RAZBAM MiG-19

Mig-19 is a little orphaned, but there were plenty of older soviet partner states with them. The Ogaden war Eithiopia and Somalia had some around F-5 time. It's a well performing aircraft, even if the avionics are like a Mig15 with a bolt on radar scope (dunno the limits) It's good for older scenarios in smaller states and its a good adversary not currently in the DCS repertoire.

 

However, I'll be honest, I have all the modules and it's not grabbing me as much as the others have. And it will probably embarrass the F-5 again :)

embarass the F5?

please, I know it comes down more to pilot skill, but in this case the Mig19 is the underdog to the F5.

F5 has a better radar, and it actually has a RWR, and A countermeasures dispenser suite plus all aspect Aim9P5, the gunsight solution is better as well. IN addition to having superior avionics, Its flight performance is also better. F5E handling is more forgiving, its maneuverability is also pretty good, and its 2 J85 engines prdouce less thrust than the 19 keep in mind the F5 weighs quite a bit less than the Mig.

The F5E-3 we have is very much the Mig21Bis Rival.

So like you said, it's a solid counterpart. :P

 

 

 

The F-100 is a bit closer, but the MiG-19 actually splits the difference between the performance of the F-100 and Mirage III (in terms of rate of climb, acceleration, etc - not in top speed).

 

It feels like splitting hairs to me, but we are all free to have our own opinions. :)

 

The interest in realistic missions and operations often leaves us DCS players with a quandary: the most closely matched opponent was often not a real opponent. Eg: F-100 and MiG-19 never encountered each other in combat as far as I know. So should a counterpart be realistic or closely matched?

 

Lets not derail our celebration of the upcoming MiG-19 by debating which is the correct mindset (there is no answer anyway - it's all about preference).

 

-Nick

well by that logic MIg21bis is a F15 rival, just because they faced them IRL? if you had a entire server of Mig21Bis vs F15 i can bet you your asking for team red to be empty.

No it didn't not but hey thats why Fictional Fulda gap scenario tat the height of the cold war would be even more interesting, It allows a what if scneario and allow the True Counterparts to face offf against each other.

Again it was really just tcircumstance, that prevented them from meeting each other. F100 just like the Mig19 served in the Vietnam war for eg. they jsut never saw combt because F100 was pulled from Northern incurusions because It could not provide proper escort to F105s ( could not keep up with the much faster jet) and because they eventually had the F4 take over exscort role, and fuffill some of the bombing functions along the F105, so the F100 was merely relegated to Fighter-bomber (specifcally CAS) duty in the south for most of the war. but again both aircraft served on that specifc war.

Again its no really opinion its a fact. the Mirage 3 in terms of service date and performance, is really a 2nd generation Mig21 rival ( PF and PFM variants)

You have to do as in reality, when there is no place in mig21 on the server, you take a mig19 :D

Sa-2 and others old SAMs and old cold war AAA has planned by ED.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2920107&postcount=761

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2977648&postcount=873

I am well aware however this is very far down thier roadmap, and low priority.

ED has far more on thier plate, than 3rd parties do, which are free to focus =on just development of modules.

well by that logic MIg21bis is a F15 rival, just because they faced them IRL?

Correct, which is why the USAF and USN DACT focused on facing the MiG-21 as their primary rival until the early 1980s when they began incorporating tactics to counter the MiG-23 and BVR capable opponents. The arrival of the F-16N for the USN and use of F-15s and F-16s as USAF aggressors signaled the need to simulate the MiG-29 and Su-27 in the late-80s.

The F-15 should be carrying AIM-9Ls and AIM-7Fs (and probably be a F-15A), but they are counterparts when appropriately equipped.

Again it was really just tcircumstance, that prevented them from meeting each other. F100 just like the Mig19 served in the Vietnam war for eg. they jsut never saw combt because F100 was pulled from Northern incurusions because It could not provide proper escort to F105s ( could not keep up with the much faster jet) and because they eventually had the F4 take over exscort role, and fuffill some of the bombing functions along the F105, so the F100 was merely relegated to Fighter-bomber (specifcally CAS) duty in the south for most of the war. but again both aircraft served on that specifc war.

