MIG vs SABRE

[FLYBOYJ]

Realy!!!?
FLYBOYJ the rights that is a myth. To read even here: -15
(26.06.50 - 27.07.53)
(26.06.50 - 27.07.53)
, 1952
So to say, a sight from the side.

Not sure what you're trying to say but I believe the second post shows total Soviet claims from Korea, showing that over 635+ were claimed by Communist forces. About 630 Sabers rotated through Korea from 1950 - 1953. So every F-86 in Korea was destroyed?!?!?

 

[Kruska]

Hello FLYBOY,

Mitya's stats shows that from 08.51 - 12.51 a total of 71 F-86 were supposedly destroyed
What do the US stats report about this period, on behalf of employed aircrafts and kills, would be interesting to find out.

From what I have read so far on this subject, I conclude that the Mig-Pilots had no G-suits, no aircon no Cadillac like aircraft. The Mig15's data's seem superior to the F-86, the armament was far superior. The quality of the Sabre in contra to the MiG is undisputable.

Personally I find the loss statistic of 792 MiG's, with a loss of only 76 Sabres-a victory ratio of 10-to-1 indeed very hard to belief – such as Rudel's Tank killer claims. Especially since there are no records which e.g. show 159 US air aces with an average of 5 aircrafts not to mention Mig's. Also a total rotation of 630 Sabres would account for 1.25 per pilot or aircraft.

Is this claim based on MiG15 contra F-86 engagements or a total summation of aircraft losses regarding these two types during Korea?


If the far better trained US pilots with a G-suit would have been equipped with the MiG15 would you think that the F-86 would have proofed to be the better aircraft in regards to combat ability?

Regards
Kruska

 

[pbfoot]

the heavier armament on the Mig also had a drawback it had a low rate of fire, giving the Sabre guys that xtra millisecond needed to being avoid nailed.

 

[Kruska]

the heavier armament on the Mig also had a drawback it had a low rate of fire, giving the Sabre guys that xtra millisecond needed to being avoid nailed.

Hello pbfoot,

Yes certainly true, but on the other hand I wouldn't want to get hit by a 37mm. But you have a good point there, maybe the MiG's weren't able to utilize those cannons in jet to jet combat - which could explain this "outrageous" kill ratio.

Regards
Kruska

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hello FLYBOY,

Mitya's stats shows that from 08.51 - 12.51 a total of 71 F-86 were supposedly destroyed
What do the US stats report about this period, on behalf of employed aircrafts and kills, would be interesting to find out.

I don't know what the actual losses were in that period but it is my belief that during the entire war the US lost just under 100 F-86s. Total there were about 250 lost to all causes and there may be some of those that were actually attributed to combat.

From what I have read so far on this subject, I conclude that the Mig-Pilots had no G-suits, no aircon no Cadillac like aircraft. The Mig15's data's seem superior to the F-86, the armament was far superior. The quality of the Sabre in contra to the MiG is undisputable.

Correct

Personally I find the loss statistic of 792 MiG's, with a loss of only 76 Sabres-a victory ratio of 10-to-1 indeed very hard to belief – such as Rudel's Tank killer claims. Especially since there are no records which e.g. show 159 US air aces with an average of 5 aircrafts not to mention Mig's. Also a total rotation of 630 Sabres would account for 1.25 per pilot or aircraft.

Is this claim based on MiG15 contra F-86 engagements or a total summation of aircraft losses regarding these two types during Korea?

I think this is a mix of all MiG operators Soviet, Chinese and Korean. From articles I seen it seems at times the Soviets would like to distance themselves from the performance of their North Korean and Chinese allies, but during the course of battle it was sometimes difficult to ascertain what MiG was from what operator.

As earlier stated, based on the earlier discussion, I'd put the kill-loss ratio to about 6 to 1, and if you went Soviets vs. US, about 2.5 to one, this is based on each sides own loss admittance, but again it seems this information from the Soviet camp was a long time coming.

If the far better trained US pilots with a G-suit would have been equipped with the MiG15 would you think that the F-86 would have proofed to be the better aircraft in regards to combat ability?

Regards
Kruska

I still think the F-86 was a better aircraft. Triple redundant hydraulic systems, better environmental system, better built and better egress systems. To me it would seem punching out of a MiG-15 would at least result in some broken bones, and the possibility of severed limbs. i base this also on the size of the cockpit.

 

[Kruska]

Hello FLYBOY,

Thanks for the information. I think it is a bit like 1944/45: formidable trained US pilots in a P-47 or P-51 Cadillac with a high combat ability against highly able 190D-9's or 109K's with wooden rudder, inferior airframes, high maintenance requirements and less skilled pilots.

