MiG-23MLD I want you to do me a favor. Just sit back and get away from all of the numbers you are always posting.
I’m asking you to do this in a friendly way. I’m not trying to insult you. I just want you to sit back and relax…..stop with all the statistics. We could debate all day about actual sorties flown and missiles expended and claimed kills and proven kills. Just stop all that though…..
You ignored just about every aspect of my argument and came back to conclude that the MiG-25 would have been a real threat to the F-4.
The fact of the matter is that I never said it wouldn’t have been. I quite openly said it would have been a big threat due to its higher speed and the longer range of its radar and AAM’s.
It should be noted that part of the reason IDF/AF F-4’s were unsucccessful in some of their attempts to shoot down MiG-25’s is because when those
intercepts were made, they were using older generation AIM-7E variants, in which the proximity fuse on the missile wasn’t capable of dealing with the high-speeds that the MiG-25 was capable of. The F-15, while having better overall performance than the F-4, was in reality much more successful not due to the fact that it could get all that much higher than the Phantom (in reality, both are fairly comparable in altitudes they can reach), but it was using newer AIM-7F Sparrow variants and it worked in conjunction with AWACS and Hawk SAM’s. Additionally, most of the MiG-25’s that were downed by F-15’s were of the fighter type which didn’t operate as high as the recce variants that the F-4’s had tried to engage. (Note: I believe at least one recce MiG-25 was downed by IDF/AF F-15’s, but I don’t know the details on it). Furthermore, the fighter MiG-25’s that were downed were actually lured into an ambush with RF-4’s acting as the bait. The RF-4’s contributed in a way to the kills by using their ECM pods to confuse the radar on the MiG-25’s which effectively left them blind and open to attack by both IDF Hawk SAM’s and IDF/AF F-15’s. Am I saying the F-4 would have been just as good at intercepting the MiG-25? No. I’m just pointing out that the F-15 had several things available to support its misson when the earlier intercepts by Phantoms lacked some of these things.All in all, I’m asking you in the future to actually read what others have to say. You have a very bad habit of writing off what other people say as incorrect because you throw out some number or statistic that seems to disprove what they say when in reality there is often a lot more to the story.
I provide these suggestions to you as advice, and I hope that you’ll take it. Many posters will take you a lot more seriously and good debate can be had by which all of us can learn.
Phantom II
Israel did claim a MiG-25R was shot down on 31 August 1982 but again the killer was an F-15 and a HAWK SAM battey
http://www.afwing.com/combat/bekkaa2/iaf-f15.jpg
All the Israeli kills of MiG-25s were made by F-15s, the only non F-15 kill of a MiG-25 was made by an USAF F-16 and with an AMRAAM.
However the MiG-25 can fly at Mach 2.35 for almost 30 minutes because it has a range of 1250km at the speed of Mach 2.35
Практическая дальность полёта, км на сверхзвуковой скорости (М=2.35) 1250
на дозвуковой скорости 1730
source and quotation http://airbase.ru/hangar/russia/mikoyan/mig/25/
So as you can see it is not going to be easy for a F-4 even having AIM-7Fs to hit the MiG-25,
That is the greatness of the F-15, its radar speed and range allowed it to shoot down MiG-25s, the F-4 in that sense never had a chance because of the F-4 first it is slower, has a less impresive performance and turn rate and inferior radar and avionics.
See that of the more than 100 air to air kills atributed to the F-15, only 5 are MiG-25s so it tells you killing a Foxbat by no means is easy specially when it is armed and can fight back with AA-6s.
Consider that even the US NAVY F-14s and F-18 armed with better weapons failed where the F-15 succeded
http://www.knowledgedrivenrevolution.com/Profiles/Military_Technology_CAN/Multimedia/F-15_Israel.jpg
That still doesn’t make any sense!
If the F-22 takes down five F-15s, duh, of course its better! Hmm… F-15 dominates the air. So, if the F-22 dominates the F-15, then it might not dominate the air? Please re-write that word-for-word and tell me that makes sense.
How can you morons sit here and say things like that?
When THIRTY-THREE (33 for some of you who might not be able to read that) THIRTY-THREE F-15s go up against EIGHT (8) F-22s, guess who won?
F-22s – no casualties.
F-15s – no target lock. No siting of the F-22 on radar. No dogfight. No missiles launched. No machineguns fired.
