MiG-21 versus Mirage III/IAI Kfir and F-4

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

16 years

Posts: 1,189

because every pilot is proud about his aircraft till he flies something better to compare it first hand. ;)

:D:D I agree
Profile picture for user alfakilo

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 523

Yes he isn't a pilot, he's actually sheet metal worker who occasionally gets to make a few parts for broken Migs in some third world european country. Just ignore him.

Yeah, I understand what you mean. My concern isn't about him so much as it is with what he says.

My concern is that most folks here are enthusiastic about military aviation and come here hoping to learn things that can't be gotten from Wiki. These folks deserve to know what is opinion and what isn't. As the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they aren't entitled to their own set of facts.

Those of us with experience in these matters have a responsibility to correct statements when those words lead others unknowingly to false conclusions. I hope my contributions here help to do that.

Member for

21 years 3 months

Posts: 11,742

To ease the temper a little bit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4477th_Test_and_Evaluation_Squadron
http://www.amazon.com/Red-Eagles-Americas-General-Aviation/dp/1846033780
The book about the "Red Eagle" and its findings are limited to the 70s and before. Just a good read about an exciting time. The USA did learn something about the flying abilities of two main SU fighters from that time scale first hand after a long time gap. What is missing are some important notes about that. Both were a kind of "US type A-models" with all the related shortcomings. Be it flying capabilities from engine and wing type fitted (the MiG-23 excample - all MiG-23s had three different types of wings fitted and not all got the most advanced type 3 in the end, when type 2 became the common standard at least) and the related radar and AAM weaponary of later variants much more common from the late 70s to the 80s.
That book is in need of a chapter to show that or its findings are just a good read about the past and its findings which have become dated for the late 70s already. A further chapter is in need if the tested aircraft did fullfil the SU demands for their kind of warfare. For the USAF they did not like a French Mirage III maybe and none is surprised about that.

Profile picture for user alfakilo

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 523


That book is in need of a chapter to show that or its findings are just a good read about the past and its findings which have become dated for the late 70s already. A further chapter is in need if the tested aircraft did fullfil the SU demands for their kind of warfare.

There is a new second edition of the book.

Profile picture for user 19K11

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 226

Thats the version I just finished. I liked the book....it was what it was.....a good read about an important program during what I think of as the "glory days" jet fighter aviation.....that is just befor the end of the cold war and befor the introduction of AMRAAM.

These folks deserve to know what is opinion and what isn't. As the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they aren't entitled to their own set of facts.

Fair enough, but don't you think that if martinez is what he says he is then he has some valuable contributions to make on that topic? For example, would you not accept that he is in a good position to judge whether a particular shortcoming as described in the book is indeed due to an inherent flaw in the design or rather a consequence of improper operating procedure or maintenance? I say "improper" not "poor" deliberately, as the latter is a bit judgemental when we are looking at a situation where specialised spares, tools and accurate manuals/documentation may have been lacking.

I think it is unwise to dismiss his perspective out of hand, even if his tone may not be to your liking.

Profile picture for user alfakilo

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 523

Fair enough, but don't you think that if martinez is what he says he is then he has some valuable contributions to make on that topic?

I certainly do. I eagerly await him doing that.

For example, would you not accept that he is in a good position to judge whether a particular shortcoming as described in the book is indeed due to an inherent flaw in the design or rather a consequence of improper operating procedure or maintenance?

Excellent suggestion.

Maybe he will do that. So far, he hasn't.

What he has done is make allegations about "poor maintenance" in that program. Perhaps he can provide a reference for that.

I think it is unwise to dismiss his perspective out of hand, even if his tone may not be to your liking.

Whether I "liked the tone" isn't the point. What is the point is the validity of his statements. Are his statements supportable or not? If the reviews of the book are to be believed, not so much.

His 'perspective' was to dismiss the book 'out of hand'. It seems you like his 'perspective'. What is it that you find attractive? Educational? Informative?

Member for

21 years 3 months

Posts: 11,742

From my read that book was not about the technical evaluation of some dated variants at first but to allow the own pilots to exploit the verified shortcomings of that. With the F-5E the USAF had an excellent tool to simulate the last MiG-21 variants as some "nacked" A-4s for the MiG-17F.
Something verified by Russian findings in the 70s by evaluating F-5s from Vietnam.
The USA used the IAI Kfir to simulate the flying performance of the later MiG-23s when they linked the missing radar-data to that.

For our topic the MiG-21 is comparable to the Mirage III, when the later ones have an advantage in most energy-fights in general.

What he has done is make allegations about "poor maintenance" in that program. Perhaps he can provide a reference for that.

Like you I would welcome more detail, so far he has only done what you have done, namely offered an opinion of the book which, based on his and your reputation as knowledgeable persons on the subject, anybody can take or leave.

His 'perspective' was to dismiss the book 'out of hand'. It seems you like his 'perspective'. What is it that you find attractive? Educational? Informative?

I'm actually pretty dispassionate about taking sides. My aim was to build a bridge so we may get a discussion going that leads to a more complete picture of the subject. You both feel the other isn't presenting an entirely accurate insight, so prompting the two of you to compare notes in greater depth seems like a good opportunity to have the record set straight for the rest of us.