Also, because the MiG-19 didn't enter combat in Vietnam until 1969 and the F-100 had been phased out of front-line units well before that time. The ANG continued combat ops till around 1969 before the Hun exited the theater entirely. Part of the issue was that US forces did not regard the F-100 as a frontline fighter at that point, while newly acquired MiG-19s were placed onto the frontline to reinforce the MiG-21s. The MiG-19 had a few ACM advantages over the MiG-21 with its three 30 mm cannons and much better rearward visibility. The MiG-19 and MiG-21 overlapped quite a bit and served as contemporaries during the 1960s. The MiG-21 was produced in far larger numbers and was generally more capable as an interceptor, but the MiG-19 had redeeming qualities as well.

if you had a entire server of Mig21Bis vs F15 i can bet you your asking for team red to be empty.

You go to war with what you have, not what you want.

Again its no really opinion its a fact. the Mirage 3 in terms of service date and performance, is really a 2nd generation Mig21 rival ( PF and PFM variants)

I'll admit, I'm not totally sure what you mean this....

Aircraft are not created or built by specific generations. It is a post-hoc assessment made by a human and therefore an opinion. It can be stated as though it is a fact, but its not. You can present facts, figures, introduction dates, but the classification is a human judgement - an opinion.

Plus....you are :poster_offtopic:

:)

-Nick

Correct, which is why the USAF and USN DACT focused on facing the MiG-21 as their primary rival until the early 1980s when they began incorporating tactics to counter the MiG-23 and BVR capable opponents. The arrival of the F-16N for the USN and use of F-15s and F-16s as USAF aggressors signaled the need to simulate the MiG-29 and Su-27 in the late-80s.

 

The F-15 should be carrying AIM-9Ls and AIM-7Fs (and probably be a F-15A), but they are counterparts when appropriately equipped.

 

 

 

Also, because the MiG-19 didn't enter combat in Vietnam until 1969 and the F-100 had been phased out of front-line units well before that time. The ANG continued combat ops till around 1969 before the Hun exited the theater entirely. Part of the issue was that US forces did not regard the F-100 as a frontline fighter at that point, while newly acquired MiG-19s were placed onto the frontline to reinforce the MiG-21s. The MiG-19 had a few ACM advantages over the MiG-21 with its three 30 mm cannons and much better rearward visibility. The MiG-19 and MiG-21 overlapped quite a bit and served as contemporaries during the 1960s. The MiG-21 was produced in far larger numbers and was generally more capable as an interceptor, but the MiG-19 had redeeming qualities as well.

 

 

 

You go to war with what you have, not what you want.

 

 

 

I'll admit, I'm not totally sure what you mean this....

 

Aircraft are not created or built by specific generations. It is a post-hoc assessment made by a human and therefore an opinion. It can be stated as though it is a fact, but its not. You can present facts, figures, introduction dates, but the classification is a human judgement - an opinion.

 

Plus....you are :poster_offtopic:

 

:)

 

-Nick

says the guy responding. sorry but these things need to be clarified and is relevant to the discussion.

Then again this ultimatley a Simulator but a virtual game notheless. Real life isnt fun. Multiplayer servers for competitiveness ideal should have aircraft that are actual counterparts, not merely agaisnt what they the faced IRL, but more focused on performance towards a comparable counterparts. Again a An F15C is vastly superior to the Mig21BIs, No one would want to play in MP because its very one sided affair.

Hence in reality the Su27 is again the closest Eastern counterpart to the F15 irregardless if they never faced each other In real life.

the viggen never faced off against anything IRL, that doesnt mean its irrelevant in DCS. Again similarly an F100 isnt irrelevant jusut because it dint face against a Mig19 ( or get any official acknowledged a2a kills) doesn't mean it shouldn't in a simulator. The F100 however would have still have been a Frontline fighter from 1956- 1962, which is still very much height of the cold war (* hence what if Fulda gap) And no technically the F100D wasnt pulled fully from active duty until about 1972. It still served in ANG till about 1979.

That said while they are cold war severs they merely pit to gether any legacy aircraft, there is no specifc cold scenario that is attempting to be represented. Theres a reason F5E was added ( cloes enough to a Mig21 rival in both era and Performance)

 

I'll admit, I'm not totally sure what you mean this....

 

Aircraft are not created or built by specific generations. It is a post-hoc assessment made by a human and therefore an opinion. It can be stated as though it is a fact, but its not. You can present facts, figures, introduction dates, but the classification is a human judgement - an opinion.