I’m not saying, “Guess who WOULD win” I’m saying, “guess who WON.” These are STATISTICS, not my fantasies.
In a REAL test exercise, F-22 pilots (five of them) got into their F-15s (they were F-15 pilots beforehand). They wanted to out-trick or outdo the F-22 because they knew what it was capable of. Their mission was to take out the F-22 and give it no mercy.
One of those F-15 pilots was gunned down and said, “The first time I saw the F-22 was when it flew over my canopy.” — He didn’t even see it on his radar.
When I saw that, the F-22 suddenly became an impossible feat to me. What aircraft on planet earth can fly right over your radar and not be seen?In the end, the F-15s were all shot down, and it wasn’t even a real dogfight.
I’m wondering how any topic can last more than 5 posts with the title “F-22 vs MiG-29”, especially on The Avaiation Forum. I’m wondering how anyone could even post such a title.
A new aircraft will be better than an old one, however it does not mean it will be as good if it does not shot down aircraft of its own generation, of course the F-14 is better than the AM6M Zero watch the Movie “Final Countdown” however it does not mean the F-14 is better than the MiG-31,
The F-15 shot down the MiG-29 and the MiG-25 both aircraft were the top fighters Russia had for sale in the 1980s, the MiG-29 is a fourth generation and the MiG-25 a third generation, see that the MiG-29 flew 5 years after the first flight of the F-15, i mean even despite the MiG-29 being newer, the F-15 came on top of it this makes the F-15 a great aircraft, the simple fact that it has been growing and being upgraded so constantly that still can fight the Su-30MKI thanks to the Python V, the aircraft has been modernized to even take on more modern threats than the MiG-25, wait and see if the F-22 can beat the PAK FA and the XXJ that will show it can get a combat record like the F-15.
The F-4 of course has AIM-7s but an inferior radar its radar is no match for the Saphir ML or the APG-63 in terms of detection range.
The later variants of the APQ-120 weren’t bad. I’ve spoken with a few former Phantom aircrew and they had good things to say about its performance. Compared to the APG-63 it is no doubt greatly inferior but compared to any radar in the MiG-23…I beg to differ…..roughly similar in performance maybe, but as a whole the MiG-23 wasn’t a much better set than that in the F-4.
The MiG-23s and MiG-25 could had very easily dealt with the F-4
I also beg to differ on this count…at least when it comes to the MiG-23. The MiG-25 no doubt would be able to shoot its missiles at a longer range and then withdraw without the F-4’s being able to counter due to much slower speed, but the MiG-23’s in this case were equipped with R-23’s which had a slightly shorter range and were decidedly inferior to the AIM-7F’s carried by IDF/AF F-4’s. The R-24 went a long way to correcting these deficiencies, but I don’t believe it was available to the Syrians at the time. The AIM-7F itself was very new at the time, and with their primary role being air-to-ground, the Israeli F-4 fleet didn’t really carry them very much and they were used on the F-15 fleet primarily. If the F-4 had still had a more primary air-to-air role, though the AIM-7F would have been used on it.
It is like football, the F-16s were line backers while the F-15s safeties or defensive backs, it is true you can field some F-4s but the fast MiG-25s would easily scape
I’m not sure how well informed you are about the American game of football, but that analogy is way off. A linebacker is always much larger than a safety or defensive back, and generally initiates contact on the offensive player with the ball on a defensive play. If anything, it would be the reverse, with the F-15’s being the hard-hitting linebackers with their long-range radar and AIM-7’s AAM’s, while the F-16’s and their smaller radars and AIM-9 armament were used to deal with anything left over.
Of course in reality, it was sort of a free for all with the F-16 actually scoring a few more kills than the F-15. Even an F-4 on an air-to-ground mission shot down a MiG-21 that tried to ambush it.
As far as the R-60 goes, it may be a slightly more agile missile, but the Python III is a much better weapon with a larger warhead (a key weakness in the R-60 design), is an all-aspect weapon (which early and mid-life R-60’s were not…certainly none in use in this conflict), and it has a much larger range. The Python III was itself improved over the AIM-9L, which was a better weapon than the early and mid-range R-60’s from the start.
As for MiG-23’s shooting their BVR AAM’s, this is all well and good, but when no IDF/AF aircraft were lost to MiG’s in that conflict, it appears that these weapons didn’t exactly work as advertised, and thus it’s not really worth mentioning that.