On the punching out part you are certainly correct. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to exist reliable or partially reliable stats about actual MiG15 and F-86 dogfight outcomes. It just seems to be a summation of total losses due to combat in general and not in regards from one a/c to another.

Regards
Kruska

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hello FLYBOY,

Thanks for the information. I think it is a bit like 1944/45: formidable trained US pilots in a P-47 or P-51 Cadillac with a high combat ability against highly able 190D-9's or 109K's with wooden rudder, inferior airframes, high maintenance requirements and less skilled pilots.

On the punching out part you are certainly correct. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to exist reliable or partially reliable stats about actual MiG15 and F-86 dogfight outcomes. It just seems to be a summation of total losses due to combat in general and not in regards from one a/c to another.

Regards
Kruska

Agree to a point - the the case with the MiG-15 there were just some systems that weren't very advanced but like the typical Soviet design philosophy, keep it simple, cheap, and make sure it works.

 

[renrich]

Does anyone know the statistics of Mig 15s versus Navy jets in the Korean War? I believe the Navy used Panthers and Banshees. I know there was one encounter off North Korea where F9Fs shot down a couple of Migs and it was kept quiet because recordings of radio transmittals indicated the Migs had Russians in them.

 

[kool kitty89]

The MiG also had manual controls iirc, so high-speed control was difficult (heavy controls).

The La-15 (and later derivatives) had more advanced systems, with boosted controls, had a cleaner airframe, more maneuverable, was well liked by pilots, and could dive through Mach 1 and maintain control (unlike the MiG).
But was more complex and not as easy to mass produce, was more expensive, and required more maintence, so they preferred the MiG.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The MiG also had manual controls iirc, so high-speed control was difficult (heavy controls).

In the MiGs I seen it almost looks like the stick was extended by a few inches to give the pilot more leverage.

 

[Kruska]

Does anyone know the statistics of Mig 15s versus Navy jets in the Korean War? I believe the Navy used Panthers and Banshees. I know there was one encounter off North Korea where F9Fs shot down a couple of Migs and it was kept quiet because recordings of radio transmittals indicated the Migs had Russians in them.

Hello renrich,

Thats all I got from WIKI,

F9F-2s, F9F-3s and F9F-5s served with distinction in the Korean War, downing two Yak-9s and five Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15s with a loss of one F9F. On 3 July 1950, LT (j.g.) Leonard H. Plog of U.S. Navy's VF-51 flying an F9F-3 scored the first air victory of the war by shooting down a Yak-9. The first MiG-15 downed was on 9 November 1950 by U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander William (Bill) Amen of VF-111 "Sundowners" Squadron flying an F9F-2B. Two more were downed on 18 November 1950 , and the other two were downed on the 18 November 1952

It flew 78,000 sorties, so I presume this aircraft must have been involved in a lot but not in interception or as a fighter.

The Banshee and other USN fighters had limited exposure to hostile enemy aircraft because they operated far out of the range of enemy fighters operating from China. Air-to-air combat missions, such as patrols in the Yalu River area, were primarily assigned to F-86 Sabres Consequently, the Banshee would score no victories nor suffer any losses in air-to-air combat, although three F2H-2s were lost to anti-aircraft gunfire.

Regards
Kruska

 

[renrich]

Thanks Kruska, that is interesting info. Not a big statistical sample but still interesting. The Panthers were armed with 4-20mm cannon and had a higher Mach number than the P80. My suspicion is that though the F9F did not have the performance of the Mig15, the training and experience of the Navy pilots would have made up for the discrepancy in performance.

 

[HealzDevo]

Yes, because a lot of Russian policy was based on an overwhelming attack swamping the enemy. The Russians really were not well equipped for a war like Vietnam where it was drawn out fighting. I thought their aircraft were designed to be flown for a certain period of time and then the Russians dumped them and put a new aircraft of the same type or a new type into the line to replace it. ..

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yes, because a lot of Russian policy was based on an overwhelming attack swamping the enemy. The Russians really were not well equipped for a war like Vietnam where it was drawn out fighting. I thought their aircraft were designed to be flown for a certain period of time and then the Russians dumped them and put a new aircraft of the same type or a new type into the line to replace it. ..

The Soviets built simple machines in very large numbers - totally contradicting what you're saying. Do you have a source to back up your statement?

 

[JoeB]

Does anyone know the statistics of Mig 15s versus Navy jets in the Korean War? I believe the Navy used Panthers and Banshees. I know there was one encounter off North Korea where F9Fs shot down a couple of Migs and it was kept quiet because recordings of radio transmittals indicated the Migs had Russians in them.

