J
J_P_C Well, let's figure it out. I see you're a bit into the subject...)
1. What kind of combat are we talking about? As we know, there is ranged combat, medium-range combat and melee, which turns into maneuverable melee. My opponent, who hates Russia, just because she is Russia, did not even mention what kind of fight we are talking about. His argument, in the form of a link to an article by 3 authors, aviation specialists, is just a reference to tactics smeared on the wall... And why doesn't he give the previous paragraph in this article? His argument is taken out of context. He knows this and does not bring it, for some reason… And this paragraph reveals the whole essence of the dispute.
2. As you know, in Russian aviation there are such concepts as ZPS, PPS and capture on the background of the earth. For those who are not familiar with these terms, we will decipher them. The ZPS is the rear hemisphere. This is how the capture takes place, with the help of an RLPC (radar sighting system) when the target is in front. This is the best angle for launching missiles. The PPP is the front hemisphere. There is a seizure on the opposite courses. And capture against the background of the earth. The most problematic part of the capture. Because of the terrain where the battle is being fought, where you can reset the grip for a while and leave (if you're lucky). So in this paragraph, which is not given, the whole essence of the issue is revealed.
3. So in what battle does the MiG-23 have a chance of winning? It is small, but there is… Ranged combat is a loss. The average one too... But in close combat, when the enemy is searching against the background of the earth, and the Mig uses it, the Mig has a chance. But this problem of the RLPC on 29 was solved a year later. That's why this center was created in Marakh...)
4. But close combat, turning into maneuverable, is a complete loss. As we say, a mouthful of earth... and a КОLS won't help here. This was tested on complex 23-93. The tests did not yield anything. They wanted to revive it, but it would have done nothing. They were clinging to a straw…
Some historians (supposedly aviation historians) cannot read between the lines. Especially about foreign aviation and a country alien to them. That's why I wrote about rewriting history.
The MiG-29 is a front–line fighter. The task is to cover the front line of defense. That was the task from the customer. Yes, and if he hadn't been promoted very much at that time, he would never have seen the sky. It is called an aerobatic airplane.
You are a Slav, and you probably understand the Cyrillic alphabet and will read it. And I'll translate it for everyone.
...Thrust-to-weight ratio, high maneuverability. When it was possible to perform an air battle, for example, with a pair of old MiG-23 fighters against one MiG-29, while on the "23rd" full afterburner, limit modes everywhere, and the MiG-29 easily maneuvers and evades pursuit, repeatedly entering the tail of these aircraft. I didn't realize this until I switched to the MiG-29 myself.
Mikhail Belyaev
senior test pilot of the MiG Corporation, Hero of Russia
By the way, the topic is not about that...)