I’m trying to understand why the MiG-23BN is placed at 9.7, especially when compared to the F-104A at 9.3.
The MiG-23BN does have a good selection of bombs and can carry two gun pods, giving it a total of four 23 mm GSh-23L cannons. While these guns provide high firepower, their dispersion is still noticeable and makes them somewhat less consistent to use compared to other aircraft.
The F-104A, on the other hand, is armed with two 20 mm M61A1 cannons, which are significantly more accurate and reliable. In addition, the F-104A accelerates better and has access to two air-to-air missiles, while both aircraft lack flares.
In terms of maneuverability, their turn performance is roughly comparable, with the MiG-23BN having an advantage at very low speeds. That said, the MiG-23BN is still not particularly agile overall and performs worse in acceleration compared to a 9.3 aircraft like the F-104A.
So why is the MiG-23BN at 9.7 instead of 9.3, where the F-104A sits? Having no flares and no missiles at 9.7, combined with mediocre maneuverability and worse acceleration than lower-BR aircraft, feels especially punishing.
I won’t say it’s good but you can literally outturn a lot of people without losing speed if you set wing angle to 0% as early as you can.
Also abuse the speed and climb to like 7km when you bomb so you can actually survive. Nobody does this and just gets point and clicked.
It would be cool if it could get some r3s but not sure if it could even carry them
Compare it to the Russian Yak-28B.
It does have a good amount of bombs it can drop, ist only 400 km/h slower, has flares and twin engines with afterburner at 9.0.
Not when the Mig-21S exists at 9.7, unless the BN would carry R-13s or R-60s. Either way, I’d prefer if flares were added instead, which would definitely make it at 9.7 worthy plane.
Sure but it also doesn’t have the gunpods, rockets, or dogfighting capabilities that a MiG-23 does. Not that a MiG-23 is insanely good but it can certainly hold it’s own, unlike the Yak-28B
I think the BN sitting at 9.7 is fair, overall. So.
I am not trying to compare a 9.0 plane to an 9.7 one, im just trying to give an example.
I know that it sits there due to these facts, and yes it was a mistake of mine to point out that it got flares.
But in my opinion it sits to high, compared what i am used to play.
The advice I can give, is drop fuel to 20 minutes, run 2 napalm to get comfy, pick routes you think fighters won’t intercept you on, afterburn there and the way back as fast as you can.
Then when you’re comfortable, bring 4 napalm if you want. You can even reduce fuel if you think it’s a good decision.
@Pinguinliebling
so basically the reason its 9.7 and not 10.7 is due to its lack of chaff and smaller payload as it get no missiles and only extra gun pods compare it F105 you can do mach 1.2 with full payload and chaff pods
radar missiles are the 105s only weakness as your fast enough to outrun any missile with energy and if you maintain it you can out run them all EXCEPT RADAR
MIG-23BN does same thin execpt it has no chaff pods leaving it vunerable to mirage IIIC and F4C
In this thread: people advocate for korean era aircraft to see a mig-23 because reads notes it doesn’t have the same features over half the korean era jets dont have
9.7 is fine imo. Once I spaded it I found it to be quite potent for fight duties. It’s quite fast, decently nimble when you use it right, and its fun is great for the BR. The lack of CMs and missiles is the only thing holding it back