F9F's of USN and USMC had 11 encounters with MiG-15's in Korea. Victories were scored on Nov 9 1950 (first victory in manned jet combat which is supported in opposing records), Nov 18 1950 (2 officially credited, 1 actually downed) and Nov 18 1952 (2 officially credited, 3 actually downed). 'Actual' is per detailed Soviet accounts for each case. One F9F-2, of Marine sdn VMF-311, was downed by MiG's July 21, 1951, pilot POW.

On opponents VMF-311 and -115 fought inconclusively with the Chinese 48th Fighter Regiment March 26, 1953, the opponent isn't known in one other inconclusive fight but probably Chinese, the opponents in all other case were Soviet AF units. The specially sensitive factor about the Nov 18 1952 combat was that the Soviet a/c were flying directly from the Soviet Union (v carrier ops in northeast North Korea), not from bases in China as usual. The Soviet 196th Fighter Regiment (based at the Antung, now usually written Dandong, field complex in China) scored the victory July 21, '51; they were credited with 7 F-94's in the encounter.

Fighter F2H's had one brief brush with MiG's also Nov 18 1952. Recon F2H-2P's of VMJ-1 were attacked by MiG's on a number of occasions, 2 were damaged March 11, 1952 one seriously (by the Soviet 821st Fighter Regiment).

Navy F3D jet nightfighters of VC-4 Det. 44N flying from land supplemented Marine F3D's of VMF(N)-513 late in the war v MiG'15 night fighters, mainly supporting B-29 night operations. One VC-44 a/c was lost July 2 1953 after radio transmissions indicating they were under attack by MiG's, though curiously no correspoding MiG claim has come to light (and there *are* specific MiG claims corresponding to the vast majority of other losses to MiG's). The USMC F3D's were credited with 5 MiG-15's, but only one of those can be unambiguously confirmed in opposing accounts, as of now.

This is USN/USMC jets v Mig-15's, only, sources are primary records.

Joe

 

[JoeB]

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to exist reliable or partially reliable stats about actual MiG15 and F-86 dogfight outcomes. It just seems to be a summation of total losses due to combat in general and not in regards from one a/c to another.

No, there's lots of detail from both sides on individual combats, and on US side, individual planes, not only grand totals. I've reviewed a lot of that stuff and came up with estimate of actual F-86 air combat losses in Korea around 85-90 rather than 78, including planes which returned safely but whose air combat damage was never repaired. A few planes could be argued here and there but no way to reasonably and objectively come up with a much higher number than that from the detailed records.

On combats, the specific Soviet claims against F-86's can be matched in almost all cases with reports of combats at the same dates, times and places in USAF records, the losses sustained just differ. In case of Chinese claims and losses there's less detail but that mainly means we can't apportion US losses accurately between them, it hardly seems likely the Chinese official loss total (224 MiG-15's, theirs only, air combat only) is seriously overstated, why would it be? The most detailed published Russian source to date on that air war (German/Seidov 'Krasnye d'iavoli...") gives a total of 319, Soviet only, air combat losses and mentions 295 case by case as I count it. The 1953 NK defector said the NK's lost 100 MiG-15's to all causes (and he had the Soviet/Chinese total losses about right, it later turned out). In case we did the same close analysis of losses in detailed a/c records, the MiG losses might rise slightly too, but anyway add up what we do have and 6+:1 head to head F-86 v MiG-15 is pretty solid as a ballpark, as solid or more than most WWII 'real' ratio's and backed by as high or higher % of detailed examples. On not taking 10:1 ratio literally, sure we shouldn't, nor take claimed ratio's from WWII literally either (most WWII claimed ratio's are more overstated than this one).

Also as in WWII cases, doubt about 6+ ratio must be based on claiming that detailed (then-) secret (since declassified) records actually systematically understate losses, or are seriously incomplete, even when they appear quite complete to those who've actually reviewed them. There was a basically similar discussion about Japanese fighter losses in their raids over Darwin Australia in 1943, when Zeroes apparently bested Spitfire V's by a ratio similar to that of F-86 v MiG-15 in Korea. It was stated 'there isn't good info on those Japanese losses' or 'it's very hard to estimate them' when in fact recently published numbers are based on the original action reports (so-called kodochosho in IJN) of the unit involved in almost all the combats, which survived the war intact. How about if other units were involved? (multiple Japanese accounts say that was the unit on the specific missions), the argument goes on in similar vein: 'prove you're not a camel',

Similarly, if one firmly believes that the USAF records *must* understate air combat losses in Korea seriously, you can't *prove* otherwise over the internet. All I can point to is the complete absence, AFAIK, of anyone who has actually reviewed them in detail and still thinks that's plausible. All published comments 'casting doubt' on USAF records in Korea, that I've ever read, are by people who've never reviewed them.

