It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by CreeWolf
Mig-23 is a NATO code assigned to Soviet aircraft. MiG denoting the design bureau, 23 the numbered sequence assigned. NATO assigned odd numbers to fighter aircraft and even numbers to attack/bomber aircraft. I don't remember all the details, but they also had a way of assigning numbers that differentiated between jet and propeller powered too. I don't even know why I'm typing this, the whole picture in this thread looks like something pulled out of one's anal orifice....
Originally posted by ch1466
1. Under the NATO naming system, a fighter would never have an even series nomenclator attached to it. This is why the 'Su-19' became the Su-24 as soon as it's true role mimicry of the F-111 was acknowledged.
2. The MiG-23 was a saturation fighter.
Originally posted by Pazo
2. Oh, that's just crap, excuse me. The first series and especially the export variants which took part in the theatres you mentioned weren't particularly good (not better than the F-4), but the same could be said about the first F-14A.
The later ML/MLD is a different fighter altogether. Especially the ones for the Russian AF and Warsaw Pact countries. It was tested by the Israelis and they found out it could break lock from Pithon-3 & Sidewinder with hard maneuvering. I don't think this is true for the F-14. That's the reason the Israelis started designing the Pithon-4. MLD versions can pretty much hold their own against an F-15, and they are much more capable than F-16A both BVR & WVR.
The MiG-23 was anything but a saturation fighter. When it appeared it was 'the' most advanced fighter in the world.