Thanks for photo MSphere.

I assume they were delivered after Ogaden War against Somalia (77-78)?

I think that they will hardly be a proof enough for anyone to change his mind. We, western fans find any claim by a Western pilot supplemented by a nice Tom-Clancy-like story as conslusive enough to attribute a kill but we completely fail to do the same on the enemy’s behalf. In that case we demand AWACS records, confirmation from the opponent’s side, wreckage photos and at best even fragments of some R-xx missile and then we MAYBE could take this possibility into consideration. Do we have the same for all our (or say Iranian or Israeli) kills, as well?

A typical double standard if you ask me. I personally find claims from ACIG about Iraqi pilots never fully recovering from the fact that they failed to shot down even one aircraft hardly a conclusive proof, either. Just my $0.02

Personally I expect US and NATO to show decent proof too.

I think Israel’s records are full of BS, especially loss ratios to all causes. I don’t dount IDF/AF dominates in air combat, but not to the degree it claims.

Bah! several points in this question:

1- nobody can be sure 100% about the effectiveness of the SEAD tactics, but it is true for the SAM efficency as well.

2- Soviet did not lack about SEAD systems: on the contrary, while being undeniabily inferior to the best western stuff, they had quite a number of aircrafts and missiles, able to fire with ARM missiles. And not forget, that in 1973 the old AS-5 destroyed two israeli radar stations.

1973 is not 1991. Assumption is that the Iraqis would’ve used more up-to-date systems and tactics as they did in real 1980-88 war.

As large number of aircraft and missiles means diddly squat if the missiles are generally incapable of hitting thier targets or are unservicable due to heavy maintenance requirements.

3- Nobody says that a ‘real’ air war is totally free of pain for the dominant airforce. Remember, soviets were aware about this issue; neverthless, they won Kursk battle while losing much more aicrafts than Germans. But Irakis weren’t germans, and hardly they could have an efficient air defence system after the first waves made up by Su-24s.

4- remember, even the western systems such Crotale and Roland did not much vs low- flying aircrafts (iranian, UK or US).

I did state Hawk – which was relatively reliable in comparison.

5- SAAF air strikes, despite the heavy air defence made up in Angola, were successfuls and effective with minimum losses.

6- the same happened with many more exercise, like Red Flags, in which stuff like RAF, LW and AMI Tornados ruled out the air defences. There is no particular concern that soviet equivalent would have been worse (atleast, the Su-24 is armoured).

True. In real life the attacker dictates terms and conditions of where the battle is fought and how it’s fought (though Germans in 1943 were completely predictable in chosing Kursk for their summer offensive).

Worse losses than the ‘real Desert Storm’? Yes, mainly due to HAWK missiles and some fighters. But, even if soviet would lost 200 aircrafts, they would have won the war neverthless.

I agree they’d lose. It’s the casualties and length of war that intrigues me.

Not forget, that soviet would have ruled in long range artillery and rockets, and they would have launched a ground offensive within few weeks, if not days. They weren’t too worried about the losses, nor the myths of the ‘invincible tanks’ (like the M1, that every time one is destroyed, there are everlasting discussions about ‘why’ and ‘what’). They could have loose 500 tanks, and still won the war against ‘irakis’. No matter. They would have fielded around 4,000 tanks with the same costs of the 2000 allied mbts.

And, in the motherland, they had other 30,000+ MBTs last -gen (T-64/72/80) ready to be sent in action, when necessary.

Too true. It’s interesting that the Soviets never really got past heavy attrition warfare. Even in 1944-45 when they held the strategic advantage, they continued to throw meat into the grinder.

And hasn’t changed since.

In contrast, if the Western Civilization looks down at their feet and sees the earth and “Realism”, my civilization, the Islamic Civilization looks up at the stars.

Yet interestingly enough it’s Westerners who first took to the skies and who first went to space. Realism doesn’t mean lack of vision or dreams.

Just out of curiosity, what kind of proof would satisfy you?

This is sort of based on hot air if you ask me.. 23mm could easily have been a MiG-23 or MiG-21 (with GSh-23), as well..

Personally I don’t believe the Iraqi claims either. Fighter pilots tend to overstate their kills by astronomic levels. Third world dictatorships even more so.

Secondly there are surviving the air crew themselves, if any.

ACIG did research into the matter and they found no conclusive evidence either.

http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=47

If conclusive proof is obtained, then I’m willing to change my mind.

Til then only kill I believe the IrAF had of Western aircraft was a single F/A-18C shot down by a MiG-25.