Phantom II
I have no doubt the F-4 would had achieved some kills, in fact it did, however the F-4 never caught the MiG-25 in the early 1970s niether shot down any MiG-25, according to Israeli accounts in June 1982 the F-4 only achieved a kill and one F-4 was lost to a SAM,
According to offical numbers Israel lost 3 airplanes in 1982, an A-4, an F-4 and an IAI Kfir and lost two AH-1s, however it shot down close to 80 Syrian MiGs and Sukhois (around 44 MiG-21s, 16 MiG-23BNs, 10 MiG-23MF/MS and 8 Su-22s).
According to Syrian claims supported by the Russians the number of Israeli fighters downed by the Syrians was higher (at least 20 aircraft) and the MiGs shot down several F-4s some russian sources claim 20 F-4 were lost, however you find no claim of an F-4 shooting a MiG-25, accordingto the Russians the F-4 was capable of shooting two MiG-23MS though.
If you take the F-15 out of the question, the F-4 was going to be an easy pray for the MiG-25s.
According to Russians sources Syria had 30 MiG-25PDs, 20 MiG-23MS and 20 MiG-23MFs, in June 1982 Syria only lost 6 MiG-23MFs and 4 MiG-23MS this is according to Russian sources that more less match the Israeli claims, however see that the Russians claim the MiG-23s shot down six F-16s with R-23s
The main reason to support my theory is because the F-4 never could stop the Russian MiG-25s operating with Egyptian roundels overflying Israel in the early 1970s however the F-15 did it
If you see the main Syrian casualties were mostly MiG-21s and strike aircraft such as Su-22s and MiG-23BN that were bombing the Israeli armed units.
The F-4, Kfir and A-4s were strike aircraft simply because they could not fight the MiG-25s and the MiG-23s..
See that the MiG-23MF represent barely 8% of the Syrian losses and the MiG-23MS even less only 5%.
So we can see the MiG-23MF was not a bad fighter considering the F-15 and F-16 were more advanced and the MiG-25 without F-15s guarding the F-16s and F-4s would had easily wreck havoc on the Israeli aircraft.
The F-4 in few words niether had the speed to catch the MiG-25, niether could get to the needed altitudes to shoot it down and undoutedly barely was a match for the MiG-23.
Simply,
How can you say that the F-22 is better than the F-15 only in theory? It already shot down five F-15s without them knowing it was there. These were F-22 pilots trying to cheat the F-22 too. They couldn’t do it.
One F-15 pilot said he didn’t even see the F-22 until it fly over his canopy. He looked at his radar….. he could see the F-22 with his eyes, but it was as if nothing was there on his radar. A time ago, of course, machinegun fire took him down.
There is also the 8 vs 33, same results. None of the F-15s even saw the F-22s, much less, got a target lock. In fact, the F-15s didn’t even dogfight at all, and launched chaffs and flares (no missiles).
That might be in controlled training, but come on, the F-15s (undoubtedly some of the most superior aircraft of dogfighting) pilots say its an unfair match!!!
ColonelMarksman
I never said the F-22 is better in theory, the only thing i said is the F-22 has not fought another fifth generation.
The MiG-15 fought the F-86, both aircraft are great aircraft simply because they are historically speaking important part of the History of the XX century, both are important because reflect the struggle of the cold war and the first true jet versus jet combats.
The Mirage III also is one of the most important aircraft of the XX century, in fact the Six days war were marked by this aircraft, any historian will notice the importance this aircraft played for Israel in that war
The F-4 is also very important, this aircraft also reflects the Vietnam war, the Yom kippur Arab Israeli war of 1973 and technologically speaking the F-4 was one of the best third generation aircraft.
The F-22 to the contrary has not proved anything yet.
The MiG-15 was the nemesis of the F-86, the MiG-21 was of the Mirage III and F-4 in the Six days and Yom Kippur Arab Israeli wars and in the Vietnam war for the F-4.
If you ask me how much influenced the Mirage III modern technology i would say a lot because from it spawned several new models and the delta canard fashion.
The F-15 has been another excellent fighter simply because it fought almost all what the soviets had to offer and defeat them. ranging from the MiG-21 to the MiG-29, the war in the former Yugoslavia, the Bekka valley and the Gulf war are basicly marked with this airplane.
