By: PhantomII
- 18th September 2000 at 02:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I have two more responses to the people who dog this aircraft. Firstly, regarding the comment on the fact that a PAF F-16 would shoot down a Foxbat with a Sidewinder missile. The IAF uses the recce version of the MIG-25 and at the altitudes and speeds they regularly fly, an F-16 wouldn't be able to get anywhere near a Foxbat, much less shoot it down with an AIM-9 Sidewinder. Secondly, during the Gulf War, a pair of MIG-25's took of one day and challenged a pair of USAF F-15's. The Foxbat's fired first, and missed, then the Eagle returned fire. The Foxbat's not only evaded all the Eagle's missiles (4 AIM-7 and 2 AIM-9), they outran them. Four more Eagle's tried to intercept them and failed to do so. Another pair of F-15's intercepted them and fired four more AIM-7 missiles, all of which missed. The Foxbats returned safely to base. I would hardly call the Foxbat a dud or an easy target. With the AA-9, it will be able to knock down any F-16 or F-15 from 70 miles away.
New
By: Anonymous
- 18th September 2000 at 09:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I doubt that. The AA-9 is an old second rate copy of the Pheonix. The Foxbat radar is also second rate. The Foxbat is nothing more that a difficult target because of its speed. It will not be a major threat to Allied fighters, especially with the AMRAAM, which has by the way killed at least one mig 25.
New
Posts: 40
By: Horace
- 18th September 2000 at 22:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The incident in the Gulf war showed the immunity the Mig25 can have (thanks to its speed) if employed correctly.
In the right hands, a flight of high alt Foxbats unleashing a salvo of missiles can create hell for an opposing enemy flight. The Russians had this tactic in mind when countering US Awacs in case of war.
Hit n' run is its game and a resourceful airforce can do some justification for this bird.
Abdul - PAF F16s can do nothing about Mig25s. One buzzed Islamabad not too long ago with no response by PAF.
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 19th September 2000 at 10:36Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
LAST EDITED ON 19-Sep-00 AT 10:41 AM (GMT)[p]Gentlemen,
I read several pretty coments regarding MiG-25"M" here, so please let me try to answer some of them:
Phantomforever(Mark):
"I could be misstaken but doesn't the MiG-25M exist already for a very long time. The NATO codename was Foxbat-E. His most important modification was the radarupgrade wich made lookdown-shootdown capabilities availible."
Correct: at the time there were many comments in the West about MiG-25P being modernized with weapons of the MiG-31. This never happened. As early as 1975 Soviets were more interessted in developing the MiG-31 as future interceptor than MiG-25 (PD and PDS were actually upgrades or mid-life refurbishments of existing Mig-25-interceptors).
PhantomII:
"The MiG-25PD "Foxbat-E" is the most potent variant until this new MiG-25M. The E can carry AA-6 Acrid (R-40), AA-7 Apex (R-23), AA-8 Aphid (R-60), and AA-11 Archer (R-73). It has a look-down shoot down radar, an IRST sensor, as well as IFR capability. It can also carry a huge 1,400 US gallon fuel tank on the centerline.
Sorry, PhantomII, this is not true (at least not all of this): neither R-23/AA-7, nor R-73/AA-11 were ever cleared for MiG-25 (see the answer of SOC for explanation). Even "down-graded" export variants of MiG-25PDs (there was no down-grade actually) carried R-40s and R-60s.
Honest Abdul:
"mig25 is big lumberging plane which is easy kill in todays air combat scenario. any self respecting F-16 pilot will dispose of it in a few seconds. Proof is that no country dares use Mig25 aggressively. for example, the IAF is so scared that its Mig25s never come near pakistan border, as F-16 will shoot it down with Sidewinder missile with ease."
Abdul: MiG-25 may be a "big lumberging" plane (especially when compared to F-16 or even F-7) but to say that no country dares to use it aggressively is completely wrong. To contrary, both Syria and Iraq used it VERY aggressively. The only reason no Pakistani F-16 ever claimed any Indian MiG-25RB while those operated over the Pak border was that they couldn't be scrambled fast enough...
PhantomII:
"Not true. The MIG-25 is defintely NOT a dogfighter, but it is a superb interceptor. It is extermely fast and can climb very high b very quickly. During the Gulf War, an Iraqi FOXBAT scored the first aerial kill of the war. (Iraq's only aerial kill.) It shot down an F/A-18 with an AA-6 Acrid (R-40). Several incidents occured where MiG-25's intercpeted Coalition planes and escaped to live another day. If used correctly, it is an excellent fighter."
Perhaps not an "excellent fighter", but bloody good interceptor, and Iraqi MiG-25 did many more other things before and after shoting down that Hornet. By the way, their best pilots (which were not trained by Pakistanis, but by Soviets) flew MiG-25s.
luismx:
"Where do you get this info about Iraqui pilot shot down an F/A-18? I never heard about this before."
In September 1992 the New York Times quoted a US Navy intelligence officer as saying that on 17th January 1991 an Iraqi "MiG-25P" shot down a F/A-18 Hornet. The case of this loss is currently being very actively researched by POW/MIA associacion.
