Russia Loses the Quantity War

[SoD Stitch]

The Soviet tried to have a 7:1 ratio at key locations. If the cold war did become hot, NATO would have had it's hands full. With the lack of spare parts like canopies, The F16 and F15 would have been hard press to control the skies for a prolong period. I will let you guess what our computer projections were.


DBII

If I remember correctly, the front-line conventional units in West Germany and Belgium weren't expected to repel a projected Warsaw Pact thrust, just slow it down a little bit; a friend of mine was in the USAEUR in the '80's, and he said they were basically there just as a "speed bump" for the attacking Warsaw Pact forces, until NATO could arrive in force from overseas. Some projections had the Soviet forces getting as far as the Atlantic coast before NATO could react with sufficient forces to repel the attack (which would probably be too late by then). Needless to say, the TNW's would probably have been released by then.

 

[The Basket]

I agree with that. It was the huge tank armies not migs that was the threat.

Any western fighter would have to deal with SAMs and AAA before he even saw a MiG. And that is after the airfield has been hammered.

An interesting aside on the Foxbat. The F-15 flew before the Foxbat defection. The Fulcrum and Flanker showed that the Soviets were capable of making first class aircraft.
The American experience in Vietnam clearly showed the need for the Eagle.
The Soviets had a huge nuclear arsenal and when you got the most powerful killing weapon in the history of mankind then a poor kill ratio in air combat can easily be fixed by pressing the fun button.

 

[solo]

" Fun button " you say........I like it nice one.

 

[SoD Stitch]

A very good example out of many I think is the Foxbat / F-15 project. The F-4, and F-111 were better than anything the Russians had and the US congress wasn't very willing to allocate the necessary budget for the F-15,16 and 18….. until the Foxbat "arrived" in Japan. Even though much later published reports regarding the inspection of the Mig25 which showed the inferiority of this a/c to the existing NATO a/c, I still remember how this Mig25 was forwarded, published as theeee super, high-tech and potentially dangerous Russian a/c that no Western a/c could match (heaviest argument was the speed of the Mig25).

Regards
Kruska

Yes, I remember the "threat" of the MiG-25 well; my formative years were the late '60's/early '70's, and all that was known about the MiG-25 at that time was that it was incredibly fast and heavily armed. It was also assumed that it was maneuverable, and had an extremely powerful radar (half true). At that time, we had nothing that could touch the "Foxbat"; it's sheer speed made it uninterceptable (like the SR-71). The Israelis had tried downing intruding Syrian "Foxbats" with their '60's-era Phantoms and AIM-7 "Sparrows" in the '70's, but to no avail; it wasn't until the Israelis got Baz-2000's (basically, F-15A's) that they were able to score a kill on a MiG-25.

 

[Kruska]

Hello SoD Stitch,

Yes and the speed couldn't be utilized as a fighter, since its Apex and Aphid missiles would have been ripped off from its four under wing hardpoints once the a/c exceeded Mach 2.4 Therefore it was only used as a recon/photo a/c and the Israelis noticed that after having used its afterburner (in order to reach its Mach 2.9) the MiG 25 "glided" onto the runway and both engines were pulled out in order to be replaced.

So the whole USAF F-15 program basically was paid just to fend off a recon plane in the 70's. I think most countries later got to know about this and therefore never optioned or purchased the F-15 as a needed replacement for its F-4's or F 104's until the late 80's. Besides Israel who probably got them for free.

Regards
Kruska

 

[HealzDevo]

But I suppose you have to look at the factor of whether the US front-line equipment was what provoked a pause in the Soviet Mind from actually saying go ahead. I think it might have been the fact that they knew they were looking at equipment they couldn't have a superiority over that stopped them from considering marching because it is no use braving nuclear warfare if you don't really consider your chances of achieving objectives being that high...

 

[Kruska]

Hello HealzDevo,

I would say you are certainly correct on your assumption, what I was trying to forward, is that the western equipment in the 70's could have easily topped the Russians until early 1990. I think since the early 80's air superiority was mastered by onboard radar, AWACS and missiles and not much if not to say not at all by maneuverability or speed of an aircraft.

So in my opinion even an present F-4 or F-14 from the 70's could still match an SU27/33 or MiG 27 in that criteria, and due to missile and radar technology it would even outfight these 90's or 00's eastern aircraft.

Regards
Kruska

 

[The Basket]

Hello HealzDevo,

I would say you are certainly correct on your assumption, what I was trying to forward, is that the western equipment in the 70's could have easily topped the Russians until early 1990. I think since the early 80's air superiority was mastered by onboard radar, AWACS and missiles and not much if not to say not at all by maneuverability or speed of an aircraft.

