foxbat155

Iraqi aircrafts had standard Soviet ASO-2 dispensers in 4x32 configuration. Soviet aircrafts had two systems: PKWP-23 with 12 PPI-50 (flare) or PPR-50 (chaff) cartridges. PPI/PPR-50 cartridges belongs to KDS-23 CM system created on the beginning for MiG-27 and Su-24, later used on Su-17, Su-27 end others aircrafts. Diameter 50 mm, weight about 850 gramms. Here photo: PKWP is combined dispenser and wet pylon for central fuselage fuel tank. Second is well known KDS-155 ( because created in first place for MiG-25 ), sometimes caled WP-50-60 ( or wrongly BWP-50-60 ). Two dispensers for 30 cartridges each. UB's during Afghan war:

Well, Iraqi aircrafts were proper MLA's ( N003E radar ), SPO and ASO addition not make them MLD-ish ( I'm sure that whole modernization was with Soviet support ), Iraqis modernized in simmilar way Su-22M's ( Iraq-Iran war needed this ), later those improvement were "moved" to Syria's and Vietnam's Sukhoi's. All those changes only seems to be simmilar because in general MLA and MLD share about 85-90 % of the same stuff. Differences are only in weapon system ( new N008 radar, which is not completely new but modified N003 ) and aerodynamical changes ( wing 33 deg position instead 45 deg ) and those big KDS dispensers. If you wanna be hard simmer, for Iraqi skin you will fly with SPO and ASO, for all rest without that stuff. In my opinion MLA with extra stuff will suit for Gulf Map very well, for others map we should get MLD ( which is my big dream ).:joystick: Yes Ub's saw combat in Afghan war, for FAC duties mostly and some AAA suppression.

MiG-23ML "23-19" never was exported, because she existed only as sole prototype ( today she rots in Monino museum ). All export MLD variants were "23-22", for Bulgaria "23-22A" subvariant, for others countries "23-22B" ( Syria, Libya ). All "23-22" aircrafts wasn't upgraded MLA's, they were new machines built from scratch as export MLD. Only MLA's upgraded with new SPO and ASO during service are iraqi machines. Check post 39 in this thread. Something like MiG-23UM never existed, Soviets only modernized over 270 own aircraft in begining of 80's. Aircrafts got new transponder, IFF system, few small changes in SAU system, small changes in weapon system ( ability to use B-8 launchers and R-60 ). In all documents modernized aircrafts were still called MiG-23UB. Modernized UB's are easy recognizable, all four external differences on one photo: About 10-15 aircrafts which saw service in Afghan war got KDS dispensers. Few photos exists:

Maybe only because nobody tried.:music_whistling::thumbup:

Difference was huge, MS had R-27F2M-300 with trust dry/afetrburner 6900/10000 kg and only R-3S and R-13M ( even without R-3R ), MLA was over 1000 kg lighter and had R-35-300 with trust 8400/12750 kg and whole arsenal of missiles ( R-3S, R-13M, R-13M1, R-60, R-60M, R-23T/R, R-24T/R/MT/MR ), and totally ahead with weapon system, only navigation system was simmilar.

Actualy MLA was fifth most powerfull Flogger, after domestic MLD and P, and after export MLD clones MLAE and MLAE2. Writing about F-4 I mean general capabilities not only radar.

No not 50%, except few changes in radar ( I wrote about this in one of previous posts ), only RWR, CW dispensers and new wing position 33 deg instead 45 deg. all rest it's identical. If you don't believe me, you can prepare your self equipment list ( there is a lot literature about Floggers, I'm talking about russian literature ) and compare. No black magic here, just a bit of reading, i'm talking of course about domestic models, not export ones. So, if guys planning anyway SPO i some CW, only few small things left and we have MLD. We will get most powerfull F-4 variant, why not most powerfull Flogger?, especially if differences are not big. One more important thing, MLD is much more realistic, few hundred of them flew around, modernized MLA's only several in Iraq and some simillar in Syria. In my opinion they have 85-90 % of needed documentation, just we have to find rest.

As far i know existed two main variants: domestic ( for Soviet AF) N003 and export N003E. Both variants had subvariations, its absolutely normal, changes made on service experience basis ( some problematic stuff changed for new more realiable, added new features: mainly missiles , rockets capability ). Tuning problems are very common even today: two identical radars don't exist, this is very complicated electronics and parameters are never identical but only within some envelopes. One of Polish AF MiG-23MF had radar with typical search range 70 km, which was teoretically impossible for RP-23D-III...... . Export N003E is a different story, because radar/weapon system capabilities depends from export policy, which was different almost for every country. Even WP countries had individual contract conditions every time when they were buying something in Soviet Union. Great example is MiG-21MF for Polish AF, we bought three batches and every time was a lot of differencies in equipment, weaponry, electronics.

For MiG-23MLA exist only one option: S-23MLA, they didn't get MLA-2 because almost all were modernized to MLD standard. For export existed special variant called N-008E, libyan, bulgarian, syrian aircrafts had them. Generally is no big difference between MLA and MLA-2: - new "Close Combat" mode simillar for those from Fulcrum, - new "Gor" mode for searching and tracking low flying targets in mountains - part of radar's internal devices were digitalized, - part of already existed modes were organized in a bit different way, - more symbology on the HUD, commands from Lazur system were moved from separate device.

Please read one more time my post, this time slowly.