 

Plus....you are :poster_offtopic:

 

:)

 

Its not just an opinion, because these 2 aircraft existed in similar time periods./ Look at the statsheets,and manuals and you can see these are very much comparable counterparts, in terms of performance and YEars of introduction. If cold war had gone hot over Europe in the 60's , these very much would have faced Nato ( thus including French piloted Mirage 3's)

its much closer comparison than the older Mig19. design. It is certianly less judgmental than you saying only aircrarft that faced each other matter.

If you like at their vital statistics, the MiG-19 and Mirage III are every bit as close in performance as the F-5E and MiG-21. So the MiG-19 and Mirage III should be fun to face off.

I don't think you can define fun with the numbers, but the numbers look good as well. What are your specific objections?

What feature or performance aspect is so superior for the Mirage III or inferior for the MiG-19?

The Mirage III will also bleed a lot more energy than the MiG-19 in turns given the Mirage's delta and lack of relaxed static stability.

-Nick

@Prowler111 i have understanding;) thanks for answering

If you like at their vital statistics, the MiG-19 and Mirage III are every bit as close in performance as the F-5E and MiG-21. So the MiG-19 and Mirage III should be fun to face off.

 

I don't think you can define fun with the numbers, but the numbers look good as well. What are your specific objections?

 

What feature or performance aspect is so superior for the Mirage III or inferior for the MiG-19?

 

The Mirage III will also bleed a lot more energy than the MiG-19 in turns given the Mirage's delta and lack of relaxed static stability.

 

-Nick

itsn ot that i dont like the MIg19, but its just not really a Mirage 3 countpart. Its much earlier design. ITs top speed is lower. ( its only mach 1.4 aircraft)

the Mirage 3 not only has a better radar, but Its single engine has a more powerful thrust and a higher top speed. So itl accelerate faster, and climb faster, and is able to reach mach 2.0 hence why Mig21PF is the true Mirage 3 counterpart. again Most Mig19s were gunfighters, save for some models that were R3 capable or had the Rp1/5 radar for intercept ( which agiain has only about 10km range. RP21 SaPhir of the Mig21PF is a closer to the Cyrano radar.

Again its not that a Mig19 wont be able to score any M3 kills. but it certainly see it as a underdog to M3. But il meet you halfway and can very much agree the M3 is still a better suited opponent, than the F5E, which would even further the performance gap. ( primarily due to avionics)

.

and the PF would again also likely get access to not just R3's but also get R3R SARH missiles or even R13s

In 1962, Egyptian MiG-19s saw some action in the ground-attack role during the civil war in Yemen during the early 1960s. The first reported air combat in the Mideast with the MiG-19 was on 29 November 1966, when two Egyptian MiG-19 fighters battled Israeli Mirage IIICs. The Israelis claimed two kills and no losses. Around 80 MiG-19s were in service with Egypt during the Six-Day War in 1967, but more than half were destroyed on the ground during the opening Israeli airstrikes of Operation Focus. Israeli pilots, however, did find the MiG-19 a potentially dangerous adversary because of its performance, maneuverability, and heavy armament.

Following the war, the Egyptians organized the surviving MiG-19 aircraft and assigned them air defense tasks of Egypt's interior. The Soviet Union did not supply Egypt with any replacement of the MiG-19s destroyed in the Six Day War, but Egypt might have received some from Syria and Iraq, so that by the end of 1968 there were 80+ MiG-19s in service with the Egyptian Air Force (EAF). The aircraft also saw combat during the War of Attrition; in one engagement on 19 May 1969, a MiG-19 aircraft engaged two Israeli Mirages, shooting down one with cannon fire while the other escaped.[22] Egypt had around 60 Mig-19s in service during the Yom Kippur War of 1973 in which they served as close air support aircraft.

The Iraqis obtained some MiG-19S fighters in the early 1960s, but later sold them all off (a couple remaining in local museums), though the survivors did see some action against the Kurds in the 1960s. It is claimed that the Iranians acquired a batch of their own F-6s.

Source Wikipedia

I wholly approve of the Mig 19.

As for scenario's, i feel it should do rather well in the Mig-21/F-5 server when its teamed up with the fishbed.

Sure the Farmer has less advanced avionics and kit, but from what i understood, it was real mean when you were turning and burning. So i'd presume that a 19/21 team could throw a mean 1-2 punch on the F-5's.

Great post Prowler111. I think that the MiG-19 will be a great complement to the Mirage-IIIC and DCS world in general. It has been around in many different conflicts and airforces.

