25 km compared to 30-35 km of APG-66. So why does the Soviet estimated that N008E Sapfir23 will have shorter look down detection range than APG-66? this comes from the fact that N008E Sapfir23MLA uses a twisted Cassegrain antenna whereas APG-66 uses a slotted array antenna:
N008E:


A Cassegrain antenna in the core is basically the simple satellite antenna that you see on every house now and then, it is very cheap and simple to manufacture so it was quite popular in the past. A twisted Cassegrain is a Cassegrain with a polarizer to address sub-reflector blockage issue. A slotted array in the core is a wave guider with many holes on it and it will radiate from each of those holes, kinda like a PESA without electric steering ability. The advantage of slotted array over Cassegrain antenna is much lower (weaker) side lobes because the beam is made up of many smaller elements. A weaker sidelobes give you better detection range because target return stand out from clutter easier


Now back to what I said earlier, Soviet didn't have an F-16A at that time, so the performance of APG-66 is only their prediction/estimation. In fact, the real APG-66 has much better detection range than N008E Sapfir23 MLA


APG-66 can reliably detect Mig-23 from 40 nm - 74 km in look up mode and 30 nm - 55.5 km in lock down mode. While N008E Sapfir23 MLA is limited at 52 km for look up and 23 km for look down mode against fighter target (if their standard for fighter target is an F-4 or F-15 then the detection range against F-16 is even shorter). To make matter worse, all Dutch F-16 went through the MLU program, so they actually use APG-66v2 which actually have 25% better detection range than the basic APG-66.
Then we shouldn't forget the fact that Mig-23 has higher RCS than F-16, so just to be on equal footing, MIG-23MLD must have a more powerful radar than F-16, which is unfortunately not the case here. Mig-23 not only hase a weaker radar, but also bigger RCS and inability to carry a jammer.
In short, even if I ignore his nonse about how Mig-23mld is superior in the vertical, Mr. Leon van Maurer's story still has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

Tell what is the use of having a better radar when you have no infrared detectors and BVR missiles?

Pretty much your explanation has no sense since the F-16 fires AIM-9Ls of shorter ranges than R-24s, tell me how do you jam a IRST?

Have you thought F100 on F-16 has to rely on a fixed pitot tube type intake?

While R-35 can be fed by a Variable geometry multishock intake?

in The 1980s and Gulf war in January 1991, F-16s used AIM-9s.

In fact if you were so right about the advertised capabilities of the F-16 radar, the 1991 kills by the americans were made by F-15s, no F-16s not even the vaunted F-14 could get the kill ratio of F-15, but F-16 did not down a single enemy fighter.

after 1992 F-16 were adapted to fire AIM-120, but the reality they always were fed information by AWACs and Iraq could not update nor operate its air force with the help of the USSR.

In 1982, E-2s were feeding information to the F-16.

So tell me if F-16 was so good with AIM-9L why the americans lost 7 in Iraq in 1991 these is according to american data, Iraqi data said close to 20 F-16 were downed by Iraq and they claimed a F-16 downed by a R-24 launched by a MiG-23!




remember the americans never give credit to claims of their enemies, but as you can see, they lost fighters and we have proof of that simply because their pilots were paraded by Saddam Hussain

 

[MiG-29SMT]

I didn't say Israel lose no aircraft. I said, if we don't believe the kill ratio of Israel because we don't have gun sight video or photo, then the same standard must be applied to Soviet's claims as well. That why I said I only count kills that is confirmed by both sides.

As Interavia magazine wrote: “... the conclusion was incorrect that a guided missile could replace a pilot capable of orienting himself and changing the position of an aircraft in aerial combat.” Improvements to increase the maneuverability of the MiG-23ML brought him to the level of the best fighters of the West. Arming it with R-60, and later R-73 missiles, significantly increased the efficiency of the fighter. This conclusion was reached by Israeli specialists after testing the Syrian MiG-23ML, which in 1989 hijacked a Syrian pilot, Major Abdul Bassem, into Israel. In the course of research, it was found, in particular, that the MiG-23ML is superior in acceleration characteristics to the F-16C, which is in service with Israel and participated in joint tests with the Syrian aircraft.


To detect air targets, a TP-23M or TP-26 heat direction finder is also used (it has a maximum detection range of jet aircraft in the rear hemisphere against a background of free space of up to 60 km). The heat direction finder allows you to quietly get close to the enemy at a distance of launching missiles from the TGS. It has the following modes of operation: T-I - target designation of missiles R-60, R-23T, R-24T and K-13M in the range of 60 ° in azimuth and 15 ° in elevation; TI - due to the narrowing of the viewing sector to +/- 7 ° in azimuth and +/- 3 ° in elevation increases the image scale; T-III - the main mode, used for auto tracking of targets maneuvering with angular speeds of 6-8 ° / s. Information from the radar and the heat detector, including the reticle for cannon fire, is output to the ILS.

http://xn--80aafy5bs.xn--p1ai/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/sssr/istrebiteli-2/istrebiteli-1960-g-1991-g/istrebiteli-okb-mikoyana-i-gurevicha/istrebitel-mig-23/mnogotselevoj-istrebitel-mig-23ml/

As you can see MiG-23MLD could fire R-24T and R-23Ts of longer ranges than AIM-9L.

You are only giving credits to western sources, the reality you should suspect both western and Russian sources but the MiG-23 did shot down aircraft, the fact most western sources compare it to F-15 and F-16 means compared to an F-4 or Viggen it was pretty good and the proof is Mirage F1 was never able to beat it