Overstratos if you want make variant with SPO-15 and flare dispenser i think is better to go in MLD direction. Weapon system and other equipment are in 90 % the same for both aircraft, so only small research is needed for rest of this stuff. Luckily for you 23 had simplified SPO-15, so amount of programing with this is not significant, dispensers are simple as well. If you don't like R-73 idea, it's no must because about half of MLD's were flying without them. Only problem I see is aerodynamics with 33 deg wing position and SOS system work, but I think that many people from russian side of this forum will help you. I can made a research in my stash as well.:smilewink::music_whistling:

Good that we will get new 3d model, she need to be perfect. I have idea, how to get something like "small MLD". During Iraq-Iran war in 80's, iraqis with soviets help did kind of MiG-23MLA modernization. They instaled on aircrafts ASO-2 chaff/flare dispensers and SPO-15LM RWR. Two important questions: -we will get functional ARL-SM? - only R-23 or R-24 as well ( some MLA's were able to carry R-24's )?

OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG :thumbup::thumbup: 3D model have few shape flaws, guys if you need help with this PM me. Absolutely great news.!!!

I never checked MiG's altimeter so deeply, because i'm using this module only occasionally due many discrepancies with reality. You will make new altimeter?, that great!. Maybe you are able do much more improvements, I promise I will find all needed papers for this work.

Generally those accuracy values are incorrect only a little. According manual WDI-30 have typical accuracy errors: Altitude 0 m - 600 m: -+20 m, Altitude 6600 m - 10000 m: -+ 130 m, Altitude 28000 m: -+600 m. And those are general errors values, because every WDI is calibrated individualy after instalment on the aircraft. Technicians are using 28 separate measurements for altitudes and IAS and then are calculated average correction values. When aircraft on the cruise altitude, 760 mm Hg ( 1013 hPa ) sholud be set, because this is standard pressure and WDI-30 is calibrated according that value.

Maybe exist explanation for those crude work. Probably you know that Soviet's aircrafts had a lot of "biuletins", kind of small modernizations and improvements during service life. In most cases all small mechanical improvements were done locally during overhals. Soviets was only sending documentation to users. Maybe this strange element is one of this situations, and depending on place and priorities those works were done better or worse. Regarding that restoration, this was MiG-17PF number red 22 with RP-1?. Regards.

No, wasn't "home made" because exist few photos from different aircrafts with this element ( different types MiG-15, MiG-17, Mig-19, from Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, USSR ). And finally you get my point: existed few variations and developers are able choose most practical version from DCS point of view.

Well, in my opinion those are two different tubes. Take closer look: Not only few inches, cumbersome tube was foldable. Here on the picture full length: According weaponry, I think that few things are missing: RBK-250 in service from 1950, 8 subvariants with different submunition, RBS-100 ( RBS stand from: disposable bomb bundle ), kind of early MER with 3x30 kg bomb, in use from 1954. .....and many more examples of early Soviet's bombs and clusters.

In order to evaluate how pilot is using gunsight for targeting, in combat situations those cameras will be removed in order to improve visibility. This was standard feature for almost all Soviets fighters and fighters-bombers.In almost every aircraft type exist this dualism, one small camera shooting through gunsight glass, and second bigger somewhere in aircraft's fuselage or wing, or in a small pod ( like in MiG-21 or Su-15 ). Radar had two kinds of screen's sleeve: short and long. Here on the picture with short variant on MiG-17PF.

Yep, AKS but..... another number :music_whistling:. AKS-3M or AKS-5 ( on picture ): Here: I'm sure that some gun was under pilot's jacket, but rather PPSh like AKS.:smilewink:

Cockpit looks great, I can't wait to fly this baby. Camera over gunsight is installed only for training purposes, for combat situations was used AKS mounted close to air intake. I'm sure that guys from Razbam know that, and this camera will be removable.

Here for sustained turns: Turn in meters, nz is g-load, letter like "y" is lateral inclination.

Thank you Overstratos for very kind word, but I think is many people on this forum with much bigger knowledge like my. Using AA missiles against ground targets generally is pointless because of very small warheads. So, yes in Warsaw Pact many airforces practicied kind of training in use these missiles against ground but only in one case: against aircraft on the ground with working engine/engines, because main weapon in these situation were IR missiles. During state trials RS-2US had experimental episode with shooting against ground targets but this was only episode, and later experience from these trials was use to create H-66 missile. According my present knowledge RP-2U didn't had "locked beam" mode so MiG-19PM wasn't able use RS-2US this way ( aircrafts for trials were modified not standard machines ), and these missiles can be fired against ground only as unguided rockets with proximity fuze. Later MiG-21 with RP-21 radar get "locked beam" mode but not for A-G work. Main reason was fight with heavy electronic countermeasures when radar wasn't able track targets automaticaly. Idea was very simple: pilot pointed whole aircraft against visualy visible target and he was able get distance readout. So, early 21's could use RS-2US against ground, but this is generally pointless, small warhead ( 13 kg, like ten S-5 rockets ), only proximity fuse, and another thing: most ( about 80 % ) of MiG-21PF's and PFM's wasn't able carry and fire these missiles, theirs main weapon was R-3S. Only later export M's and MF's were able use RS-2US and R-3R simultaneously, but had H-66 as well, so use RS-2US against ground was pointless. Summarizing, for me this story is more "urban legend" like real possibility.

You right, I've made mistake, I was writing KPP/AGD all the time and finally I mixed they functionality. Lately I'm flying a lot Mi-8 and there AGD have flag :music_whistling:, KPP have of course gyro malfunction lamp ( inside cage button ) and those flags are for RSBN.

Both instruments "KPP" and "NPP" have "K" and "T" blinkers/flags but for different purposes. NPP's "K&T" shows lack of external radio signals from PRMG, or RSBN's landing channels malfunction, KPP's "K&T" shows 458 gyro malfunction or signal lack when gyro not ready. Yep, you right KPP will drift. I've checked MiG-21UM avionics description, and KPP gyro needs correction from WK-53 mechanismus which is part of KSI. So without turned on KSI switch KPP although is able work separatelly will drift over time.