So in my opinion even an present F-4 or F-14 from the 70's could still match an SU27/33 or MiG 27 in that criteria, and due to missile and radar technology it would even outfight these 90's or 00's eastern aircraft.

Regards
Kruska

Well...
The F-4 had trouble in Vietnam against the MiGs and only superior pilot training made the difference. The Phantom is certainly at a disadvantage against a Fulcrum or Flanker. Plus the helmet mounted sight and the Archer missile. To dismiss Soviet technology as rubbish didn't do the Isrealis any good in 1973.

Todays Fulcrums and Flankers would be as good as you want and only the Raptor would have the edge.

 

[Kruska]

Well...
The F-4 had trouble in Vietnam against the MiGs and only superior pilot training made the difference. The Phantom is certainly at a disadvantage against a Fulcrum or Flanker. Plus the helmet mounted sight and the Archer missile. To dismiss Soviet technology as rubbish didn't do the Isrealis any good in 1973.

Todays Fulcrums and Flankers would be as good as you want and only the Raptor would have the edge.

That is what the aircraft industry wants you to believe.

The F-4's didn't have any trouble by the time the Vietnam war was ending. A helmet mounted sight has nothing to do with the aircraft itsself, neither does any archer missile, you could fit that onto a F-101, A-4, or F-5 any time.
No Russain aircraft was ever a threat to the IAF, not in 1973 not now.

The only thing that matters is the Radar signature, EM emission-hiding/overriding, Antenna positioning and Radar tracking capability + a good missile.
Even a F-4G could match a Raptor, not economicaly/per flying hour but on interception terms. Present RASIGMA II improvments make a Tornado even more effective then a Raptor or F-35 or Eurofighter.

The problem for the aircraft industry is that a RASIGMA feature costs about 2-4 million $ per a/c - nothing compared to selling/promoting a Raptor, F-35 or a Eurofighter.

So what makes you think that a MiG29 or Su27 would be superior against a GAF F-4G? The sales brochures?

Regards
Kruska

 

[Henk]

That is what the aircraft industry wants you to believe.

The F-4's didn't have any trouble by the time the Vietnam war was ending. A helmet mounted sight has nothing to do with the aircraft itsself, neither does any archer missile, you could fit that onto a F-101, A-4, or F-5 any time.
No Russain aircraft was ever a threat to the IAF, not in 1973 not now.

The only thing that matters is the Radar signature, EM emission-hiding/overriding, Antenna positioning and Radar tracking capability + a good missile.
Even a F-4G could match a Raptor, not economicaly/per flying hour but on interception terms. Present RASIGMA II improvments make a Tornado even more effective then a Raptor or F-35 or Eurofighter.

The problem for the aircraft industry is that a RASIGMA feature costs about 2-4 million $ per a/c - nothing compared to selling/promoting a Raptor, F-35 or a Eurofighter.

So what makes you think that a MiG29 or Su27 would be superior against a GAF F-4G? The sales brochures?

Regards
Kruska

I agree with you Kruska.

If you look at the cold war, it was all about who's got the bigger war toy.

"Oh look I have a plane that can go Mach 3, but that is old news we have a fighter that can do that."

The aircraft company's made tons of money with the cold war, it was never about actually killing each other, money makes world turn around.

 

[Kruska]

Hello Henk,

The SA Atlas Cheetah and the Israeli Kfir are indeed very good examples of refitted upgraded aircrafts. Both originate from 60's Mirage III's, and were well capable to fight of any new Russian 70's, 80's or 90's fighter. Due to the F-15/F-16 "present" it was off course far cheaper for Israel to abandon the Kfir project rather than continuing the upgrade on their own costs.

Regards
Kruska

 

[Henk]

Yes, even today the aircraft whole spec's is top secret.

The Cheetah entered service in the 80's, but the SAAF did great with the Mirage aircraft in the Bush war in Angola. Gave those Cubans and communist scum everything they had and more. Very brave pilots.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8ycjFjk3nM
Great read this mate.
IPMS South Africa - DENEL Aviation Cheetah

 

[Kruska]

Hello Henk,

Wow, thanks a lot for that fantastic link.

Do you have any good info on the Impala's, I always liked this kind of a/c - simple - rugged - performing on the job.

Even amazing that most of the Impalas were flown by retired or civil reservists who kicked Cuban buts. If someone wouldn't have stashed his pockets, the Cheetah would still be the runner up instead of Saab.

