Libyan MiGs




 
--
 
February 28th, 2011  
adriann
 

Topic: Libyan MiGs


I have heard that Libyan MiGs are tough opponents in a dogfight ??

http://books.google.com/books?prints...page&q&f=false
February 28th, 2011  
Seehund
 
Not if you try to go against two F-14
February 28th, 2011  
Yossarian
 
 
That infamous day included Mikoyan 23s (correction from Seehund)


Shame they fought the USN and wasted such wonderful aircraft however lol
--
March 1st, 2011  
Seehund
 
The first Gulf of Sidra incident, was on August 19, 1981, when two Libyan Su-22 Fitter attack aircraft were shot down by two American F-14 Tomcats off of the Libyan coast. The second Gulf of Sidra incident occurred on January 4, 1989 when two US F-14 Tomcats shot down two Libyan MiG-23 Flogger-Es

As far as I know, Libya has never been a SU-27 operator.
March 4th, 2011  
AVON
 

Topic: Re: Libyan MiGs


Quote:
Originally Posted by Seehund
The first Gulf of Sidra incident, was on August 19, 1981, when two Libyan Su-22 Fitter attack aircraft were shot down by two American F-14 Tomcats off of the Libyan coast.
In this encounter one of the Su-22M-2K Fitters fired first! Most likely an Atoll missile in a head-on approach, there is no way that missile could have hit the F-14s. After the attack the Su-22s split up and in opposite directions and headed south. Neither Fitter tried to really evade the Tomcats and were easily shot down rather easily with Sidewinder-9Ls..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seehund
As far as I know, Libya has never been a SU-27 operator
Correct... even if the LARAF had Su-27s, without competent pilots the Sukhois do not provide an increase in capability for the LARAF.

After the last incident in January of 1989 between the F-14A and Libyan Arab Republic Air Force (LARAF) MiG-23s, about a week later in an interview with Aviation Week and Space Technology (AW&ST), a Tomcat pilot stated that as Navy pilots approach Libyan aircraft, they can tell by how well the approaching jet operates and the skill of the pilot whether the pilot was trained by French instructors or by instructors from the (former) Soviet block country! French trained pilots are more difficult to intercept and display a far finer capability to maneuver their jet.

There is a lot of debate about the incident between the MiG-23MF Floggers and the F-14A Tomcats. The MiG-23MFs were among nineteen flights of many types of aircraft from Libya that approached the US fleet that day! This flight of MiG-23s were neither the first nor the last flights that day. They were the only ones which violated the USN's ROEs. I have since read, due to increase in tensions between the USA and Libya the US forces changed the rules of engagement! The LARAF had no knowledge of the change in ROEs so their pilots did not know the actions they took were considered hostile.... at least until they got within twenty-miles of each other!
The MiG-23s got radar lock-ons five times on the F-14s. The two MiGs did not seemed to know the F-14 leader had maintained a radar lock on the MiG leader? That the F-14 leader fired two Sparrow Missiles (which failed to guide) at the MiG-23 leader? (Now, The MiG-23s were directly ahead of the F-14s and were several thousand feet higher in altitude than the F-14s.) When the Tomcat wing-man turned initiating a defensive split and the MiG-23 leader dove down on him hitting almost 1,000-mph, was that not hostile? The F-14 wing-man maneuvered and the MiG leader was not able to use his weapons, if indeed that was his intent. The MiG wing-man stayed high and did not charge down after the Tomcat wing-man of who he could see. One Sparrow-7M was fired by the F-14 wing-man against the MiG wing-man in a head-on shot from four miles away.... for the first kill. The F-14 leader now was catching up to the MiG leader who had turned south. The F-14 wing-man did a climbing turn to cover his leader. The lead F-14 fired (the leader's third missile), a Sidewinder-9M missiles from the rear quarter to shoot down the MiG-23 leader.

After this incident the militaries of both countries agreed to notify the other country in the future of any change of ROEs!
March 6th, 2011  
LeMask
 
Can someone explain how the French trained pilots are so superior to their Soviet trained counterparts?

Is it a difference in the theories behind the training? Or are the French instructor so rare that they only send their best pilots to receive this training? Both?

And once a pilot is trained by a French instructor, he can also share his knowledge and even train his fellow pilots himself, not? They had time for that by the way.