SOC:
"MiG-25's aren't compatible with the R-23/24, this is a very popular myth that was perpetuated because someone realised that newer MiG-25's had a derivative of the MiG-23 weapon system. The R-23/24 cannot be "flown"(carried) at the MiG-25's operating speed. This was one of the problems with integrating the AS-11 ARM into the MiG-25BM weapon system. Likewise R-73's
cannot be carried either."
Correct, and the reason for rumours of MiG-25s carrying R-23s were supposedly "downgraded" export variants.
Ink:
"MiG-25s flew over Israel for years without effective inteception. May not be a great fighter but in its day it was a great rece platform."
Well, Ink, to be honest, they flew for two years along the Suez Canal and Sinai, not "over" Israel. So far there is stil no evidence that any MiG-25RBs - neither Soviet, nor Syrian - ever flew "over" Israel.
PhantomII:
"So, you are going to tell me that Jane's is just making all
this up? Why would they have this information on all of their resources I have ever seen. It is not just Jane's either, I
have seen many other sources say the the Foxbat is compatible with AA-7 and AA-11 air-to-air missiles.
Phantom, none of the Jane's editors ever stated to be "Dear Lord" concerning the data they present. For countries which are still using MiG-25s combat aircraft are no manequins, so the info is partialy not complete and partialy wrong. As mentioned, there are really many sources explaining about the capability of MiG-25s to carry AA-7s and AA-11s, but this NEVER happened (and if, certainly not on any operative mission).
Honest Abdul:
"My cousin in PAF confide that Iraq score many air to air kill- not just this one F-18. Kills include:
F-16 shot by MiG29 on raid over Haiwatha (spelling?)
F-18 shot by MiG-25
A-10 shot by MiG-29
Tornado shot by MiG-29"
Abdul, by all respect for your cousin, except one F/A-18 shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25PD on 17 January 1991, and one F-16C, previously damaged by SAM during the raid against Tuweitha (suburbs of Baghdad, where the building site of Iraqi nuclear plant from the "Tammuz"-programme was) possibly attacked by an MiG-29 (even some pilots which flew in the same formation with that F-16 deny this now) there is absolutely NO PROOF that anything else was shot down by Iraqi MiG-29 during the II Persian Gul War, except one Iraqi MiG-23ML. Regarding that "Tornado shot by MiG-29": Russians CLAIM the Italian Tornado IDS which was shot down on 18 January 1991 deep over Iraq as downed by Iraqi MiG-23ML, not MiG-29. Italians are quiet about this and they concentrated on explaining what happened to the crew after their ejection. It would be nice to learn more data about all this from your cousin, so please be so kind and ask him for more. I'm very curious about other possible explanations.
PhantomII's list of aircraft capable of carrying R-73/AA-11 sounds pretty strange to me:
> Su-22: 2
> Su-24: 2
> Su-25: 4
I can't quite belive that this three types are capable of carrying R-73s: R-60s /AA-8s yes, but R-73s.... Is this data really from Janes?
> Su-27: 10
> Su-30: 12
> MiG-21: 4
> MiG-23: 4 (maybe 6?)
No way more than four: even the outfit with four R-60s under the fuselage of MiG-23M and MLDs was a pretty "tight" one.
> MiG-25: 4
As mentioned, this is certainly not true.
> MiG-27: 2
> MiG-29: 6
> MiG-31: 4
The same case as MiG-25. In my opinion this list is OK for R-60s/AA-8s, but certainly not for R-73/AA-11s.
PhantomII:
"...that a PAF F-16 would shoot down a Foxbat with a Sidewinder missile. The IAF uses the recce version of the MIG-25 and at the altitudes and speeds they regularly fly, an F-16 wouldn't be able to get anywhere near a Foxbat, much less shoot it down with an AIM-9 Sidewinder...."
This doesn't means anything: why shouldn't it be possible for an F-16 to shot down an MiG-25RB with Sidewinder, or even with gunfire, if the interceptor is correctly positioned and opens fire at the correct moment?
Biffbutkus:
"I doubt that. The AA-9 is an old second rate copy of the Pheonix. The Foxbat radar is also second rate. The Foxbat is nothing more that a difficult target because of its speed. It will not be a major threat to Allied fighters, especially with the AMRAAM, which has by the way killed at least one mig 25."
Biff, sorry, but take a look at mentioned book by Gordon: Smerch and Safeer-25 radars are ideal for fighting against targets covered by heavy jamming, they showed this constantly during the II Persian Gulf War as well, the only problem were missiles they have had to guide (high malfunctioning rate and the fact, that AA-6s were developed for fighting against bombers like XB-70, B-58, B-52 and B-1 are). I don't belive this has anything to do with "second rate". And the AA-9 is far from "old second rate copy" of the Phoenix. As a matter of fact, AA-9 is absolutely NOT a copy of AIM-54, only the proof that this aerodynamic configuration is ideal for missiles with such capabilities.
I concur with Horace: old MiG-25PD could be even more dangerous opponent than Su-27. Foremost because of the fact, that it can dictate the fight, due to its higher speed.
By: Harry
- 19th September 2000 at 13:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Wow!Thanks for this info.
