why are we talking about mig-23bn in a fighter role/ air to air losses, it’s basically a mickey model mig 27k that had literally 0 air to air missiles
it is
this is a MiG-29A (DCS image LMAO)
And it doesnt even have an aerial refueling probe - or do you see any?
that’s 2005 mig 29m/m2
wasnt aerial refueling integrated only from F16A MLUs or anything above the Block 30?
You shure thats a F16A bl 10?
you didn’t say blk 10 earlier
well my bad, I admit my mistake
Correction, F16 can do aerial refueling lol
If you want to count variant specific kdr like 23M to 23BN, sure, but it’s still a Flogger
did blk 1 have it? can’t tell
no we do not
we want to count the KD of the Fighter versions seperated from the Strike version, that didnt had a radar, any air to air ordinance, a rwr and countermeasures
Someone said MiG-23 wasn’t a bad airplane when it’s the worst widely used fighter jet OAT
why include mig-23bn in (fighter jet)
1 Like
because it has the same number and he has no clue how soviet designations work
iam pretty sure he didnt even knew that the Mig-27 existed
Common term for (relatively) small jet powered combat aircraft
No… my point was If your going to talk about the Fighters service record… then talk about the FIGHTER variant not the dedicated strike aircraft developed from its airframe.
2 Likes
but then he would have to admit that he was wrong and we cant have that
1 Like
No I know what the MiG-27
so what is it?
and what is the difference between it and the Mig-23M and the Mig-23BN?