The Most important aircraft of the XX century are aircraft that are associated with a historical moment and a Pilot, example the Wright Brothers` first flight in their airplane at Kitty hawk, the Red baron`s Albatros D III, Lindbergh`s Spirit of st Louis, Paul Tibbets` B-29 Enola gay, Yeager`s X-1, Gary Power`s U-2, Belenko`s MiG-25, and so on however the best modern aircraft has to be an aircraft that combines good capabilities and a legacy that are reflected in its design, from my point of view the F-15 was quit influencing because it has been a tool to shape History, has the best combat record of modern times and perhaps in the History of combat aviation .
The F-22 has not proved it will be an aircraft that will be so important that will mark an age as the AM6M Zero has done for the Japanese.
WWII will be remembered as Hitler`s war in the same way Napoleon`s wars and the word STUKA will be associated to Blitzkrieg.
I do not think the F-15 will be so ever lasting as probably other aircraft will be but i think in the last part of the XX century the F-15 will be a fundamental weapon of the Arab-Israeli conflict along side as a weapon of the Cold war and post cold war.
Of course you need to praise the MLD a bit, but your claim is a little bit to sporty in my eyes.
The F-16A’s empty weight is given with 6600kg. Lets add one ton to that, consider 3/4 internal fuel, 4 Sidewinders, a pilot and gun ammo.
That is:
6600kg Empty
1000kg (additional undefined equipment, to make my calc conservative)
100kg pilot
320kg Sidewinders
60kg gun ammo
2330kg fuel
———
10410kg, wing loading is 373kg/m²
Thrust(static)/weight: ~1.04MiG-23MLD under similar conditions:
10200kg Empty
100kg pilot
320kg 4x IR-AAM
60kg gun ammo
2780kg fuel
———
13460 kg, wing loading (45°) is 377kg/m²
Thrust(static)/weight: ~0.95From this view things look good for the Flogger. However, it must be considered that the F-16 gets more lift out of its wing, has lower drag at G-load and automatic slats/flaps. Additional we can count the radar (with dogfight modus), the HOTAS-system, the carefree handling, the exceptional view and the the higher g-tolerance of pilot and airframe. Some of these characteristics are even better than for the MiG-29A.
Yeah it is more less what the Russians are saying, of course they acknowledge the MiG-23 is not a match for the F-16 in turns, it only has similar AoA limits.
But remember in 1987 the Russians had some MiG-29s armed with AA-10s and MiG-23MLD armed with R-24s, so the Frontal aviation always had fighters that were more capable than the F-16s at BVR combat.
Since 1984 either the MiG-23MLD or MiG-29 carried the lethal AA-11 and the R-60MK that could be cued with HMS, so the F-16 were in total disadvantage, only the F-15 could had prevailed at long range or at least fight in more or less even terms
This was another reason the F-16 was used as strike fighter it had niether the Range in terms of BVR weapons or radar to deal with enemy fighters in 1991
So it is easy to see in 1991 the top fighters were the Su-27s and the F-15, in 1977 the top fighters were the MiG-25 and the F-15 and even in 1999 the top operational fighters were the F-15 ad Su-27, so for more than 30 years the F-15 ruled as the top fighter
How are the Russians supposed to get true performance figures for the F-16? No aircraft performs in combat as in testing, so many things different, ranging from weather over pilot performance, engine issues and the loads, which will not always be as stated in the flight manual.
But if the Russians said it was not the best performer, it sounds like a sedation for themselves. In 1982 the F-16A was still ahead in terms of technology, with only the MiG-29 catching up in terms of performance (but not in terms of technology). Reality is that the F-16 was much better suited for visual air combat than any current Russian made fighter, which at that time compromised only MiG21 and MiG-23 (ranging from M over ML to MLD). the MiG-29 was just entering service.Heavy take-off weights should not been the foremost isse in Lebanon, as combat radius was rarely more than 100nm. That aera is small. From Tel Aviv to Damaskus is only 100-150nm, 15 minutes for a jet in fast cruise, down to half for supersonic cruise.
Schorsch
The Russians accounts i have read say the Israeli F-16As were modified by the Israelies in few words new equipment was fitted and this added weight, also that their engines did not have a thrust as high as General Dynamics promised.
Once the F-16A gained weight its thrust to weight ratio was lowered but not only that its wing loading also got heavier in fact getting very close to the MiG-23ML in wing loading and thrust to weight ratio terms.
Also in 1985 the few MiG-29As were more capable than any F-16 then operational because it had AA-10 Alamos.
