Only very late ~1990 (squadron was disbanded July 1990) not when the pilot youre talking about flew
And stealing form wikipedia which ik isnt a good source but still
" The declassified history of the squadron shows that it operated MiG-17s, MiG-21s and MiG-23s between 1977 and 1988 […]"
So again before they got the MiG-23ML
Right
Nonetheless they still had the versions with the dogtooth wings and all
Can you demonstrate how big of a turn performance increase was obtained with official sources?
Your image is MiG-23MS (both of them) or BN in the image with F-15, hard to tell but nose looks like BN
Ok great
So what changed that made the ML considerably better at turning
I highly doubt they increased its turn performance considerably.
Again show me actual documentation.
weight, engine thrust, airframe? it got lighter and more thrust and stronger wings
Actual documentation lmao, scroll up maybe?
ML had completely different air frame
MiG-23MS is a crippled M with fucked weight and balance, ML is miles ahead
Am I also mistaken in thinking that it got slats?
MLD got slats not ML
Use your brain
I said do you have documents for both so I can see how much it improved by
The documents shown that have the sustained G are bad. It doesn’t turn well even after the upgrades
You never said show documentation for both? You said show ANY documentation. Maybe you should learn to read?
And again my issue was simply with the fact you were taking the pilot interview as an end all be all for EVERY MiG-23 performance
I know the MiG-23 isnt a godlike dog fighting plane and that was very much not in its doctrine anyway
Great
However I find it very unlikely that the performance was increase considerable enough for the better variants to not be roughly comparable to the worse ones.
Its great that you think that but you are clearly not educated enough to know that ^^
For sure lol
I’m only speaking facts
“facts” and “I find it” lmao
everything in this game overperforms by 1.5
F8U-2 for example could pull max load of 7.5 in game it can 1.5 X that which is 11.25G
I’m not taking about structural limits, that gets a multiplier of 1.5.
I’m talking about sustained turn rate, which is basically how much can a plane turn when sustaining a set speed.
Currently mig-23s overperform by 10-15ish percent
You wouldn’t believe how many times people thong sustained G is structural
The Americans anti-Soviet propaganda about the MiG-23 even in red flag exercises definitely aided the belief that they had poor turn rates etc. It was as good or better than the Phantom and had superior flight performance otherwise with some exceptions.
The radar and weapons systems were inferior, and the range was not as good. There are pros and cons, but the MiG-23 was a fantastic aircraft once the teething issues were resolved.
The vast majority of 4th gen fighters considerably overperform by unbelievable margins, this is not really a massive concern imo. Gaijin is unwilling to fix the F-5 series either, which overperform by such a large margin… the F-5E outperforms the real world F-20…
Gaijin’s statement on those is “they’re old, we will leave them as-is and are not interested in fixing them”. (They didn’t want to nerf premiums that sell well).
Right but I’ve now just seen its sustained turn rate chart and it’s bad.
I do agree with you on the other points.
The F-5E is very handheld
including 4.5 gen canards or only legacy 4th gen?
