От Д. Сбоев Ответить на сообщение
К Серёга
Дата 25.06.2002 19:31:00 Найти в дереве
Рубрики Прочее; Версия для печати

От я не ...

Дык этот я уже видел совсем недавно здесь же :). Но это дела не проясняет с сирийскими МЛами в 83. Этот у евреев в конце 80-х оказался. Я не спец - но фиг его знает что с камуфлом может в сириийском климате стать. А можно этот МЛ с индийскими сравнить или с иракскими? Ссылка вот кстати (воды правды много):

http://www.acig.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=3&forum=8&14

Квинтессенция про МЛ вот (про Корею там по-моему ничего интересного не оказалоь).

Let me try to explain this to you in a simple manner. You seem to be so sure that in October (others say December) 1983 Syrian "MiG-23MLs" have shot down three Israeli F-15s. Because of this I asked you what is your source. I wanted to see what makes you so sure that this ever happened?

What was the answer? Be serious: actually nothing. You haven't offered anything else than what is already broadly known and what was already desribed in that Russian article about MiG-23s initially published in the Ukrainian Aviatsija&Vremja Magazine. But that article is full of mistakes which I - hopefully - made you clear in my last post: no MiG-23MLs in Syria in 1983 no R-24s there at all etc. The author of that article wasn't even able to offer more data about that clash and there is absolutely no independent confirmation it ever happened (this contrary to dozens of other cases of air battles over Lebanon which were documented by dozens of different sources).
------------

kfadrat
Registered User
Posts: 15
(2/15/01 4:31:48 am)
Reply Re: Korea
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
just a moment who said there were no MLs here on 83 ? the first R-24s begane arriving late on 82 where do you guys get your info from ? the moon ?


Tomcat114
Administrator
Posts: 261
(2/15/01 8:37:39 am)
Reply Re: Korea
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kfadrat
as said: there is no trace that the SyAF got any MiG-23MLs in 1983. Actually there is also no trace that any MiG-23MFs were in use during the Lebanon War in 1982 except that one article which - sadly - sounds like written by somebody who read the reports about the NATO-hysteria that the F-16 is underarmed when compared to the MiG-23s because it haven't got any BVR AAMs early during its career. With other words: the article about the Syrian MiG-23-kills continues to repeat that R-23s (not R-24s) were used from distances of between seven and nine kilometers - supposedly out of the range of AIM-9L-armed F-16. Together with - sadly - the lack of better informations regarding these air battles from the Syrian side this gives the whole situation a very bad taste.

And for comparission: Indians which were not involved in any war at that time also got "only" R-23R/T-armed MiG-23MFs - not MiG-23MLs - in late 1982. And the R-24 was developed as a main weapon of the MiG-23ML/MLD (23-18 ) . Furthermore Iraqis which were such good customers of Soviets and also massively supported by Soviet instructors even at the time when these were officially not even in the country (late 1980-early 1982) got their MiG-23MLs in 1984 only (and they could be sure that none of these would land in US hands even if shot down over Iran).

Thus sorry I simply don't believe that Russians notorious for their secrecy would deliver their top version of the MiG-23ML to Syria - involved in fighting in Lebanon continuously - in 1983 if there was a danger of some of them landing in Israeli hands (just like it happened in 1989) even as wreckage.

I'm sure Arthur could sheed some more light on this if somebody can't believe what I said.
------------------

Now regarding the MiG-23ML:
"As for the Mig-23Ml you mena to tell us you don't know whether Syria had ML versions in 83 (that is what you mean)."

What I'm telling you is following: I'm privately researching about Arab air forces for over 15 years now and intensively cooperating with several other researchers. I personally know several people which either served in different Arab air forces or which still serve - some of them from my teen-age. Based on such sources and experiences I can tell you: there is NO trace so far that ANY Arab AF got MiG-23MFs before 1982 or any MiG-23MLs before 1984.

"You say there was no reason for the USSR to give MLs to Syria while it didn't give them to India and Iraq. Well India wasn't fighting any one at the time and Iraq was doing quite well against the Iranians. the USSR wanted to test the Ml versions and Syria would be the perfect place since it would fight against F-15 and 16s. Therefore this would be the first place to send them."

Well here my friend I got a feeling you don't quite know what are you talking about. Just for example: India was the only country which got the sophisticated MiG-27 while there was still the Soviet Union. MiG-27 wasn't exported anywhere else (and only during the last year did the Ukraine sold five refurbished MiG-27s to Sri Lanka see under "Current Conflicts"). India was also the first country to which a delivery of MiG-29s was permitted. Syria Iraq Algier Angola and all the other "splendid" and "important" Soviet allies of the Warshaw Pact never got MiG-27s and got MiG-29s only after India.

But you indicate that Syrians would get MiG-23MLs when Indians would not?

And then "Iraq was doing quite well against Iranians"...

Fishbed
Iraq was mirred in a deep trouble from the moment it attacked Iran on the afternoon of 22 September 1980. The IRIAF was flying all over that country at will for all eight years of the war: most of air raids undertaken by Iranian Phantoms were even anounced on the TV in advance! Before 1987 the Iraqis weren't doing any good. If there was a "test ground" for Soviets to send their newest models then it was Afghanistan and Iraq. Just for example: do you know where the MiG-25BMs and Kh-58s were tested in combat for the first time? Certainly not in Syria.

If there was a good place to test the MiG-23MF and MiG-23ML in combat then it was Iraq. Why? Because the situation on some parts on the front - at certain times of the year - there (compared to what was going on in Lebanon) was actually that of a clasical conventional warfare with Iraqi tactical interceptors deployed according to Soviet doctrine and under conditions of clear numerical superiority (just like it would be the case over the Central Europe). I.e.: perfect test-ground for testing MiG-23MFs and MiG-23MLs against a weakened enemy which wasn't that much as dangerous.

Soviets were not interested to enable Syrians to equalize the technical advantage of Israel: that would only mean more "problems" for Moscow make Syria less dependable on Soviet "help" and weaken Soviet influence in that part of the Med. To contrary their presence in Iraq assured them some kind of influence in the oil-rich Persian Gulf while they were also constantly able to "impress" Iranians with capabilities of their weapons. In two cases it worked for sure: after the war with Iraq Iranians immediately ordered MiG-29s and Su-24s from the USSR.

Regards
Tom

Дима