Thats why it should be on low BR.
What I read Ye-231 didnt have radar at all:
Edit: ah sorry I made wrong conclusion…Ye-231 what you mean is third prototype and not first one. Third prototype got radar.
But that would be better to use serial version than prototype (Ye-231 went into serial production under name MiG-23 (iz.23-11) (Flogger A) with little changes):
Question is what is better as counterpart to F-4C:
MiG-23 (iz.23-11) (Flogger A)
MiG-23S (iz.23-21) (Flogger A)
I think that first MiG-23 with Saphire-23 may be problematic to balance mainly when radar will be fixed. It will be practically PD radar with pretty decent missiles on trash plane without countermeasures (maximally S-5P/S-8P chaffs).
3 Likes
The MiG-23S would definitely be a counterpart and competitor to the F-4C, but not an equivalent. The two are very different aircraft.
The F-4C has twice as many missiles and good radar missiles. It’s also quite heavy. The MiG-23S has great IR missiles and much better flight performance, but lacks long-range capability.
A closer equivalent might be an Su-15 variant.
1 Like
Su-15 have R-60. Its not very close to F-4C.
The TM model does. I mean something like the Su-15T.
1 Like
These grey missiles from second row looks like miniature of 3M8, from 2K11 Krug xD
Yeah but Su-15T have only two missile from K-8 family (hard to say how effective they would be) compared to 8 missiles on F-4C. MiG-23S have less missiles but better ones. Its not equivalent to F-4C as you write but its pretty close with some thing better and some worse.
It’s not. The MS is basically an M fitted with the weapons systems of the S. The S itself was a mechanical nightmare with very poor performance, while the M resolved most of those issues. The S also had a different tail details compared to the MS. On top of that, the MS was modified to carry two R-13M missiles.
You can read my MiG-23MS suggestion here: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MS Flogger-E – The Monkey Model
2 Likes
Reliability isn’t modelled in-game, and the German MiG-23S also carried R-13M and R-3R. What, performance-wise, do you see as a significant difference?
1 Like
I’d say the performance difference is very difficult to calculate without getting the exact specifications of each jet.
The engine on the MS was slightly newer, although I am not sure if it had better performance.
I’d say they are plus minus equal.
1 Like
Yeah ok
Worse engine, older type of wings without reinforcement so it can pull less G with differenet aerodynamic elements and angles, conical radome instead of ogival and many more. Its pretty significant difference. You can check Ruslet for all differences which was made.
1 Like
+1. I would love to see this in the tech tree at 13.0. It would be similar to the f-4 ice and av-8 which is why I think it should be 13.0
1 Like
I wonder if it had the same RWR-- that being the SPO-15, or if it was upgraded to the SPO-15T or L-150.
Would like to see it at 13.0 regardless in the tech tree! Preferably after a “late” MiG-23MLD with R-24Ms (upgraded R-24Rs) and R-73s. Would be a good 12.3 or so jet as well :D
2 Likes
this would have been a better premium instead of the su30 or have both as premium
4 Likes
Bro forgot about Kfir and Phantom with Fox 3 missiles
1 Like
He is just clown which should be ignored.
4 Likes
Tornado F.3 Late with 4 AIM-120Bs at 13.0 as well.
He doesn’t know what he’s talking about and should be ignored.
1 Like
already happens
1 Like
would make a fun 13.0 counter for russia to the F4F ICE
5 Likes