New
Posts: 570
By: JJ
- 19th September 2000 at 14:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Egyptian MiG-25s did not only fly over the Sinai, they also flew a couple of times alongside the Israeli coastline, and even made some pictures of Tel Aviv. So they DID fly over Israel without being caught.
By: PhantomII
- 19th September 2000 at 15:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
That list I gave of aircraft that can possibly carry the R-73, is Jane's info. It is also from many, many other sources I have or have seen on the internet. I am not just some kid who thinks he knows everything. I may be young, but I have had a fascination with planes ever since I can remember. I don't just look at plane pictures, I research them. This information may not be entirely correct, but for the most part it is. I still believe that the Foxbat is capable of using the R-23 and R-73 missiles. I have seen too many sources that say it can to believe otherwise. It may not have used the missiles in combat yet, but I feel that it has the CAPABILITY to use them. Anyway, I am glad that so many people have replied to this topic. I am glad I am not the only one who feels that the Foxbat is one of the great warplanes of our time. It is not perfect, but you have to admit, it is very interesting.
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 19th September 2000 at 15:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
LAST EDITED ON 19-Sep-00 AT 04:01 PM (GMT)[p]JJ,
if you ask any reasonable pilot, or anybody who has something to do with the air defence at all, they will tell you, that there is a VERY LARGE difference between flying OVER some object, or some 25 kilometers (or outside the 12-mile border along the coastline) "along" the place at the level of 22 or so thousand meters. So far, I wasn't able to find any source which states that "Egyptian" X-500s (actually Soviet owned and flown MiG-25RBs) flew OVER Tel Aviv at any time. If you did, please help me and tell me where to find such statements?
(I would rather say that some Soviet-flown MiG-25 "touched" the Israeli air space during some mission, flying over a parabolic route [MiG-25RB needs up to 180 kilometers for a full 180° and two minutes of flying time for a turn at max speed]; I would also rather say that Syrians or even Iraqis did something similar [means, flying along the Israeli border] than Soviets.)
PhantomII,
sorry, but this data - as you said - published by Jane's (you haven't named the exact source) rather indicates the CAPABILITY than the the real ABILITY or even the FACT that some of the mentioned planes do carry R-73. I've never, really never, heard about Su-22s carrying any R-73s, but very certainly there were Su-22M-3Ks carrying K-13Ms or Su-22M-4Ks carrying R-60s; there are also no Su-25 carrying any R-73s (yes, prototypes of Su-34/39s did). The same is the case with MiG-25 and MiG-31. There was also never the need for them doing so, MiG-25 is not compatible with R-23, and it never was. R-23 was and still is the main weapon of MiG-23M/MF/ML/MLD, it has nothing to do with MiG-25.
Sorry pal, you can ask SOC, he works for USAF and will repeat you the same again. MiG-25s and MiG-31 also never used R-73s, you can also ask Arthur, (he's a real expert regarding Soviet/Russian aircraft) he'll be more than glad to help you. And if this is stil not enough, then I'll get a specialist or two from the Eastern Europe to repeat the same: building the Kh-58 (AS-11) and R-60Ms (AA-8) so that both were still operative after a flight under a wing of MiG-25RB or MiG-25PD/PDS, respectively, was already a problem enough. As mentioned, Russians never considered MiG-25"M" as worth developing further, instead they got MiG-31, and that one was either armed with R-33s and R-40TDs (the later MiG-31M with R-77s), so, there was no need for this type to get R-73s as well.
By: SOC
- 19th September 2000 at 17:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Let me put this to rest: read the book MiG: 50 Years of Secret AIrcraft Design, written by Jacques Marmain and Rostislav Belyakov, who just happened to be the head of MiG at the time. They cover everything, including obscure prototypes like the Ye-8, and at no time is it said that the R-23/73 can be employed by the MiG-25. Belyakov, being actually in the OKB, should know.
By: ink
- 21st September 2000 at 14:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
It seems agreed that the MiG-25 is a potent aircraft even now, many years after its first flight. If this is true, what does that mean we should think of the MiG-31?
Surely with better avionics, two pilots, a stronger airframe and other improvements but no degredation of speed the MiG-31 is a real threat!
Also, it looks better.
By: PhantomII
- 22nd September 2000 at 02:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Who agrees that the MIG-25 is still an effective interceptor. So what if it can't dogfight, it wasn't designed with that in mind anyway. The updated versions of the R-40 (AA-6 Acrid) have a great range and are very deadly to larger aircraft. The AA-8 is a threat to aircraft that get in close. I think the AA-6 radar verion has a range of around 30 miles and the IR version a range of around 20 miles. The AA-8 is useful at around 3 to 4 miles. So, who agrees with me?
New
Posts: 839
By: Rosco
- 22nd September 2000 at 02:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Speed is it. I'm lucky enough to have witnessed an SR-71 being flown all-out over my home city over a period of several days as part of a local airshow. While not the most maneuverable aircraft in the conventional sense the SR-71 would vanish astonishingly quickly out of sight over the {clear} horizon and reappear facing the opposite direction or come in from another direction altogether, all within seconds. In comparison with this dominating "ground eating" ability and sheer energy, aircraft like the F-15 and MiG-29 seemed like prop driven stunt planes! I imagine the MiG-25 and '31 possess similar qualities, they'd be absolute hell to fight when flown properly and armed with decent missles.