To the ones that are comparing Mig-19 to current and coming modules:

Many of us thought that the F-5E would be a superior fighter against the MiG21bis in DCS (better guns/sight, great visibility, agility, modern RWR). My point is, when you go old school,

pilot skill matters more. Radar is nearly useless, and it all depends on who sees who first and how good your tactics are. In DCS I would put the MiG-19 in the same league as the MiG21bis or F-5E.

Yes it's older, weaker and lacks countermeasures. But I have no doubt that it will be a good dogfighter.

And besides that, It's not all about multiplayer score. It's about enjoying an aircraft. Another "russian" jet will be welcomed.

In 1962, Egyptian MiG-19s saw some action in the ground-attack role during the civil war in Yemen during the early 1960s. The first reported air combat in the Mideast with the MiG-19 was on 29 November 1966, when two Egyptian MiG-19 fighters battled Israeli Mirage IIICs. The Israelis claimed two kills and no losses. Around 80 MiG-19s were in service with Egypt during the Six-Day War in 1967, but more than half were destroyed on the ground during the opening Israeli airstrikes of Operation Focus. Israeli pilots, however, did find the MiG-19 a potentially dangerous adversary because of its performance, maneuverability, and heavy armament.

Following the war, the Egyptians organized the surviving MiG-19 aircraft and assigned them air defense tasks of Egypt's interior. The Soviet Union did not supply Egypt with any replacement of the MiG-19s destroyed in the Six Day War, but Egypt might have received some from Syria and Iraq, so that by the end of 1968 there were 80+ MiG-19s in service with the Egyptian Air Force (EAF). The aircraft also saw combat during the War of Attrition; in one engagement on 19 May 1969, a MiG-19 aircraft engaged two Israeli Mirages, shooting down one with cannon fire while the other escaped.[22] Egypt had around 60 Mig-19s in service during the Yom Kippur War of 1973 in which they served as close air support aircraft.

The Iraqis obtained some MiG-19S fighters in the early 1960s, but later sold them all off (a couple remaining in local museums), though the survivors did see some action against the Kurds in the 1960s. It is claimed that the Iranians acquired a batch of their own F-6s.

 

 

Source Wikipedia

I dont think anyone here is debating that the mig19 didnt see service or that its somehow a historically irrelevant bird, but thanks for posting anyhow to educate those who may not have any idea on the Mig19.

Great post Prowler111. I think that the MiG-19 will be a great complement to the Mirage-IIIC and DCS world in general. It has been around in many different conflicts and airforces.

 

To the ones that are comparing Mig-19 to current and coming modules:

 

Many of us thought that the F-5E would be a superior fighter against the MiG21bis in DCS (better guns/sight, great visibility, agility, modern RWR). My point is, when you go old school,

pilot skill matters more. Radar is nearly useless, and it all depends on who sees who first and how good your tactics are. In DCS I would put the MiG-19 in the same league as the MiG21bis or F-5E.

 

Yes it's older, weaker and lacks countermeasures. But I have no doubt that it will be a good dogfighter.

And besides that, It's not all about multiplayer score. It's about enjoying an aircraft. Another "russian" jet will be welcomed.

Kind of but not really. I never thought it was going to be superior enough to to have a clear edge, however even with the Mig21 vs F5, pilot skill is not at its full play because both still get acess to modernish missiles ( R60M and Aim9P5 respectively) one of which is a limited all aspect seeker, and the other a fully aspect Ir missile. the P may have older design, but it still used a Aim9L seeker. I think when the missiles will be limited to aim9b/R3S and pilot have to rely even more on guns, we will see the Pilot "skill" aspect truly at play. Either way these aircraft are great opponents because they both offer somethting different. F5E has the better radar, and a better RWR, while Mig21 still offers more Missiles, per airframe, and a better P/W ratio.

M3 vs Mig19 will still be a different story because neither have RWR, and will only get rear aspect missiles, so with only a par of unreliable and unmanveruable missiles there should be a greater degree of more old school dog fighting and guns usage.

personally i hope that if in servers Mig19 & MIII gets thrown in with the 21s along witf F5's, that a mission user Disables the R60s and Aimp95s. so the 21 and F5s will actually have to work for a kill, and to lessen the disparity of technology.

That can be limited by the server. MiG-19 and MiG-21bis armed with R-3S vs F-5E with rear aspect Aim-9P will be a very good matchup I think.