Member for

15 years 2 months

Posts: 2,814

No surprise you don`t see any difference there Levsha, I got used to your mindless remarks ages ago. Apparently you`ve missed an important fact that India was a producer of the Mig-27M(38 pcs upgraded to UPG lately) Bahadur in Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), therefore the IAF had the ability, guts and money to extend their service life, whereas most of poor post-commie airforces didn`t. Anyway I wonder why are still many African countries flying the type in spite of its bad safety record then?

So you don't agree that the MiG-23/MiG-27 has a poor safety record?

I think the available evidence would show otherwise (you are familiar with the website - you originally posted it on the forum).:rolleyes:

http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10869.html
http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10870.html

Maybe you can ask those African countries why they still operate such an aircraft - if they really do?

Profile picture for user TR1

Member for

10 years 6 months

Posts: 9,579

Always interesting to read your insight Martinez, thanks.

Profile picture for user TR1

Member for

10 years 6 months

Posts: 9,579

Yes he isn't a pilot, he's actually sheet metal worker who occasionally gets to make a few parts for broken Migs in some third world european country. Just ignore him.

We all know you are "special", but calling Slovakia "some third world European country" does not help your case.

Member for

21 years 3 months

Posts: 11,742

We all know you are "special", but calling Slovakia "some third world European country" does not help your case.

I see it similar. :)

Profile picture for user obligatory

Member for

12 years 5 months

Posts: 6,983

We all know you are "special", but calling Slovakia "some third world European country" does not help your case.

lol

Member for

9 years 2 months

Posts: 122

So you don't agree that the MiG-23/MiG-27 has a poor safety record?

He's a fanatic so of course he wouldn't agree. Even if you stacked hundreds of Mig wrecks up in his yard he'd still say they don't ever go wrong.

So you don't agree that the MiG-23/MiG-27 has a poor safety record?

I don't think that anybody is pretending that the MiG-23 has an exemplary safety record, but is it WORSE than the MiG-21 (which is what the original claim effectively was)? Might want to ask India about that aspect of the Fishbed ;)

Member for

16 years

Posts: 1,189

We all know you are "special", but calling Slovakia "some third world European country" does not help your case.

do not worry buddy, and lol i'm flattered for that...:D

I don't think that anybody is pretending that the MiG-23 has an exemplary safety record, but is it WORSE than the MiG-21 (which is what the original claim effectively was)? Might want to ask India about that aspect of the Fishbed.

Sorry for not responding earlier, the forum was down the whole night. Anyway, thanks for being resonable, all I can do is not to respond to this kind of people, just let them make fools of them selfs.


So you don't agree that the MiG-23/MiG-27 has a poor safety record?
I think the available evidence would show otherwise (you are familiar with the website - you originally posted it on the forum).
http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10869.html
http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10870.html
Maybe you can ask those African countries why they still operate such an aircraft - if they really do?

Ah, Levsha, Levsha, do you have any clue what is written on those pages, not sure why pointed out both, when only the first one is describing mishaps and crashes of all Mig-23(U, BN, MF, ML) in former Czechoslovakia. You can count 9 crashes within 25 years of service, just three of them due to a/c malfunction. Does it speak for poor safety record of Mig-23 at all? Try to do some comparison with the Red Eagle praised Mig-21.:rolleyes:

Member for

16 years

Posts: 1,189

I certainly do. I eagerly await him doing that.

Maybe he will do that. So far, he hasn't.

What he has done is make allegations about "poor maintenance" in that program. Perhaps he can provide a reference for that.

His 'perspective' was to dismiss the book 'out of hand'.

You didn`t read my previous reply carefully, I did say that there was a plenty of discussion on this forum some time ago where I made all my statements clear. Why do you think I`ll jump whenever a guy has a dream. As I recall we had some Red Eagle personal here clarifying book`s content, so why don't you just save my time and read it by your self. link here. Anyway, tell me what purpose would there be to discuss any maintenance procedure on soviet Migs with you, when you have ZERO experience with them? If you are still eagerly waiting for that contradicting stuff in Red Eagles book, here is one of many.

page227, Red Eagles by Steve Davies.

Quote:
In addition, because the R-29A ran extremely hot, the fleet was plagued by false alarms when the temperature sensors in the engine bay of the gangly jet reach a critical temperature , thus energizing fire warning lights in the cockpit. Such an indication resulted in an immediate "Knock it off!" call and return to TTR. Each fire warning light activation was treated with the utmost caution and respect, and following a thorough inspection on the ground the aircraft in question would have to be flown on an FCF sortie before it could be released back onto the flying schedule. On one occasion, Shervanick had to fly three FCF sorties in a row on the same Flogger when the fire warning light illuminated on successive flights. "It felt like every day one of the Mig-23s had a fire warning light come on, " Geisler reflected,"and so we ended up putting in a second fire warning system that was of American design...