By: SOC
- 22nd September 2000 at 12:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The advantage to high speed means you won't be catching any of these aircraft with an F-15. The FOXBAT tops out at Mach 2.83 with 4 AA-6 missiles, and thats only the speed limit imposed by the Air Force to keep the engines from melting...
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 22nd September 2000 at 13:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
...and that's - very probably - one of the reasons for USAF's "hanging" on F-22: close fast (supercruise capability) and "silent" (stealth) for a shot (with AMRAAM) before the enemy notices you're there and reacts by accelerating away or turning around...
By: SOC
- 22nd September 2000 at 13:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
True, but with fixed inlets, the F-22 can only dream of reaching the MiG-25's speed...
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 22nd September 2000 at 14:15Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Clear stuff, SOC, F-22 cannot reach the speed of MiG-25, but it can close on it fast and undetected, and surprise the opponent.
I don't know if your job is also to analyse recent engagements between USAF and USN fighters and Iraqi MiG-25s, but, lets take the example with what I belive that happened on 5 January 1999.
If you ask me, somebody there tried to set a trap for Iraqis, after Iraqi aircraft repeatedly breached the southern no-fly zone in the days before.
Well, I think it was so: there were an ES-3A, listening Iraqi comms and radar signals, an E-2C, waiting with radar powered up, but not emitting, perhaps even one of USAF's heavy working RC-135W and E-3C close by, doing the same? Then at least four F-15Cs on one side and two or more F-14Ds of VF-213, together with some SEAD-assets (means HARM-armed EA-6Bs and F/A-18Cs).
All of them waiting on the brink of the range of Iraqi early-warning radars, in total EMCON.
Iraqis took off and began to organize, flying toward and along the southern no-fly zone, at the same time trying to pull some of US fighters closer to certain zones, defended by SAMs.
Then came - probably two - Iraqi MiG-25PDS. Flying straight, at high speed and level they closed to almost 60 miles of the Saudi border. That's close enough, somebody aboard some E-2C or E-3C - warned by ES-3A's crew (which monitored enemy emissions) - tought, and the radar is powered up: blink! Off-goes the RWR of the Iraqi MiG-25s and pilots are immediately turning around with Eagles in hot pursuit. The distance is not too large, perhaps as small as 15 to 20 miles, but too large for AMRAAMs to reach their targets in pursuit (because the actuall distance missiles will have to cover in order to reach a target flying AWAY FROM them was almost doubled).
Some times afterward, second round, this time with Americans sending F-14Ds, as their AIM-54Cs should make the difference. What happens? Don't know how close MiG-25s came that time, but at least two (perhaps more) of 1-million-USD-per-round Phoenixes are fired, again at turning and accelerating-away Iraqi Foxbats. As far as I know USN-fighters wouldn't fire until their targets were at around 60 miles (or even less). The result? Not clear, perhaps one hit, but the distance is simply too large to recognize facts.
Hkhm...Conclusion? With F-22s instead of F-15Cs and F-14Ds, Americans could probably sneak up on Foxbats completely unnoticed by Iraqi GCI and fire their missiles from much favourable positions... Any comments?
By: SOC
- 22nd September 2000 at 14:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Good point on the whole "sneaking up" issue and how it will effect launch ranges. And no, my job isn't to analyse Iraqi/US engagements, there's people whose unfortunate lot in life is to live in Saudi and do that! My solution would be a long-range Phoenix-class AAM for the F-22. Why settle for the lesser-ranged AMRAMM? Given the LPI radar on the F-22, and the fact that you could use IR terminal homing thanks to the MiG-25's massive IR signature, you could knock aircraft out of the sky with reckless abandon! Maybe I should re-train and get a pilot training slot hehe.
New
Posts: 794
By: Tom
- 22nd September 2000 at 15:25Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Heh, SOC, ever tought of trying to catch one of those nice jobs of "special advisor" to some congressmen, the USAF or anything else after your current tour?
And, (sorry for the next direct question) what's wrong with Saudi Arabia? Al Hofuf is such a beautifull oasis...
Back to the topic: just like you I absolutely don't understand what's going on in the USA since 1991 regarding AAMs, except there is some "black" programme for a weapon of the kind of mix between AIM-54C and AIM-120B (or what AIM-120C promises to become), which will be kept back as long as there is no "proper" opponent for it....
If the opposition in the air was (relatively!) weak during the II Persian Gulf War/Desert Storm, over Somalia, Bosnia or Yugoslavia, that doesn't means that this will be the same case next time. Do the USAF, USN and USMC - and so many decision-makers in Washington - really think that no potential foe can afford to field potentialy dangerous air-to-air assets today (and tommorrow) any more?
Iraqi (and some other) MiG-25s are still flying around, just for example...
It's always the same: decision-makers are always leading their country into a new war the way they think is how their predecessors should have done in the last one. But, what if somebody goes a step further? Yugoslaws did so last year. Perhaps some days Saddam's sons will finally manage to understand the importance and - foremost - the real value and capabilities of their Air Force?
Posts: 3,269
By: ink - 15th September 2000 at 23:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Merlin, don't beleive every thing you read.