Joe

 

[renrich]

JoeB, many thanks for your post. I believe the Nov. 18, 1952, encounter was the one that was kept under wraps because of Soviet pilots. There at one time was a website online about the fight. If memory serves seven Migs were intercepted by a CAP of a division of F9Fs. One Panther had a fuel flow problem and had to head for the carrier along with his wing man. That left two F9Fs versus seven Migs although the wing man got back into the fight after his section leader landed on the carrier. The Panthers had a donnybrook with the Migs with two claimed and one probable. The F9s had some damage but all landed safely. Makes one wonder about Soviet pilots and the vaunted Mig15 versus the old straight winged F9F. Go Navy!

 

[Kruska]

Similarly, if one firmly believes that the USAF records *must* understate air combat losses in Korea seriously, you can't *prove* otherwise over the internet. All I can point to is the complete absence, AFAIK, of anyone who has actually reviewed them in detail and still thinks that's plausible. All published comments 'casting doubt' on USAF records in Korea, that I've ever read, are by people who've never reviewed them.

Joe

Hello JoeB, thanks for your data's and research efforts.

My intension is not at all to downgrade the F-86 but to get a realistic impression of Korea contra Vietnam and modern times in regards to air superiority of the USAF.

In case of MiG15 contra F-86 combat:

So if I total your figures I would come up with 643 MiG15's shot down by F-86's, according to FLYBOY about the same number of F-86 "rotated" through the entire Korean War. In return this would account for 643 US pilot/kills taking into account certain multiple kill pilots it would still upkeep the information that about 360 (please see below) US Pilots achieved MiG15 kills. And if lets say 800 MiG15 were shot down then this figure would even increase to around 550 US F-86 pilots with MiG15 kills.

But so far I have never seen a statistic that would name more then 50 US F-86 pilots being awarded with MiG 15 kills, and these 50 add up to 334.5 kills (and these claims are probably errand at 30-50% such as the kills during the 2nd WW) so IMO something doesn't figure out or I might have very wrong information in regards to US MiG killers during Korea.

Regards
Kruska

 

[JoeB]

So if I total your figures I would come up with 643 MiG15's shot down by F-86's, according to FLYBOY about the same number of F-86 "rotated" through the entire Korean War.

But so far I have never seen a statistic that would name more then 50 US F-86 pilots being awarded with MiG 15 kills, and these 50 add up to 334.5 kills (and these claims are probably errand at 30-50% such as the kills during the 2nd WW) so IMO something doesn't figure out or I might have very wrong information in regards to US MiG killers during Korea.

I guesstimate the NK's lost around 50 MiG's in combat and the rest in accidents. Another indirect piece of evidence is that the NK's claimed (to the Russians) they'd downed 44 F-86's. The Chinese claimed 211 F-86's for 224 MiG's: it may have been the tendency to claim at least approximately as many as you lost in combat. Those claims btw are in addition to the Soviet claim of at least 642 F-86's, so around 900 F-86's claimed altogether v around 90 F-86 air combat losses, a very high overclaim ratio, but that appears to be what happened. Anyway the total MiG combat loss might have been a little under 600, and 20 or so were lost to a/c other than F-86's.

Thompson and McLaren in their book "MiG Alley" gave brief individual histories for all F-86's they found to have been used in Korea, 600-some. I haven't double checked that list, I've focused instead on a/c known to have been damaged from daily action reports (were they ever repaired?) and those losses attributed to non-combat causes where a MiG claim might plausibly match instead. But, I know how they got the list (looked at the Individual Aircraft Record Card of every F-86 and see which were assigned to units in Korea during the war, tedious but straightforward), and I've no reason to doubt its basic correctness.

Werrell in "Sabres over MiG Alley" estimated 1000-1200 pilots flew combat missions in USAF F-86's in Korea (not all of them USAF pilots, included also USN, USMC, and Allied exchange pilots).

Per the USAF official credits list 365 USAF pilots were credited with victories in the F-86 in the Korean War. That includes fractional scores <1, and a few victories v non-MiG-15's, but doesn't include the exchange pilots.

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So if I total your figures I would come up with 643 MiG15's shot down by F-86's, according to FLYBOY about the same number of F-86 "rotated" through the entire Korean War.

Actually you have it backwards Kruska - Soviet sources have claimed about 643~ Sabers were shot down over Korea - almost the same number rotated through Korea by the USAF.

JoeB - always great posts!!!!