What do you think?
March 16th, 2011  
AVON
 

Topic: Re: Libyan MiGs


Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMask
Can someone explain how the French trained pilots are so superior to their Soviet trained counterparts?
In many countries which purchased Soviet made equipment, found the Soviet Union did not have good training programs. The statement I made in a previous posting about the Soviet trained pilots not performing well, I first heard about from one of the two F-14 pilots after the 1981 F-14/Su-22 incident. (Do you remember, after that incident the aircrews were flown back to the USA within a day and did press conferences? The first one was televised and I watched it, on the program "Nightline!") After the press conference in January 1989 incident -of which I also watched, AW&ST had a news brief with an interview with a Navy pilot, from another squadron on that carrier who expressed the same views. He was the one who stated more specifically the quality differences between Libyan pilots... their basic flying skills and more difficult to intercept.
The French instructors teach their student pilots to fly combat and meet NATO minimum standards for NATO pilots. Money is provided by the particular air force for a good program and, the program keeps the pilots at peak proficiency.
Also look at the results of pilots who use Soviet equipt, other than India which used a training regiment similar to the USAF's, what country that used the Soviet requirements that did well in combat? Libya, Syria, Egypt, etc., the pilots were not combat effective mainly due to their training. They did not get much air time 50-hr/yr.
Search to find out what happened when the East German AF merged with the Luftwaffe, about a third of the pilots did not make it through the evaluation on minimum pilot proficiency for NATO pilots to remain in the AF. About 20% could not adjust to the NATO culture of combat, to act independently and not depend on GCI for everything. Less than three dozen East German pilots made the successful transition to the Luftwaffe.
Egyptian pilots complained bitterly about the training they received in the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, they were treated as though they were in basic flying school and, no lessons on tactics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMask
Is it a difference in the theories behind the training? Or are the French instructor so rare that they only send their best pilots to receive this training? Both?
Yes, there were different theories on what was required in successful aerial combat. The Soviet pilots mainly trained for high altitude intercepts as did the USAF/USN before TOP GUN.
Capt. Steve Ritchie the only USAF 'pilot' ace during the Viet Nam War said in an interview, before he went to Viet Nam on his first tour, he had flown the F-4 Phantom for two years. After his second tour, he came home as an ace... he started hearing about maneuvers the pilots of 'old' used. He started reading about rolling scissors, barrel roll attacks, the high yo-yo, etc. and he stated that not only did he not know what these maneuvers were but, he had never heard the terms previously! Red Flag provided him with his first DACT training!! He had become an ace using just his instincts.
Investigate the Israeli AF dogfight against the Egyptian MiG-21's on 07/30/70, five Soviet pilots were shot down that afternoon! Read the opinions of the Israeli pilots about the five Russian 'instructor' pilots experience level. There are many 'hits' on this topic. One source is located at URL;
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_262.shtml

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMask
And once a pilot is trained by a French instructor, he can also share his knowledge and even train his fellow pilots himself, not? They had time for that by the way.
Evidently, they operated and were treated as separate communities and, are not integrated even for training purposes. You have to remember that, other than Israel, few of the Arab countries wanted a highly efficient air force! Many coups started with the incumbent leader having his palace bombed by the air force of his country, the air force generals were with the challenger for the leadership of the country. So, having an air force that looked good on paper or parades was all that was really desired.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeMask
What do you think?
How many things done by other militaries, countries or, cultures don't make sense to us Americans? Reality doesn't have to make sense to us!
March 16th, 2011  
LeMask
 
Thanks AVON, that was a good read.

And you are right about the Arab leaders not wanting a skilled air force or at least I agree with you.

But I'm a bit surprised to see that a huge power like Russia/ex-USSR couldnt build a strong reputation in training military forces in the countries working with them.

It would explain the major military failures they had in some theaters... But... damn... They were huge...
March 16th, 2011  
Prapor
 
 
A. There is 'Libyan MiGs'. MiG (Mikoyan i Gurevich) is Russian plane. Libya or China or wherever else use them buy them from us.

B. Libyan pilots would not last 5 minutes against NATO pilots. That is a fact. Here in Russia we have long learned to sell only crap to Arabs, selling them good technology is a waste. All those tanks and planes USSR sold to the Egyptians, Israel destroyed them all in a few hours. In the 6 Day War, Egyptian pilots catapulted from their planes when they saw Israeli planes. And look at Iraq, their air forces destroyed on the ground; all the planes, tanks, etc, all burnt in minutes... Arabs seem to only perform well in terrorist-style warfare, like Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. Good suicide bombers don't make good soldiers. Sorry, LeMask, if that is not politically correct enough for you. Just telling it as it is though.
March 16th, 2011  
LeMask
 
Hmmm, no, I'm fine. You didnt say that Arabs are an inferior people, you just critized their military forces. It's alright in my books.

Men of quality wouldnt sell their skills to scum bags like Saddam...
 


Similar Topics
Libyan ship carrying aid for Gaza heads for Egypt (AP)
Dutch boy sole known survivor in Libyan jet crash (AP)
Libyan opposition groups call for united front to topple Ga
U.S. Lifts Restrictions on Libyan Envoys (AP)
Saudi Arabia Asks Libyan Ambassador to Leave (Reuters)