Posts: 2,282
By: Harry - 16th September 2000 at 09:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
>becasaue top Iraqi pilot who
>train in Pakistan fly these
>planes.
No wonder Iraq got thrashed badly!
Posts: 7,989
By: PhantomII - 18th September 2000 at 02:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I have two more responses to the people who dog this aircraft. Firstly, regarding the comment on the fact that a PAF F-16 would shoot down a Foxbat with a Sidewinder missile. The IAF uses the recce version of the MIG-25 and at the altitudes and speeds they regularly fly, an F-16 wouldn't be able to get anywhere near a Foxbat, much less shoot it down with an AIM-9 Sidewinder. Secondly, during the Gulf War, a pair of MIG-25's took of one day and challenged a pair of USAF F-15's. The Foxbat's fired first, and missed, then the Eagle returned fire. The Foxbat's not only evaded all the Eagle's missiles (4 AIM-7 and 2 AIM-9), they outran them. Four more Eagle's tried to intercept them and failed to do so. Another pair of F-15's intercepted them and fired four more AIM-7 missiles, all of which missed. The Foxbats returned safely to base. I would hardly call the Foxbat a dud or an easy target. With the AA-9, it will be able to knock down any F-16 or F-15 from 70 miles away.
By: Anonymous - 18th September 2000 at 09:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
I doubt that. The AA-9 is an old second rate copy of the Pheonix. The Foxbat radar is also second rate. The Foxbat is nothing more that a difficult target because of its speed. It will not be a major threat to Allied fighters, especially with the AMRAAM, which has by the way killed at least one mig 25.
Posts: 40
By: Horace - 18th September 2000 at 22:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The incident in the Gulf war showed the immunity the Mig25 can have (thanks to its speed) if employed correctly.
In the right hands, a flight of high alt Foxbats unleashing a salvo of missiles can create hell for an opposing enemy flight. The Russians had this tactic in mind when countering US Awacs in case of war.
Hit n' run is its game and a resourceful airforce can do some justification for this bird.
Abdul - PAF F16s can do nothing about Mig25s. One buzzed Islamabad not too long ago with no response by PAF.
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 19th September 2000 at 10:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
LAST EDITED ON 19-Sep-00 AT 10:41 AM (GMT)[p]Gentlemen,
I read several pretty coments regarding MiG-25"M" here, so please let me try to answer some of them:
Phantomforever(Mark):
"I could be misstaken but doesn't the MiG-25M exist already for a very long time. The NATO codename was Foxbat-E. His most important modification was the radarupgrade wich made lookdown-shootdown capabilities availible."
Correct: at the time there were many comments in the West about MiG-25P being modernized with weapons of the MiG-31. This never happened. As early as 1975 Soviets were more interessted in developing the MiG-31 as future interceptor than MiG-25 (PD and PDS were actually upgrades or mid-life refurbishments of existing Mig-25-interceptors).
PhantomII:
"The MiG-25PD "Foxbat-E" is the most potent variant until this new MiG-25M. The E can carry AA-6 Acrid (R-40), AA-7 Apex (R-23), AA-8 Aphid (R-60), and AA-11 Archer (R-73). It has a look-down shoot down radar, an IRST sensor, as well as IFR capability. It can also carry a huge 1,400 US gallon fuel tank on the centerline.
Sorry, PhantomII, this is not true (at least not all of this): neither R-23/AA-7, nor R-73/AA-11 were ever cleared for MiG-25 (see the answer of SOC for explanation). Even "down-graded" export variants of MiG-25PDs (there was no down-grade actually) carried R-40s and R-60s.
Honest Abdul:
"mig25 is big lumberging plane which is easy kill in todays air combat scenario. any self respecting F-16 pilot will dispose of it in a few seconds. Proof is that no country dares use Mig25 aggressively. for example, the IAF is so scared that its Mig25s never come near pakistan border, as F-16 will shoot it down with Sidewinder missile with ease."
Abdul: MiG-25 may be a "big lumberging" plane (especially when compared to F-16 or even F-7) but to say that no country dares to use it aggressively is completely wrong. To contrary, both Syria and Iraq used it VERY aggressively. The only reason no Pakistani F-16 ever claimed any Indian MiG-25RB while those operated over the Pak border was that they couldn't be scrambled fast enough...
PhantomII:
"Not true. The MIG-25 is defintely NOT a dogfighter, but it is a superb interceptor. It is extermely fast and can climb very high b very quickly. During the Gulf War, an Iraqi FOXBAT scored the first aerial kill of the war. (Iraq's only aerial kill.) It shot down an F/A-18 with an AA-6 Acrid (R-40). Several incidents occured where MiG-25's intercpeted Coalition planes and escaped to live another day. If used correctly, it is an excellent fighter."
Perhaps not an "excellent fighter", but bloody good interceptor, and Iraqi MiG-25 did many more other things before and after shoting down that Hornet. By the way, their best pilots (which were not trained by Pakistanis, but by Soviets) flew MiG-25s.
luismx:
"Where do you get this info about Iraqui pilot shot down an F/A-18? I never heard about this before."
In September 1992 the New York Times quoted a US Navy intelligence officer as saying that on 17th January 1991 an Iraqi "MiG-25P" shot down a F/A-18 Hornet. The case of this loss is currently being very actively researched by POW/MIA associacion.
