I wonder how a fantasy duel between a MiG 23 MLD vs a contemporary F-16 would result.
F-16 pilots from the Netherlands actually enjoyed flying the MiG-23MLA(D?) in the 80s. One such, Leon Van Maurer said it performed in certain regards as well or better. He would have been flying F-16’s without SARH missiles at the time.
2 Likes
Assuming they met in '82 the F-16’s (Basic Block 15s w/ AIM-9L would be the cutting edge F-16 configuration) would probably get dumpstered due to being IR only, and struggling prevent MiG’s from just jousting let alone actually mange to force the MiG into a dogfight let alone making them stay.
By '85 the only major difference would be the presence of the R-60M and shift to the F-16C-25 / AIM-9M as the front runner and with its IRCCM and extended lock on range vs the -9L, and AN/APG-68 it may actually get off the rail before it eats an R-24.
1 Like
In the 80? Wasn’t that in the '90s?
I think that in the Warsaw Pact countries they didn’t fly the MLA version but the ML version.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hIfaLzUF1h7S
All Mig-23’s are having their sustained turn performance reduced.
1 Like
@RideR2 and I were looking into this, it is unfortunate that they are so willing to adjust the performance of the MiG-23, but not also the F-5 which still similarly overperform.
A good change regardless.
1 Like
Absolutely, a damn shame that the F5 isn’t given the same treatment.
1 Like
Isn’t the F-5E’s performance in line with one that was theoretically fitted with the IHQ kit and auto-flaps?
Which of course neither replicates the actual service configuration of US F-5Es (they only had some of the features of that make up the Improved Handling Qualities kit, and automatic flaps & slats), or the in game 3D model, but combines various features that were available but Gaijin has mixed and matched the configuration to provide the best possible performance and the widest array of stores and features available to the F-5E.
2 Likes
No, Gaijin assumed the Russian sources predating the existence of that model predicted the performance of that model. That would assume a jump in performance from 12 to 20 deg/s was achieved by a slightly reshaped nose and iirc 6% additional wing area with auto flaps… when we already know the additional low speed performance gained from the flaps in various positions with the original nose anyway.
Gaijin took the tertiary 1975 performance data from a non-owner of the aircraft that was literally just made up nonsense from foreign press bits over the actual NATOPS. The bias towards the vehicle comes from the fact that fixing it would also indicate the F-5A is overperforming (as it would outperform the “fixed” F-5E), and the F-20 is also overperforming… as the F-20 is currently extrapolating the F-5E flight model rather than using available performance data.
The in-game F-5E currently outperforms the real life F-20A Tigershark in almost all areas related to sustained maneuverability and at all altitudes.
Anyhow, to cut back to the MiG-23, the reason for the overperformance is different. While the MiG-23 allegedly was modeled for having rockets installed or something… Gaijin simply misread the F-5A NATOPS chart because it is a bit harder to read and decipher than more modern EM graphs. They took the time to complete 180 degree sustained turns and applied their own assumptions to how well it should stall which affected the turn radius. The turn radius instead of being 0.5 nautical miles is nearly 0.3 nautical miles… but the turn rate is “correct” in some datapoints because the time to make the turn is similar. The available overload during the turn is thus, incorrect.
EM graphs, which have turn rate, turn radius, and overload at various points in the turn makes this far easier to read and understand… but when provided these for F-5E they assumed it couldn’t be correct because the F-5A outperformed it. Instead of looking at the F-5A model again, they buffed the F-5E to more closely match the very obviously erroneous TsAGI performance data based on tertiary 1975 and earlier foreign press materials.
3 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0rMovt47uzgy
one more nerf for the mig23s
i wish we had dedicated players to nerf the f16s/f5/f15 ufo flight models too or at least check them out
mig21bis and su17m4 are also being nerfed according to the reports he made
F5 is reported, F-16 has some reports, F-15 doesn’t have much wrong?
1 Like
Russia is overperforming the most between 9.7 and 11.3 atm so I just report hem.
I don’t think anything else overperforms by 40% like the Su-17/22, or 30% like the MiG-23.
I would also report the MiG-19, but I don’t have any manual, just book sources saying that it should be like 30-40% worse in turn rate, but I can’t really use that.
F-5E was reported but the devs don’t want to change it and every bug report is being rejected, just read the MiG_23M’s post above, F-16 is only slightly overperforming in sustained turn rate (don’t complain about the AoA since none of existing FBW planes gets a G/AoA limiter and won’t change it) and the F-15 should be mostly fine when it comes to turning (maybe only at very low speed it’s off).
I’m just surprised about how for so many years no one noticed that Russian planes are so broken OP compared to the data from the flight manuals.
7 Likes
oh yeah, I’m not hating on you or anything, you’re not wrong in doing that, if something is vastly overperforming it should be put at some realistic level, it was just a mix of frustration on my part tbh, like damn only the yak141 is somewhat good for 1v1s now lol
We asked tech mods often and they stated that our tests were using wrong fuel or payload - in case of MiG-23 turns out devs were wrong.
Were you unaware of all these Russian jets over-performing by this much? Especially the MiG23 which you play a lot and researched when you made the report buffing its AoA.
3 Likes
MiG-23 ML and MLA were completely overperforming, they were outraging peak gripen (the one before the March nerf). What remains to be seen is how the MLD will be affected by this, as it was rating worse than those planes while, at least at lower speeds, slats should improve the sustained turn rate.
MiG-23s will still outrate F-14As, Mirage2000 and all other good 11.3/11.7 planes, actual game impact of the nerf shouldn’t be huge, as fights rarely get to pure flat rate fights in AirRB. As said before MiG-23s were outrating the old gripen in a flat out rate fight
apart from the F-5 the reason those 2 planes are “ufos” in air RB is the instructor