On the public forum I wouldn't be able to tell you much but maybe you want to refer to: http://www.aero-microwave.com/Files/2005-ETTC - Antenna Pattern Measurements.pdf

Fritzel and Steiner I know quite well, for more info try EADS and then search for RaSigma, but it will be very difficult/impossible to find details. If you put RaSigma5 and a Cheetah together you would easily have the worlds best fighter/fighterbomber - forget the F-22 just good looks and a lot of propaganda - it wouldn't stand a chance.

The US, Russia and China are exteeeemly interested in this.

Regards
Kruska

 

[The Basket]

It was the SAM missile threat that did the IAF during the Yom Kippor war.

HoHo...underestimating the Russian people and their technology...why didn't NATO invade? We could be in Moscow by teatime?

I'm sure a few people tried and got that wrong.

F-15 pilots were told both in Iraq and Serbia...do not dogfight with a Mig-29...

Luftwaffe pilots themselves said that with the Fulcrums power, Archers, guns and helmet mighted sight would own anything within visual range. Although they were rubbish in any other engagement.

The South African pilots are as good as anything...so are the Isrealis...if you read what the pilots say...especially during the 70s...they would put it down to pilot training. The Fishbed and the Mirage III were very similar in performance and it was the man that made the difference.

 

[Kruska]

It was the SAM missile threat that did the IAF during the Yom Kippor war.

Yes, and by simply showing the cold side of the aircraft, or underflying the Radar the "dreadfull" SAM's were put out of action.

F-15 pilots were told both in Iraq and Serbia...do not dogfight with a Mig-29...

Maybe in Pilot fantasy magazines, the avarage distance for MiG 29 kills was tracking ident 67km, Dot plotting intercept 57km, Radar clouding 55km, 2nd reasure ident 37km, missile launch 28km, who needs a dogfight nowadays?

Regards
Kruska

 

[The Basket]

Er...How many aircraft did the Isrealis lose...to useless SAMs...

F-15s did tangle with Fulcrums within visual range during Desert Storm.

The rules of engagement needed confirmation of enemy in case you brought down a friendly. Therefore you have to get an eyeball on the jet. And a dogfight begins...

If you're comparing modern day then you're missing the point. A war between America and Russia is unlikely and an Iraqi MiG-29 cannot be compared to a Soviet or Russian MiG-29.

It is how Warsaw Pact would take on NATO...

 

[Henk]

Hello Henk,

Wow, thanks a lot for that fantastic link.

Do you have any good info on the Impala's, I always liked this kind of a/c - simple - rugged - performing on the job.

Even amazing that most of the Impalas were flown by retired or civil reservists who kicked Cuban buts. If someone wouldn't have stashed his pockets, the Cheetah would still be the runner up instead of Saab.

On the public forum I wouldn't be able to tell you much but maybe you want to refer to: http://www.aero-microwave.com/Files/2005-ETTC - Antenna Pattern Measurements.pdf

Fritzel and Steiner I know quite well, for more info try EADS and then search for RaSigma, but it will be very difficult/impossible to find details. If you put RaSigma5 and a Cheetah together you would easily have the worlds best fighter/fighterbomber - forget the F-22 just good looks and a lot of propaganda - it wouldn't stand a chance.

The US, Russia and China are exteeeemly interested in this.

Regards
Kruska

No problem mate.

Here is a link for the Impala.

IPMS South Africa - Impala Mk1 Mk2 - Classic Italian design.

Yes the Cheetah is a great aircraft and it was retired way before it's time, but the ANC government wants it that way so who are the rest to complain.

 

[Kruska]

The rules of engagement needed confirmation of enemy in case you brought down a friendly. Therefore you have to get an eyeball on the jet. And a dogfight begins...

Who's rules? the USAF? For this ID problem you have a "window" system - not PC windows you can also call it a "time, air space sectional" system.

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Regards
Kruska

 

[Kruska]

No problem mate.

Here is a link for the Impala.

IPMS South Africa - Impala Mk1 Mk2 - Classic Italian design.

Yes the Cheetah is a great aircraft and it was retired way before it's time, but the ANC government wants it that way so who are the rest to complain.

Thanks Henk,

will do some reading on the Impalas and Cheetah

Regards
Kruska

 

[The Basket]

Who's rules? the USAF? For this ID problem you have a "window" system - not PC windows you can also call it a "time, air space sectional" system.

There is absolutly no need nowadays to ID an a/c by visual confirmation - it is however done in peacetimes to ensure the savety for "irregular" civilian a/c - not in a war.

Regards
Kruska

I said it happened in the Gulf War...which was a war. The MiG-29 did show up as a friendly so they couldn't fire until the eyeball.