And one more info. During the Libyan conflict, not a single Libyan Mig-25 take to the air to confront the US figters. Instead the US only face the Flogger, SU-22 and MIG-21. Somehow the Libyans hide their Foxbat because none was reported being destroyed either in the air or in the ground.
Iraq has MiG 25-PUs???
- Thread starter Frozen Hell
- Start date
Awang-se these are the coalition stats I have
Mig25PD, F/A 18C USN, 29nm SE Bagdhad
All other losses are attributed to various types of SAMs or AAA
US Casualties:
148 Killed
458 Wounded
207 Killed in friendly fire or accidents
Tank Lost: 4(all to friendly fire)
Artillery Lost: 1
Armored Personal Carriers Lost: 9
Helicopters Lost: 17
Aircraft Lost: 44(23 US)
Aircraft Lost in the Air: 1
Iraqi Casualties:
Soldiers Killed: 20,000-30,000
Prisoners of war handed over to Saudi control, 72,000
Tanks Lost: 3,847
Artillery Lost: 2,917
Armored Personal Carriers Lost: 1,450
Helicopters Lost: 7
Aircraft Lost on the Ground: 141
Aircraft Lost in the Air: 43
Mig25PD, F/A 18C USN, 29nm SE Bagdhad
All other losses are attributed to various types of SAMs or AAA
US Casualties:
148 Killed
458 Wounded
207 Killed in friendly fire or accidents
Tank Lost: 4(all to friendly fire)
Artillery Lost: 1
Armored Personal Carriers Lost: 9
Helicopters Lost: 17
Aircraft Lost: 44(23 US)
Aircraft Lost in the Air: 1
Iraqi Casualties:
Soldiers Killed: 20,000-30,000
Prisoners of war handed over to Saudi control, 72,000
Tanks Lost: 3,847
Artillery Lost: 2,917
Armored Personal Carriers Lost: 1,450
Helicopters Lost: 7
Aircraft Lost on the Ground: 141
Aircraft Lost in the Air: 43
I can tell you exactly where the coalition aircraft losses were, but it would be too big for this forum.Awang se said:
But, if you look at the statistics is says a few things:
The US had total air dominance, and that implies that they had a top down view of the battlefield. (eg AWACs)
The tank losses are harder to isolate, but a ratio of 3847 to 4 also shows complete domination of the battlefield. Airpower was responsible for the majority of kills
The lessons out of the Gulf War are the absolute domination of air power in destroying a phyiscally huge army that lacked technical substance.
It is a bit more complex than that but it would be a bit large to respond to inside this thread..
Its the fact that the americans have developed and refined the concept of "jointness"Awang se said:
At a purely tactical level they have:
- absolute air supremacy
- absolute command of the sea, they are literally the only "Blue Water" navy left in the world (using the Mahanian definition)
- absolute domination of land using superior equipment and tactics
- they fought at a time of their choosing
- proper integration of combined arms across all of the military services
- the domination of C4i
- use of precision guided weapons, some of which were controlled from space
- political will and intent - ie the support and committment of the government
- appropriate use of special forces at the opening stages
- concurrent striking of all the critical points of military influence
- better training of the officer cadre
- better baseline training of the regular soldiers
- a capacity for troops to call in air support and have it in place when and where required
- approp use and flexibility of doctrine for UAV's
as a military force, Saddam believed that numbers and mass would place the battlefield to his advantage. That was a concept that was first challenged at the armoured level by the Israelis in the 6 day war.
-
It's not new. We see throughout history how the quality of the troops was able to compensate for the numerical inferiority. take the romans vs barbarians.
If that MIG-25 have better weapons, they might have give an allied troops something to worry about. There is also a rumour that the migs can easily evade the AMRAAM.
If that MIG-25 have better weapons, they might have give an allied troops something to worry about. There is also a rumour that the migs can easily evade the AMRAAM.
The first real example of combined arms, the management of split armies etc was done by Ghengis. I should have clarified the American example is one relevant to the integration of current technology. (land, sea, air, C4i, EW, Space)Awang se said:
I'm not sure if the 25 could evade an AMRAAM if you look at its current ECM/Technology suite.
In the past the 25 was flying too fast and too high for EAD to perform a lock and an intercept. I don't think that capability could guarantee it against this generation of missiles.
The 25 was designed to intercept the A12, SR21 etc... new missile technology makes that unnecessary and was one of the reasons why the SR71's were withdrawn from overflight uses.
The Foxbat(mig25) & Foxhound(mig31 can't manouver to save their butts.The max glimit of both models is +5,-2.Their only saving graces in areial combat are:1)high speed & avery high service ceiling(applies to both),2)the extreme range at which they can engage enemy fighters especially the Foxhound with it's AA-9 Amos missiles which have a range of about 100nm(almost the same as the Aim-54 Phoenix).In a dogfight with any half decent modern fighter they would appear the second best which is not good.(supposing they get into a dogfight at all)
umair, in modern air warfare the Mig25 is not a good aircraft to be in. all it has is speed and altitude. Current long range AAM's reduce its chances of surviving combat. The very reason that saw the SR71 removed (ie the threat risk) are the same for the Mig25.
The Americans knew all of its capabilities after Victor Belenko flew one to Japan in 1976. So it has never been an air threat since then. I suspect that is why Gadaffi never sent them up to engage the Tomcats as he knew that the survival chances were low.
The Americans knew all of its capabilities after Victor Belenko flew one to Japan in 1976. So it has never been an air threat since then. I suspect that is why Gadaffi never sent them up to engage the Tomcats as he knew that the survival chances were low.
Gadaffi's Foxbats actually were sent up. I have apicture of one shot(the pictureI mean) by a Tomcat(the pic is in the book "The Encyclopedia Of Modern Warplanes" by Bill Gunston 1995 edition)Too bad that my scanner just flipped over & went to hardware heaven a few days ago,otherwise I would have scanned & posted the picture here.The mig's reg#is/was:7003.Maybe one of u guys could have it verified. :help
No mate, I was confirming what you said!umair said:
I think the only long range AAM that can achieve first shoot in confronting the Foxhound is the AIM-54. Even the AMRAAM can't reach that far. The only drawback is guiding the Amos require the launch aircraft to maintain it's radar track of the target, which risking it to lose the range advantage. currently the russians are working on the Foxhound MRCA version. It will integrate the russian and the western equipment. obviously it is for export.