So only by 1989 the F-16 gained the AIM-7 and by 1992 the F-16 gained the AIM-120, so basicly the F-16 was inferior to both the MiG-23MLD and MiG-29 the Soviets operated in 1988.
This did not happen with the F-15 that bettered the F-16 in BVR combat and was a more capable fighter than the F-18 and the proof is the F-18 did not kill any MiG-25 see that also the US Navy F-14s also did not score any MiG-25 kill in US service even with AIM-54s and the fact they fired AIM-54Cs from F-14Ds at Iraqi MiG-25s, this proves that the F-14 horrible climb rate was not even enough to kill the MiG-25 because in one ocassion Iraqi MiG-25s dodged several F-15s and fired missiles to a group of EF-111s however the F-15 also score MiG-25s kills in 1991 and this is also admitted by the Russians.
Since 1981 the F-15 proved it could kill the MiG-25, and even despite i have my doubts it could defeat the MiG-31 at least the aircraft has the best combat record of any modern fighter.
See this real fact the F-15 had the range, the weapons, the agility needed, it had excelent reliability and serviceability, it gained the respect of the Russians that is basicly FEAR FACTOR, it is a beautiful aircraft, even has been sold in descent numbers compared to the 80 F-14s sold by Grumman, the more than 400 F-15s sold to Israel, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Korea are a good example the F-15 ruled as the best cold war warrior even despite the Su-27 was a better fighter interceptor or the MiG-29 a better dogfighter, the F-15 stands as the most succesful modern fighter, in fact i can assure you this if in the bekka valley Israel would had only flown F-4s and F-16s they would had lost the aerial battles simply because the F-16 had no BVR AIM-7s and all the MiG-23MF/ML and MiG-25 had long range AAMs 
It is possible the MiG-25 also did a good Job because to the few aircraft shot down the West usually claim there is a probability they indeed shot down some F-4 and F-5s during the Iran-Iraq war as some reports claim.
The poll idea was in my brain, but it would’ve been way too narrow considering some of the aircraft others came up with.
As for the F-22 comparision to the F-15 unfair, we could say the F-22 is noted to be the first (rather excellent of its kind) 21st generation fighter. Because, like I said, trying to say like the toughest aircraft…. A-10 Warthog. Then there’s no competition. Most superior air combt fighter then would be the F-22, again, no competition.
But this is less of a poll, less of a competition as it is a very broad survey.
I noticed the Harrier got in here a few times. Would it be the horizontal lift off, or what?
I will give you an analogy
a new born baby has not proved any thing, an old man has proved how great he was
The F-22 in 2007 is one of the most advanced aircraft, it is true it is the first fifth generation aircraft to have been deployed any where in the world.
But the F-15 was deployed in 1976 and first flown in 1972, in 2007 the aircraft is 35 years old, it is at least 25 years much older than the F-22 and was deployed 30 years earlier than the F-22.
The first time the F-15 was blooded was in the late 1970s, so in few words, you can argue theoreticallly that the F-22 will be as good as the F-15, this is just a guess and expectation, we need to see another 10-15 years more how good is the F-22.
An aircraft can only be judged in two aspects, one as a war machine and this is how good was in combat? how many wars it helped to win? how good and useful it was? in few words its kill rate , and the other is how much money it made for its maker
Good aircraft always have superior technology and excellent maintaineability and serviceability, and at the end they become prolific or at least classic.
we can not know yet if the F-22 will become a classic, today a classic is the Spitfire, the MiG-15, the Stuka, the AM6M Zero, the Me-262, the F-4, the B-29, U-2, the F-117, the MiG-25 these aircraft usually are a fundamental part of certain period in History or a synonym in the public imagination of a great aircraft.
The B-29 for example always will be part of History, it is a fundamental aircraft synonym of Japan`s defeat and the end of WWII.
The A6M Zero is a synonym of kamikaze and japanese aviation
The Spitfire reflects the unbreakable british will and the Luftwaffe defeat, it is s synonym of England fighting against Germany against all odds.
The Stuka reflects Blitzkrieg and the German victories in WWII
The Me-262 the best german super weapon of WWII
The F-4 is synonym of the Vietnam war.
The MiG-25 will be remembered in history thanks to Belenko`s defection.
The U-2 reflects the Cuban Missile crisis and one of the darkest moments in history where WWIII was almost a reality also as a synonym of the trail of Gary Powers.
