^
I understand that it was relatively immobile but it had good range, when the russians sold it to cyprus in 90s it caused a huge uproar in turkey !

Is there a good source on this missile system

^ thanks for the replies

does anybody have the figures for the inventory of the AA-11 R-73 in Soviet service in 1989-90 period ?

Cause it would not be able do get a gun kill on any F-4E. No way in hell.
And consider the poor missile armament on the Su-15TM..
Hense its a interceptor. You fire your missile from a advatage position, preferable you want to suprise your enemy with speed, use clouded condition etc and the Su-15TM might get firing solution(on bombers!) and get away too.
Wiki:

Yes ofcourse, but would they able to avoid the F-4E which are escorting the bombers ?

How bad is the Su-15TM as a close in fighter ?

^ how can they avoid the escorts like F-4E?

During computerized war simulations in the 80’s t

Are these results available today ? where can we find them ?

nastle, alfakilo it might be worth considering if you will, to my experience (Polish family members), east europeans tend to use words like “technology” and “doctrine” interchangeably.
I don’t believe the Soviets received notice their technology was inferior, but it is an ostensible notation there were already voices in the Kremlin by the 1980s suggesting their doctrinal approach was.
And doctrinal approach was dictating industrial requirements and processes particularly for Frontal Aviation equipment (moreso than AVMF or PVO).

And when a Russian tries to tell you a doctrinal approach is inferior he is very likely to use the word technology without thinking there is any difference. The technology of military leaders, the doctrine of military leaders, it means exactly the same thing.
But not to english speakers.

What do you think, possible?

could be, not familiar with eastern european languages so I really cant say

Neither the author nor anyone in this thread has said that they were….but Mig-21s and MiG-23s were the standard for WP air forces in 1982.

You continue to defend Soviet systems, training, etc. The article was about Israeli lessons learned, not deficiencies in Soviet equipment.

No…the question was that you claimed he was “ill-informed”. Now, we may be “ill-informed” because the author did not use his name…LOL…but you haven’t backed up your claim.

No, I didn’t say that or anything close to that. What I did say was that the US seemed to have learned lessons from the 1982 Israeli experience and put them to good use in 1991.

In any case, you have drifted far away from the thread topic. This isn’t a Soviet bashing thread, the articles weren’t Soviet bashing articles.

Let’s get back to the actual topic, if you don’t mind.

alfakilo forgive me I misunderstood your earlier posts !
I would still say that Rebecca Grant’s article was a bunch of fluff, there is nothing new in this article other than what is already wellknown.I would say that Grants article was clearly soviet bashing.
I am not claiming that soviet weapon systems were as good as western ones for that era but in a CW scenario could not be so easily defeated as Grant seem to imply