SOC:
"MiG-25's aren't compatible with the R-23/24, this is a very popular myth that was perpetuated because someone realised that newer MiG-25's had a derivative of the MiG-23 weapon system. The R-23/24 cannot be "flown"(carried) at the MiG-25's operating speed. This was one of the problems with integrating the AS-11 ARM into the MiG-25BM weapon system. Likewise R-73's
cannot be carried either."
Correct, and the reason for rumours of MiG-25s carrying R-23s were supposedly "downgraded" export variants.
Ink:
"MiG-25s flew over Israel for years without effective inteception. May not be a great fighter but in its day it was a great rece platform."
Well, Ink, to be honest, they flew for two years along the Suez Canal and Sinai, not "over" Israel. So far there is stil no evidence that any MiG-25RBs - neither Soviet, nor Syrian - ever flew "over" Israel.
PhantomII:
"So, you are going to tell me that Jane's is just making all
this up? Why would they have this information on all of their resources I have ever seen. It is not just Jane's either, I
have seen many other sources say the the Foxbat is compatible with AA-7 and AA-11 air-to-air missiles.
Phantom, none of the Jane's editors ever stated to be "Dear Lord" concerning the data they present. For countries which are still using MiG-25s combat aircraft are no manequins, so the info is partialy not complete and partialy wrong. As mentioned, there are really many sources explaining about the capability of MiG-25s to carry AA-7s and AA-11s, but this NEVER happened (and if, certainly not on any operative mission).
Honest Abdul:
"My cousin in PAF confide that Iraq score many air to air kill- not just this one F-18. Kills include:
F-16 shot by MiG29 on raid over Haiwatha (spelling?)
F-18 shot by MiG-25
A-10 shot by MiG-29
Tornado shot by MiG-29"
Abdul, by all respect for your cousin, except one F/A-18 shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25PD on 17 January 1991, and one F-16C, previously damaged by SAM during the raid against Tuweitha (suburbs of Baghdad, where the building site of Iraqi nuclear plant from the "Tammuz"-programme was) possibly attacked by an MiG-29 (even some pilots which flew in the same formation with that F-16 deny this now) there is absolutely NO PROOF that anything else was shot down by Iraqi MiG-29 during the II Persian Gul War, except one Iraqi MiG-23ML. Regarding that "Tornado shot by MiG-29": Russians CLAIM the Italian Tornado IDS which was shot down on 18 January 1991 deep over Iraq as downed by Iraqi MiG-23ML, not MiG-29. Italians are quiet about this and they concentrated on explaining what happened to the crew after their ejection. It would be nice to learn more data about all this from your cousin, so please be so kind and ask him for more. I'm very curious about other possible explanations.
PhantomII's list of aircraft capable of carrying R-73/AA-11 sounds pretty strange to me:
> Su-22: 2
> Su-24: 2
> Su-25: 4
I can't quite belive that this three types are capable of carrying R-73s: R-60s /AA-8s yes, but R-73s.... Is this data really from Janes?
> Su-27: 10
> Su-30: 12
> MiG-21: 4
> MiG-23: 4 (maybe 6?)
No way more than four: even the outfit with four R-60s under the fuselage of MiG-23M and MLDs was a pretty "tight" one.
> MiG-25: 4
As mentioned, this is certainly not true.
> MiG-27: 2
> MiG-29: 6
> MiG-31: 4
The same case as MiG-25. In my opinion this list is OK for R-60s/AA-8s, but certainly not for R-73/AA-11s.
PhantomII:
"...that a PAF F-16 would shoot down a Foxbat with a Sidewinder missile. The IAF uses the recce version of the MIG-25 and at the altitudes and speeds they regularly fly, an F-16 wouldn't be able to get anywhere near a Foxbat, much less shoot it down with an AIM-9 Sidewinder...."
This doesn't means anything: why shouldn't it be possible for an F-16 to shot down an MiG-25RB with Sidewinder, or even with gunfire, if the interceptor is correctly positioned and opens fire at the correct moment?
Biffbutkus:
"I doubt that. The AA-9 is an old second rate copy of the Pheonix. The Foxbat radar is also second rate. The Foxbat is nothing more that a difficult target because of its speed. It will not be a major threat to Allied fighters, especially with the AMRAAM, which has by the way killed at least one mig 25."
Biff, sorry, but take a look at mentioned book by Gordon: Smerch and Safeer-25 radars are ideal for fighting against targets covered by heavy jamming, they showed this constantly during the II Persian Gulf War as well, the only problem were missiles they have had to guide (high malfunctioning rate and the fact, that AA-6s were developed for fighting against bombers like XB-70, B-58, B-52 and B-1 are). I don't belive this has anything to do with "second rate". And the AA-9 is far from "old second rate copy" of the Phoenix. As a matter of fact, AA-9 is absolutely NOT a copy of AIM-54, only the proof that this aerodynamic configuration is ideal for missiles with such capabilities.
I concur with Horace: old MiG-25PD could be even more dangerous opponent than Su-27. Foremost because of the fact, that it can dictate the fight, due to its higher speed.
Posts: 2,282
By: Harry - 19th September 2000 at 13:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Wow!Thanks for this info.