The F-15 and Mirage III will be remembered as fighters that helped Israel to preserve their freedom.
the F-15 already is a synonym of GWI.
The F-117 of the war in Yugoslavia.
The MiG-15 of the Korean war.
In few words classic aircraft and the best aircraft of a generation impact history in a way that become part of a period in History
Don’t want to get into this tiring topic again, but you should at least mention that many sources claim 0 F-16 and 0 F-15 shot down by MiG-23. I guess you refer mainly to Syrian versus Israel engagements, and western sources did not write of any losses due to AA-engagements. I guess these western biased sources are equally faraway from the plot like eastern biased sources.
I totally agree with you, the West concedes very few combat aircraft shot down to the MiG-23, usually in the West they might only concede that a few helicopters, Mirage F1 some F-4s and some F-5s were shot down by MiG-23s, it is normal since both sides always are biased towards their own aircraft.
Technically speaking you usually find better analysis of the MiG strengths in Russian accounts and reviews.
Without getting into too much debateable arguments is fair to say any
aircraft has a range of possible victories and losses and that is with any
aircraft.
the real fact is you find more claims than evidence in either side,
the West never has proven the claims sometimes western authors claim and the same applies to the Russians
The West however acknowledges several hundreds of F-4s were lots in combat and several F-15, F-18, F-15 and F-14 have been shot down
However in the Russian analysis the F-15 is consider more less one of the best fighters ever created and the Russian accounts i have heard give very few losses to the F-15, no more than 6 in Lebanon and 3 or 4 over Gulf war I
Another case is the F-86 and MiG-15 there are some authors that claim the real kill ratio over Korea was 1:3 in favour of the F-86, is it probable? i guess it is, however remember a combar record is not only Air to Air kills but also any loss to enemy fire.
here is a sabre shot down
a F-84
source http://wio.ru/korea/korea-a.htm
a B-29 shot down by a MiG-15
http://www.b-29s-over-korea.com/MIG-15/Perf_Mig-15_Combat_2.html
What else could it be except opinion? A bit like asking a father who his favourite son is… just a stupid question that can only lead to problems of conflict in the future…
Top ten modern aircraft:
1: Tu-160
2: Tu-142M
3: Tu-22M3
4: Mig-31M
5: Mig-29M
6: Su-34
7: An-124
8: Il-76M
9: Buran
10: A-40 Albatros
OK Sferrin will start whining now…
Garry i feel you are exagerating, come on man, the Russian aircraft are good but not to be the only aircraft.
If you ask me is the F-15 the greatest aircraft? i would say historically speaking it has the best combat record and three wars won
Could have the Su-27 or MiG-29 done the same if they had had the chance? the answer perhaps is yes, but definitively the Mirage III, MiG-15, F-86, MiG-21, F-4, MiG-23 won`t be in that list because all these aircraft have more losses than the F-15
These are the aircraft the F-15 shot down
MiG-29: this fighter is more agile than the F-15 and better in close combat dogfight, however it was not upgraded very fast and has mediocre BVR combat capabilities, this is a fourth generation fighter
The Su-27 to be comparable would need to shoot down at least 10 F-16As, it has shot down nevertheless two MiG-29s according to Russian acounts
MiG-25: this fighter is a third generation aircraft the Su-27 would need to shot down either the Sr-71/A-12 or at least a few MiG-25s
MiG-23: This is a third generation fighter the Su-27 would need to shot down around 15 F-4Es to have a similar record, this is achievable.
MiG-21: this is a second generation fighter to be comparable the Su-27 would need shot down at least 30 F-5s or Mirage III this also achievable, so there is not a great feat in that neither for the F-15 or the Su-27
Mirage F1:this is another aircraft that is no match for a Su-27, in mock combat it has alredy proven it can beat it
Su-22: this is a striker of the third generation, the closest western equivalent would have been the Etandard or the Jaguar, for a Su-27 it is not a great feat to shoot down a Jaguar or a super Etendard
Su-25: this is not a great feat the closest western equivalent is the A-10, and almost it is guaranteed the Su-27 would had shot down A-10s very easily
The rest of the aircraft the F-15 has shot down are small game so for a Su-27 would have been the same victory over victory
So in few words the F-15 is a great aircraft because in the history books will be remembered as a great weapon despite in reality it was never superior to the Su-27 or MiG-29 but the power that used it, had a better economy and a better strategic policy.
Sign In