Dont you think that claiming such bs like "engine running extremely hot and reaching critical temperature in engine bay" in the first place was doubled with another one "thus energizing the fire alarm system and giving false alarms what plagued the whole Mig fleet"? What does the fire alarm system have to do with engine running hot, when its principle of work is based on the detection of electric conductivity in the flame burning in the air of the engine bay? One can say, poorly maintenaned fire alarm system hence it gave false alarms what can be easily fixed if you have spares. Surprisingly, after I pointed out that there is something wrong with this statement an ex-Red Eagle pilot clarified Steve Davies folklore.
....
....
....
Quote:
We had one MiG-23BN that had a problem with giving us false fire warning indications in flight. Every aircraft type I have ever flown has had one airplane that was a “problem child”. Things would go wrong in flight and maintenance could not duplicate it on the ground. This happened 3-4 times with this particular plane and we finally said “to hell with it”. We had already spend more sorties flying FCFs trying to find and fix the problem than we wanted (remember, every FCF sortie flown was 1 sortie not available to train our guys), so we decided to just put one of our warning systems in it and be done with it.

well, who to blame then? Hopefully I made that clear in my first reply. I do understand the book wasnt about tech stuff, but rather about colorful stories of US jocks flying soviet Migs, but with all respect after reading such arguments I was not sure whether to laugh or cry. Sure, we can continue to discuss every story in that book and at the end you`ll agree that the book is full of nonreasonable stuff which needs further explanation what is polite atleast to say. At last we had a good understanding of problems Red Eagles were facing when evaluating soviet Migs without most of operational manuals, spares, tooling and ground test equipment, explicitly meaning no proper maintenance according to manufacturer's recommendations, what a reasonable person just can`t argue about!!! This is a fact, no wonder that their conclusions about aircrafts were derived mostly empirically, even if profesionally, but not always correct.

P.S. If you check the link above, you will find more contradicting stuff about Mig fuel system, engine antisurge and relight system, flight, takeoff and landing characteristics, ..etc

Member for

21 years 3 months

Posts: 11,742

do not worry buddy, and lol i'm flattered for that...:D

Sorry for not responding earlier, the forum was down the whole night. Anyway, thanks for being resonable, all I can do is not to respond to this kind of people, just let them make fools of them selfs.

Ah, Levsha, Levsha, do you have any clue what is written on those pages, not sure why pointed out both, when only the first one is describing mishaps and crashes of all Mig-23(U, BN, MF, ML) in former Czechoslovakia. You can count 9 crashes within 25 years of service, just three of them due to a/c malfunction. Does it speak for poor safety record of Mig-23 at all? Try to do some comparison with the Red Eagle praised Mig-21.:rolleyes:

To stay fair it is the ratio of losses per flight-hours and the way a fighter is used. Little known but the MiG-21F13 had a similar loss ratio per flight-hours like the GAF F-104G despite being flown higher up compared to the German strikers. Both suffered from some reability problems of the related engine at first. From the 70s the advances in technology had reduced the losses from technical failures considerably. A MiG-23 from the 70s can be compared with a MiG-21 from the 70s only. From that time-scale special circumstances related to mission demands became the main cause for losses. Just air-forces flying both types in similar mission and circumstances get comparable accident-rates. We can agree that the first MiG-23s had some similar technical issues like the first MiG-21s too and was the more demanding fighter to fly from both types. In the 70/80s the MiG-23 was a top end fighter of the "East" and operated by the best units at first.
About India. For some time it has no MiG-23MF/BN operated in the fighter roles any longer. Just the MiG-27 striker soldiers on as well as late built MiG-21s in the training and tactical fighter role.

Profile picture for user MSphere

Member for

11 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

So you don't agree that the MiG-23/MiG-27 has a poor safety record?

I think the available evidence would show otherwise (you are familiar with the website - you originally posted it on the forum).:rolleyes:

http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10869.html
http://www.valka.cz/clanek_10870.html

Maybe you can ask those African countries why they still operate such an aircraft - if they really do?

LOL :) You obviously haven't even bothered to read what you just posted.. Let me help ya out here:

MiG-23BN #9142 - hard landing due to blocked front landing gear leg. Aircraft saved, pilot OK
MiG-23BN #9140 & #9138 - mid-air collision, one pilot KIA
MiG-23BN #5746 - autopilot failure, pilot ejected
MiG-23BN #9859 - engine stall, pilot ejected
MiG-23MF #3921 - engine fire, pilot ejected
MiG-23MF #3888 - failed landing by a novice pilot, aircraft repairable
MiG-23U #7721 - ground impact due to misorientation (overcast night), both pilots KIA
MiG-23U #8327 - crashed due to pilot error, both jocks KIA
MiG-23U #8325 - entered flat spin during a dogfight with MiG-23ML, both pilots ejected

That's exactly three crashes due to technical malfunction.. IMHO, that's a very good safety record...
Note that most crashes due to pilot error occured in post-Commie times where quality of pilot training started to suffer greatly.

Second page shows oversight of all MiG-23BNs in Czechoslovak AF and it's not a crash list. It's better to use a translator sometimes before you claim anything. :)