Posts: 570
By: JJ - 19th September 2000 at 14:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Egyptian MiG-25s did not only fly over the Sinai, they also flew a couple of times alongside the Israeli coastline, and even made some pictures of Tel Aviv. So they DID fly over Israel without being caught.
Posts: 7,989
By: PhantomII - 19th September 2000 at 15:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
That list I gave of aircraft that can possibly carry the R-73, is Jane's info. It is also from many, many other sources I have or have seen on the internet. I am not just some kid who thinks he knows everything. I may be young, but I have had a fascination with planes ever since I can remember. I don't just look at plane pictures, I research them. This information may not be entirely correct, but for the most part it is. I still believe that the Foxbat is capable of using the R-23 and R-73 missiles. I have seen too many sources that say it can to believe otherwise. It may not have used the missiles in combat yet, but I feel that it has the CAPABILITY to use them. Anyway, I am glad that so many people have replied to this topic. I am glad I am not the only one who feels that the Foxbat is one of the great warplanes of our time. It is not perfect, but you have to admit, it is very interesting.
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 19th September 2000 at 15:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
LAST EDITED ON 19-Sep-00 AT 04:01 PM (GMT)[p]JJ,
if you ask any reasonable pilot, or anybody who has something to do with the air defence at all, they will tell you, that there is a VERY LARGE difference between flying OVER some object, or some 25 kilometers (or outside the 12-mile border along the coastline) "along" the place at the level of 22 or so thousand meters. So far, I wasn't able to find any source which states that "Egyptian" X-500s (actually Soviet owned and flown MiG-25RBs) flew OVER Tel Aviv at any time. If you did, please help me and tell me where to find such statements?
(I would rather say that some Soviet-flown MiG-25 "touched" the Israeli air space during some mission, flying over a parabolic route [MiG-25RB needs up to 180 kilometers for a full 180° and two minutes of flying time for a turn at max speed]; I would also rather say that Syrians or even Iraqis did something similar [means, flying along the Israeli border] than Soviets.)
PhantomII,
sorry, but this data - as you said - published by Jane's (you haven't named the exact source) rather indicates the CAPABILITY than the the real ABILITY or even the FACT that some of the mentioned planes do carry R-73. I've never, really never, heard about Su-22s carrying any R-73s, but very certainly there were Su-22M-3Ks carrying K-13Ms or Su-22M-4Ks carrying R-60s; there are also no Su-25 carrying any R-73s (yes, prototypes of Su-34/39s did). The same is the case with MiG-25 and MiG-31. There was also never the need for them doing so, MiG-25 is not compatible with R-23, and it never was. R-23 was and still is the main weapon of MiG-23M/MF/ML/MLD, it has nothing to do with MiG-25.
Sorry pal, you can ask SOC, he works for USAF and will repeat you the same again. MiG-25s and MiG-31 also never used R-73s, you can also ask Arthur, (he's a real expert regarding Soviet/Russian aircraft) he'll be more than glad to help you. And if this is stil not enough, then I'll get a specialist or two from the Eastern Europe to repeat the same: building the Kh-58 (AS-11) and R-60Ms (AA-8) so that both were still operative after a flight under a wing of MiG-25RB or MiG-25PD/PDS, respectively, was already a problem enough. As mentioned, Russians never considered MiG-25"M" as worth developing further, instead they got MiG-31, and that one was either armed with R-33s and R-40TDs (the later MiG-31M with R-77s), so, there was no need for this type to get R-73s as well.
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 19th September 2000 at 17:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Let me put this to rest: read the book MiG: 50 Years of Secret AIrcraft Design, written by Jacques Marmain and Rostislav Belyakov, who just happened to be the head of MiG at the time. They cover everything, including obscure prototypes like the Ye-8, and at no time is it said that the R-23/73 can be employed by the MiG-25. Belyakov, being actually in the OKB, should know.
Posts: 3,269
By: ink - 21st September 2000 at 14:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
It seems agreed that the MiG-25 is a potent aircraft even now, many years after its first flight. If this is true, what does that mean we should think of the MiG-31?
Surely with better avionics, two pilots, a stronger airframe and other improvements but no degredation of speed the MiG-31 is a real threat!
Also, it looks better.
Posts: 7,989
By: PhantomII - 22nd September 2000 at 02:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Who agrees that the MIG-25 is still an effective interceptor. So what if it can't dogfight, it wasn't designed with that in mind anyway. The updated versions of the R-40 (AA-6 Acrid) have a great range and are very deadly to larger aircraft. The AA-8 is a threat to aircraft that get in close. I think the AA-6 radar verion has a range of around 30 miles and the IR version a range of around 20 miles. The AA-8 is useful at around 3 to 4 miles. So, who agrees with me?
Posts: 839
By: Rosco - 22nd September 2000 at 02:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Speed is it. I'm lucky enough to have witnessed an SR-71 being flown all-out over my home city over a period of several days as part of a local airshow. While not the most maneuverable aircraft in the conventional sense the SR-71 would vanish astonishingly quickly out of sight over the {clear} horizon and reappear facing the opposite direction or come in from another direction altogether, all within seconds. In comparison with this dominating "ground eating" ability and sheer energy, aircraft like the F-15 and MiG-29 seemed like prop driven stunt planes! I imagine the MiG-25 and '31 possess similar qualities, they'd be absolute hell to fight when flown properly and armed with decent missles.
