DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM

No, no any kind of DMT on MiG-23B/BN, this aircraft is from 1971....., Pepin yes this is little weird but MiG-23B/BN don't have AAM's, MiG-27 had them, Su-17 of any variant had them but B/BN don't.:joystick:

To be fair, by comparison the F-105 could carry the AIM-9 but over Vietnam it rarely did (and it still did ok-ish in air to air combat for what it was), so back then not carrying AAMs was probably not the biggest deal.

Also Foxbat, love your posts, thanks for the info!

Despite all the Russian economic crisis of the 90s. I can understand the majority of the Air Force retirements. After some years in DCS, this experience tell me that retirement of a fast mover and light bomber like Mig-27M/K is a big mistake. That’s why I like so hard after Mig-23, the next RU module from RAZBAM should be at least the 23BN. Fingers Crossed :joystick:

No, no any kind of DMT on MiG-23B/BN, this aircraft is from 1971....., Pepin yes this is little weird but MiG-23B/BN don't have AAM's, MiG-27 had them, Su-17 of any variant had them but B/BN don't.:joystick:

So how similar would it be in terms of sight symbology/usage to the SU-25A? Fairly close to that? I realize its probably got a crappier bomb computer, but the LRF/sight/computer combo suggests some similarity to the SU-25A then.

Can’t remember which ones didn’t have afterburner, can’t seem to find anything on google

Su-25 had weapon system taken from Su-17M3, which was development of system fitted in Su-17M2......:music_whistling: which was the same like in MiG-23B/BN so yes stuff from Su-25 is a bit more advanced. Photo of ASP-17 symbology, you have to be aware that MiG-23B have ASP-17, Su-25 have ASP-17BC which are very different devices which use the same optical head S-17VG :

All MiG-23 variants had afterburner, difference was in engine types.

So if we ever get a 27 slim chance to outrun any harriers.....

The 27 can still go supersonic, but at higher altitudes it's not as fast as a 23 because of the simplified air intakes iirc. It should be able to outrun any Harrier fairly easily.

Okay, guessed it needed to dive when I first saw that. Interesting compromise to make compared to 23s

Overstratos have right, S-23 is doppler pulse radar, first of this class in Soviet Union. With MiG-25 situation is bit more complicated: first fighter variant MiG-25P had pulse radar RP-25A2 or A4 "Smierch", later variants MiG-25PD/PDS had scaled up variant of Flogger's N-003 called N-005 "Saphir"-25 (RP-25M or later MN).

By western definition, it is a clutter-referenced MTI.

Much discussion of it can be found here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mikoyan-mig-23-avionics.25/ (read down the whole page, and you can see the conclusion is that its not really PD but a unique MTI pulse radar)

Big notes from the link:

-Uses low PRF (True pulse doppler doesn't do this, and low PRF makes doppler completely ambiguous)

-Uses novel MTI technique to separate clutter from moving targets.

-Using a Low PRF means it cannot distinguish doppler or target velocity. Thus, it can indicate moving targets on the scope, but not determine or track doppler. Hence, its not a Pulse Doppler radar.

It is different. Not same construction technology. Because you see weakness point in western old technology that doesn’t mean this must be present by general rule in Soviet technology. As ECM resistance for example. Exactly the things ED doesn’t simulate 100%.

By western definition, it is a clutter-referenced MTI.

 

Much discussion of it can be found here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mikoyan-mig-23-avionics.25/ (read down the whole page, and you can see the conclusion is that its not really PD but a unique MTI pulse radar)

 

Big notes from the link:

 

-Uses low PRF (True pulse doppler doesn't do this, and low PRF makes doppler completely ambiguous)

 

-Uses novel MTI technique to separate clutter from moving targets.

 

-Using a Low PRF means it cannot distinguish doppler or target velocity. Thus, it can indicate moving targets on the scope, but not determine or track doppler. Hence, its not a Pulse Doppler radar.

I know this discussion and I know Mr.Detonator, we had lot of interesting discussions about MiG-21 and 23 on polish forums ( he is from Czech ). You only picked up one of this discussions points of view: which terminology is more correct - Western or Soviet, because in many cases both sides use the same words for differents things. According Soviet terminology RP-23 is a coherent pulse-doppler radar with external coherency. It's uses doppler filters to analyze/process signal, some people says that only radars with internal coherence can be called pulse-doppler but this is only matter of terminology. Technically this radar use doppler techniques only implemented different way, but without those techniques wasn't possible achieve development targets and because doppler filters playing here main role so radar is doppler-pulse.

The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:

For closing targets at or above the “Flogger’s” altitude, the radar could track (“lock onto”) a target inside 18.9nm (35km), which was approximately the maximum range of the R-24R missile when fired head-on at high altitude. To detect targets below the radar’s altitude, the AVM-23 computer used an “external coherence method” to detect a target passing across/through the “clutter” caused by the earth’s radar return (called

“moving target indicator”). This computer process had severe limitations due to numerous “blind zones” in multiples of the radar’s PRF, being able to only detect targets in the duration between successive pulses, and was limited to much shorter detection ranges (16.2nm/30km).

Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.

It is different. Not same construction technology. Because you see weakness point in western old technology that doesn’t mean this must be present by general rule in Soviet technology. As ECM resistance for example. Exactly the things ED doesn’t simulate 100%.

I'd be happy if ED simulated 10%... Just sayin...

The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:

 

 

Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.

Based on what I read it also depended on which version of the radar you were talking about. The improved the filtering as time and model numbers went on.

Not really interesting about the APG-63, the US was way ahead in terms of electronics and miniaturization compared to soviet union for the entire cold war. Probably the better comparison would be the F4 radar system.

The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:

 

 

Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.

I think that biggest weakness of this design was analog computer, probably much slower like digital, but this is radar from end of 60's so complaining is misplaced. F-16's radar is 10 years younger at least, and over that time digital techniques did big step forward. Lot of info in Osprey Dual 72 and many others is just bullshits, even today is hard to get access to full RP-23 documentation. R-24 had almost 50 km range ( not used in Iraq ), target like F-15 was tracked "head on" from distance 60 km ( at med and high altitude ), and one more thing: weapon system of MiG-23MLA is a combination of two systems - radar and IR, and basic metod was hidden observation by IR supported by special low profile radar mode. During tests IR was tracking aircrafts with afterburner typically from 90 km, kind of champion was MiG-25 when flown with afterburners, because TP-26 was able see her from 120 km.

Given that the opponents encountered by the MiG-23 in real life had much better radar systems, I do not think one should skip over this. BTW, the early versions of the AN/APG-66 appeared already in 1974 following development starting several years prior.

While reliable data is indeed hard to come by, I remain cautious towards the real life ("non-test") implications of these figures, given narratives such as in this well-known interview about the meager performance of the much newer S-31E2 and the R-27R.

BTW I have read that a MiG-25 in afterburner was seen during the Gulf War at a distance of 70 nm by the mk1 eyeball.

According pdf you attached, initial serial AN/APG-66 were delivered in June 1978, for comparison RP-23 development started in 1964 and first production radar show up in 1969 with MiG-23 "model 1969" production (RP-23L).

Yeah not a real good comparison to the APG-66, it started development a decade after the Sapfir.

Realistically the best comparisons are to the F4 radars.

There were multiple quantum leaps in terms of radio component/tech/computers development from the mid 60's to the mid70's.

One has to keep in mind that the rapid advances in electronics and computers occurred mainly on one side of the world.

Nonetheless, I feel the comparison to the APG-63 and APG-66 is fair, as 1) these systems were installed in contemporary aircraft, with the MiG-23MLA remaining in production through 1982, 2) more important, the MiG-23 of various versions encountering hostile aircraft equipped with these radars in combat.

Then, what is the point of it all? As said, I think the MiG-23MLA module will most likely shine in the Cold War MP servers instead of the general servers, given the relative obsolescence already affecting certain systems when the aircraft was only just rolling of the assembly line. Notwithstanding the previous statement, I do look forward to adding this plane to the stable.

I know this discussion and I know Mr.Detonator, we had lot of interesting discussions about MiG-21 and 23 on polish forums ( he is from Czech ). You only picked up one of this discussions points of view: which terminology is more correct - Western or Soviet, because in many cases both sides use the same words for differents things. According Soviet terminology RP-23 is a coherent pulse-doppler radar with external coherency. It's uses doppler filters to analyze/process signal, some people says that only radars with internal coherence can be called pulse-doppler but this is only matter of terminology. Technically this radar use doppler techniques only implemented different way, but without those techniques wasn't possible achieve development targets and because doppler filters playing here main role so radar is doppler-pulse.

Many MTI radars rely on the principle of doppler.. That doesn't make it pulse doppler.

Pulse Doppler radars are radars that measure doppler.

The soviets threw around whatever propaganda they wanted to try to convince the world they're on par with the west..

I dont care what the USSR called it. It does not, and cannot measure doppler.

MIT Lincoln Lab states:

The soviets threw around whatever propaganda they wanted to try to convince the world they're on par with the west..

Soviets didn't have to and what is more important didn't wanna to convince anybody because till today docs about those old radars are secret. For sure they wanted keep in secret almost all theys achievments because then is much easier suprise and defeat people/nations thinking stereotypes. They get the same goals with different way.

I dont care what the USSR called it. It does not, and cannot measure doppler.

 

MIT Lincoln Lab states:

Well, that your right to do this, and I'm sure that NIIR ( S-23 creator) have the same way of thinking about Lincolns Lab theorems. They called this radar: doppler-pulse with external coherency and I respect this, especially that in DCS is impossible to catch differences between radar with external and internal coherency due game engine limitations.

Do you have any technical description of S-23 radar ( no important which variant) ?

What is the pod name used in the Kh-23 configuration?

https://images.app.goo.gl/WSTLs1pPCExWPTc59

What is the pod name used in the Kh-23 configuration?

 

 

 

https://images.app.goo.gl/WSTLs1pPCExWPTc59

DELTA-NM

It is used for? As I did think the radar itself have a mode for Kh-23 missiles.