That can be limited by the server. MiG-19 and MiG-21bis armed with R-3S vs F-5E with rear aspect Aim-9P will be a very good matchup I think.

Or rather R3S & Gar8 (aka Aim9B)

Aim9 P vanilla may be rear aspect but TBH its much more effective than the R3S. IMO the R13M would probably closer the the vanilla P.

IRL maybe. DCS is different. In DCS R-3S outperforms GAR-8 by a lot.

IRL maybe. DCS is different. In DCS R-3S outperforms GAR-8 by a lot.

and yet the even in my expereince game the Aim9P still is better than the R3. So hence in such a in such a server I think the Mig21 ought to get its R13's since it seems the Mig19 only ever used the R3.

I see your point. But we are straying a bit off topic I think.

My point is, if the MiG19 is armed with R-3S and are facing

other fighters with rear-aspect missiles, it will be competitive.

I don't know if the 19P can carry beam-rider missiles, but that would also be a lot of fun to try :)

itsn ot that i dont like the MIg19, but its just not really a Mirage 3 countpart. ITs top speed is lower. ( its only mach 1.4 aircraft)

A counterpart doesn't need to be a perfect performance match, it is an aircraft that served around the same time in a similar role, but a different air force. It is simply another aircraft that could have been met in A-A combat. It need not be a foreign derived carbon copy or near perfect performance match.

Its single engine has a more powerful thrust and a higher top speed. So itl accelerate faster, and climb faster, and is able to reach mach 2.0 hence why Mig21PF is the true Mirage 3 counterpart. again Most Mig19s were gunfighters, save for some models that were R3 capable or had the Rp1/5 radar for intercept ( which agiain has only about 10km range. RP21 SaPhir of the Mig21PF is a closer to the Cyrano radar.

Actually the MiG-19 has more power and is quite a bit lighter.

MiG-19 combined thrust: 14,320 lbs thrust static

MiG-19 weight: 11,500-12,000 empty, 16,000 lbs gross

Mirage III thrust: 13,700 thrust static

Mirage III weight: 15,543 lbs, 21,000 gross

With the high induced drag of the delta, you may see inferior STR for the Mirage (I'm not sure) and the unloaded acceleration would likely favor the MiG-19. Plus, the MiG can probably regain energy better after a turn or climb with its superior T/W ratio.

Also, the Cyrano radar may be better, but neither radar is very effective except during truly optimal conditions. It's nice having the better radar, but I doubt that it would completely transform the situation. But that is just my opinion.

.

and the PF would again also likely get access to not just R3's but also get R3R SARH missiles or even R13s

In both cases, cannon is really a primary armament and the existing missiles aren't great. The Mirage III gets either AIM-9Bs or the first iteration of the Magic 550. Neither were very effective or reliable. The MiG-19 will have R-3S', very similar to the AIM-9B (some say a true copy). Both A/C have 30 mm cannons, but the MiG carries 3 to the Mirage's 2. The MiG also has better rearward visibility, but the gunsight for the Mirage is likely more advanced (just a guess).

Overall, there is plenty of give and take. Neither A/C has a clear advantage in every aspect - which sounds like a reasonable match.

Anyway, we can likely go on for a while, but it probably won't change much. Prowler seems to also think that the MiG-19 and Mirage III are reasonable counterparts. I don't think you will convince them to change their plans and develop a F-100 for the MiG-19. :P

Best,

Nick

I see your point. But we are straying a bit off topic I think.

My point is, if the MiG19 is armed with R-3S and are facing

other fighters with rear-aspect missiles, it will be competitive.

I don't know if the 19P can carry beam-rider missiles, but that would also be a lot of fun to try :)

true enough it may be alright.

As for beam riders like the K5 im not quite sure. It says they they were compatible with the RP2 radar, and only on the Mig17PM and Mig19PM variants.

Though i dont think we want the PM, the Mig19PM is gunless :/

Though i dont think we want the PM, the Mig19PM is gunless :/

One of the reasons to go for the P.

It is a great choice in my opinion. More armament and a RP-1 radar, isn't it?

PM please, more capable and advanced!!

Nah, I prefer the guns. Give us the P please.

When it comes to variants according to wikipedia, P carries 2x23mm or 2x30mm, and S carried 3x30mm with 2 hardpoints? Both have radar, for gun ranging only or capable of detecting targets as well?

Is this correct or were there more relevant differences?