Also the Warpac members historically always had good quality fliers, so in don’t think that would be much different during the Cold War. What they badly lacked imo though, were upgrades for their frontline aircraft, especially MiG-21s, but others too including MiG-23. I’m thinking of things most soviet VVS aircraft had like chaff& flare dispensers and good RWRs like SPO-15, and up to date A-A missiles, as many MiG-21MFs for instance were still flying with R-3S and RS-2US missiles.

Very good sample. Various invest nation by nation:
HuAF – MiG-21MF’s retired with R-3S and RS-2US, while there were large stocks of R-13M, R-60.
NVA-LSK – R-60 capability even to MiG-21PFM at regular overhauls
etc.

As I expected. You have no any idea about the real numbers, about the real pilot training…..probably 😎

The flight hours of the Soviets were probably pretty decent in the 70’s, but come to the end of the Iron Curtain it was much different.

You have hard statements based on what? Probably…

That’s fine and dandy if we’re talking Hungary AF, but that isn’t the CCCP.

>

1st:
HuAF

And you cite a single logbook.

While you cite some fabulous comments 😎
Gentleman-style…first time you can see the real data and you can not accept, you can not say a simple – ‘thanks’
Do you think it’s ordinary, public info?
I would be grateful for at least a few same pages from USAFE and Luftwaffe F-4 pilot logbooks from the same period…

That’s fine and dandy if we’re talking Hungary AF, but that isn’t the CCCP.

I help you >

HuAF – the smallest and poorest WP airforce.

At any time in the Cold-War era the Soviets flew much more than the HuAF. More flight hours, more exercises, more live firings etc.

1st:
HuAF – the smallest and poorest WP airforce.
From the logbook of a young captain who flew on MiG-21bis. The yearly flight-hours in the late ’70s >

1977 – 133h 36m
[ATTACH=CONFIG]216407[/ATTACH]

1978 – 171h 3m
[ATTACH=CONFIG]216408[/ATTACH]

1979 – 139h 17m
[ATTACH=CONFIG]216409[/ATTACH]

Repülések száma = Flights
Nappal = Daylight
Éjjel = Night
Befüggönyzött kabinban = under curtain
Felhőben = in clouds
Korlátozott látás… = at restricted visibility

Please quote same Soviet data, data from other WP nations pilot logbooks, etc…

Hi Robert, do you have info when, where(which IAP) was the foto taken? thanks

That’s all I know: Bagram, Afghan AF MiG-21bis with R-13M & R-3R(probably pre-flight checking by Afghan pilot)

Would you think this is the same dispenser as in your picture?

Here you can see on Afghan AF MiG-21bis >

http://s12.postimage.org/muwid1rhp/aso.jpg

regarding the mysterious chaff&flare dispensers on MiG-21, so they supposed to be installed in wartime as well? Where were they fitted on the aircraft?

Simple system, fits to RATO connections, works by the wires and switches of the RATO.
http://forums.airforce.ru/attachments/raboty-na-saite-www-airforce-ru/23606d1269615138-2-.jpg/

” The CIA gave us a flare dispenser from a Frogfoot [Su-25] that had been shot down in Afghanistan. We gave it to maintenance – it was just a thing with wires coming out of it. Four hours later they had it operational on a MiG-21. That proved to be a very important test. In 1987 we had the AIM-9P, which was designed to reject flares, and when we used US flares against it would ignore them and go straight for the target.
We had the Soviet flares – they were dirty, and none of them looked the same – and the AIM-9P said ‘I love that flare’.
Why’d that happen? We had designed it to reject American flares. The Soviet flares had different burn time, intensity and separation. The same way, every time we tried to build a SAM simulator, when we got the real thing it wasn’t the same.
I use the AIM-9P because it is out of the system and I can talk about it. The same thing happened to a lot of things that are still in the system and that I can’t talk about.”
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3A1253fb8a-3b45-4f68-b273-fff9b8f2f73d

😀

Hang on a sec, something very, very interesting for me… so the “wartime” MiG-21’s were supposed to fire chaff from the gun ?!

Some non-soviet WP airforces purchased this, others do not…spec-ammo came with the MiG-21bis.

What were the missions of MiG-23 in VVS and what tactics were adopted by them to counter NATO fighters

At these Links you can find some public details from ex-Soviet pilots, exercises at ‘Russian Top-Gun’. These are not exactly what you need, in most of the ‘fights’ the MiG-23 played F-15 vs MiG-21’s, but these are interesting.

‘AWACS hunting’ – MiG-21bis vs AN-12 ‘AWACS’ & MiG-23ML >
http://forums.airforce.ru/sovremennost/3667-planirovanie-vozdushnogo-boya-3/#post73501

MiG-21bis vs MiG-23ML(act F-15 with AIM-7F) >
http://forums.airforce.ru/sovremennost/3667-planirovanie-vozdushnogo-boya-3/#post73583

http://forums.airforce.ru/sovremennost/3667-planirovanie-vozdushnogo-boya-3/#post73611

x4 MiG-21bis vs x2 MiG-23ML >
http://forums.airforce.ru/sovremennost/3667-planirovanie-vozdushnogo-boya-3/#post73511

The online-translating does not work perfectly, but it helps:

http://translate.google.com/
” Late May to early June, 1985g. Mary-I. Proverka 927iap.
Free dogfight zvena. Veduschaya pair: regimental commander-zampolit. Vedomaya pair: zam.komandira-st.shturman. “Enemy” is a pair of MiG-23 local air group.
Battle plan was developed in three versions, depending on the construction of the battle formation of the “enemy.”
Converged on a collision kursah.Para “enemy” has opened at the front with an interval of 2-3km.Komandir determined: “Option number 2.”
At a distance of “the enemy” 30-35km team: “maneuver.”
The leading pair of GS-23 guns shoot projectiles dipolyami. After shooting – a 180 *, the leading pair of right-led vlevo.Vysota 1500-1800m. “Enemy” is higher.
Watching sblizheniem.Na range 15-20km – “maneuver.” Shooting IR-traps ASO-2I and perevorot. Na exit the horizon leading the pair: “The purpose of the left at 45, range 3” – “observed attacks.” Led the pair: “The purpose of the right to 45, range 3” – “observed attack”
Everything went like notam.Pobedili.
At the command post airbase commander asked me, “What is the option number 2 and what maneuvers were performed?” I replied that I can explain gruppy.Esche after landing, he asked: “How many options for a fight?” I said, “Three.” To which he nodded approvingly and no more questions asked.
P.S. Mog not quite correctly specify “range” and “high.” It is too proshlo.Zdes the forum there are members of the test, they have to correct. “

Some standard ‘tactics’ for close-combat:

‘Arkan’ , ‘Uzel’ , ‘Krab’ etc. became standard at VVS fighter units from the early ’70s. These came with the unit level ACT program ‘500s’
Just for example one of the check flights(in two seater trainer) for these ACM’s was the exercise no.523 ‘O’