US Air-to-Air Missiles

Ivan the Colorado wrote:
The AIM-7M had a much better kill rate in GW1 because it was used to hit archaic 3rd or already outdated and very early 4th generation aircraft at best. The early R-27 was being utilized against super-maneuverable Su-27s and MiG-29s. Of course there is going to be a difference in how they perform against their targets.

BlackArrow wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:
The AIM-7M had a much better kill rate in GW1 because it was used to hit archaic 3rd or already outdated and very early 4th generation aircraft at best. The early R-27 was being utilized against super-maneuverable Su-27s and MiG-29s. Of course there is going to be a difference in how they perform against their targets.

Yes, but the AIM-7M still worked though didn't it?
Most of the aircraft that the Iraqi air force was using in Desert Storm were absolutely not archaic or outdated. MiG-23ML, MiG-29, MiG-25PD, Mirage F1IQ, Su-24, Su-25, all leading frontline types in the WArsaw Pact as well. Although, yes, they were equipped with inferior EW, ECM. That was Iraq's poor choice in choosing Soviet technology in the 1980s. Should have bought American?

BlackArrow wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:
The AIM-7M had a much better kill rate in GW1 because it was used to hit archaic 3rd or already outdated and very early 4th generation aircraft at best. The early R-27 was being utilized against super-maneuverable Su-27s and MiG-29s. Of course there is going to be a difference in how they perform against their targets.

Yes, but the AIM-7M still worked though didn't it?
Most of the aircraft that the Iraqi air force was using in Desert Storm were absolutely not archaic or outdated. MiG-23ML, MiG-29, MiG-25PD, Mirage F1IQ, Su-24, Su-25, all leading frontline types in the WArsaw Pact as well. Although, yes, they were equipped with inferior EW, ECM. That was Iraq's poor choice in choosing Soviet technology in the 1980s. Should have bought American?

Ivan the Colorado wrote:
They were archaic in the way that they were not upgraded and nearly all those aircraft were heavily downgraded monkey models. Aircraft must be upgraded thoughout their lifespan in order to have them win dogfights or aerial superiority. Iraq's aircraft were not upgraded to the point where they could have been a threat to any coalition aircraft. The American aircraft were very well equipped with the newest tech enabling them to achieve aerial superiority without a struggle.  Sorry about bursting your bubble.

" However, as other countries have proven (notably Germany with their MiG-29s), an up to date Soviet fighters with a well trained pilots pose quite a serious threat to USAF birds."

BlackArrow wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:
They were archaic in the way that they were not upgraded and nearly all those aircraft were heavily downgraded monkey models. Aircraft must be upgraded thoughout their lifespan in order to have them win dogfights or aerial superiority. Iraq's aircraft were not upgraded to the point where they could have been a threat to any coalition aircraft. The American aircraft were very well equipped with the newest tech enabling them to achieve aerial superiority without a struggle.  Sorry about bursting your bubble.

Most equipment exported by the Soviet Union in the 1980s was 'downgraded' - another way of saying it was crap. But like I said that was there own fault for not buying American.

" However, as other countries have proven (notably Germany with their MiG-29s), an up to date Soviet fighters with a well trained pilots pose quite a serious threat to USAF birds."

That didn't happen in real life though. How many MiG-29s were shot down by F-16s and F-15s in the last 20 years or so?

BlackArrow wrote:That didn't happen in real life though. How many MiG-29s were shot down by F-16s and F-15s in the last 20 years or so?

BlackArrow wrote:Most equipment exported by the Soviet Union in the 1980s was 'downgraded' - another way of saying it was crap. But like I said that was there own fault for not buying American.

U.S. Navy reveals longest-range air-to-air missile at RIMPAC

kvs wrote:The US does not have an equivalent or approximate version of the Mig-31.  

lancelot wrote:

kvs wrote:The US does not have an equivalent or approximate version of the Mig-31.  

They had the North American Rapier. But it got cancelled.

GarryB wrote:The usual... a record breaker, but not fit for purpose.
Maybe they could buy some F-14s back from Iran...

Mir wrote:This is obviously a response to the success of the R-37 in Ukraine. A quick response was the only NATzo SAM with a long reach - the navy's SM-6. Well the USN surely needs an interceptor with long range AAM's. Wonder if it's going to find it's way into the airforce?