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 22nd September 2000 at 12:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
The advantage to high speed means you won't be catching any of these aircraft with an F-15. The FOXBAT tops out at Mach 2.83 with 4 AA-6 missiles, and thats only the speed limit imposed by the Air Force to keep the engines from melting...
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 22nd September 2000 at 13:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
...and that's - very probably - one of the reasons for USAF's "hanging" on F-22: close fast (supercruise capability) and "silent" (stealth) for a shot (with AMRAAM) before the enemy notices you're there and reacts by accelerating away or turning around...
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 22nd September 2000 at 13:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
True, but with fixed inlets, the F-22 can only dream of reaching the MiG-25's speed...
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 22nd September 2000 at 14:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Clear stuff, SOC, F-22 cannot reach the speed of MiG-25, but it can close on it fast and undetected, and surprise the opponent.
I don't know if your job is also to analyse recent engagements between USAF and USN fighters and Iraqi MiG-25s, but, lets take the example with what I belive that happened on 5 January 1999.
If you ask me, somebody there tried to set a trap for Iraqis, after Iraqi aircraft repeatedly breached the southern no-fly zone in the days before.
Well, I think it was so: there were an ES-3A, listening Iraqi comms and radar signals, an E-2C, waiting with radar powered up, but not emitting, perhaps even one of USAF's heavy working RC-135W and E-3C close by, doing the same? Then at least four F-15Cs on one side and two or more F-14Ds of VF-213, together with some SEAD-assets (means HARM-armed EA-6Bs and F/A-18Cs).
All of them waiting on the brink of the range of Iraqi early-warning radars, in total EMCON.
Iraqis took off and began to organize, flying toward and along the southern no-fly zone, at the same time trying to pull some of US fighters closer to certain zones, defended by SAMs.
Then came - probably two - Iraqi MiG-25PDS. Flying straight, at high speed and level they closed to almost 60 miles of the Saudi border. That's close enough, somebody aboard some E-2C or E-3C - warned by ES-3A's crew (which monitored enemy emissions) - tought, and the radar is powered up: blink! Off-goes the RWR of the Iraqi MiG-25s and pilots are immediately turning around with Eagles in hot pursuit. The distance is not too large, perhaps as small as 15 to 20 miles, but too large for AMRAAMs to reach their targets in pursuit (because the actuall distance missiles will have to cover in order to reach a target flying AWAY FROM them was almost doubled).
Some times afterward, second round, this time with Americans sending F-14Ds, as their AIM-54Cs should make the difference. What happens? Don't know how close MiG-25s came that time, but at least two (perhaps more) of 1-million-USD-per-round Phoenixes are fired, again at turning and accelerating-away Iraqi Foxbats. As far as I know USN-fighters wouldn't fire until their targets were at around 60 miles (or even less). The result? Not clear, perhaps one hit, but the distance is simply too large to recognize facts.
Hkhm...Conclusion? With F-22s instead of F-15Cs and F-14Ds, Americans could probably sneak up on Foxbats completely unnoticed by Iraqi GCI and fire their missiles from much favourable positions... Any comments?
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 22nd September 2000 at 14:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Good point on the whole "sneaking up" issue and how it will effect launch ranges. And no, my job isn't to analyse Iraqi/US engagements, there's people whose unfortunate lot in life is to live in Saudi and do that! My solution would be a long-range Phoenix-class AAM for the F-22. Why settle for the lesser-ranged AMRAMM? Given the LPI radar on the F-22, and the fact that you could use IR terminal homing thanks to the MiG-25's massive IR signature, you could knock aircraft out of the sky with reckless abandon! Maybe I should re-train and get a pilot training slot hehe.
Posts: 794
By: Tom - 22nd September 2000 at 15:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
RE: MIG-25M
Heh, SOC, ever tought of trying to catch one of those nice jobs of "special advisor" to some congressmen, the USAF or anything else after your current tour?
And, (sorry for the next direct question) what's wrong with Saudi Arabia? Al Hofuf is such a beautifull oasis...
Back to the topic: just like you I absolutely don't understand what's going on in the USA since 1991 regarding AAMs, except there is some "black" programme for a weapon of the kind of mix between AIM-54C and AIM-120B (or what AIM-120C promises to become), which will be kept back as long as there is no "proper" opponent for it....
If the opposition in the air was (relatively!) weak during the II Persian Gulf War/Desert Storm, over Somalia, Bosnia or Yugoslavia, that doesn't means that this will be the same case next time. Do the USAF, USN and USMC - and so many decision-makers in Washington - really think that no potential foe can afford to field potentialy dangerous air-to-air assets today (and tommorrow) any more?
Iraqi (and some other) MiG-25s are still flying around, just for example...
It's always the same: decision-makers are always leading their country into a new war the way they think is how their predecessors should have done in the last one. But, what if somebody goes a step further? Yugoslaws did so last year. Perhaps some days Saddam's sons will finally manage to understand the importance and - foremost - the real value and capabilities of their Air Force?