The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! MIG-23 is a terrible fighter.in Airplanes

George_Horse

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-mig-23-russias-worst-fighter-jet-ever-21791 

The MIG-23 was shot down many times by Israeli F-16s and F-15s.  It is not a dogfighter, but a speeder.

"Fast forward to today, and opinions of the MiG-23 are all over the spectrum. Former 4477th Squadron test pilots were afraid the engines would blow up or the aircraft would kill them. "

passedbill

No, the airplane has a great reputation and is a great fighter. It has a lot of strength and is very fast.

Grenache

It's all relative.  What planes are you comparing it to, how are you using it, and how are all the planes in comparison being maintained?  The USA has many terrific aircraft but they need extensive upkeep.  A US design, if it is out of repair, may be far worse than a Russian design completely maintained.

averyapro

Yes, the Soviet MiG-23 is a horrible plane. Honestly, the only thing that it favors is its speed but it's not durable or useful at all honestly. To be honest, if an Isreali F-15 or F-16 could take this the MiG down it can't be that great. F-15's are probably one of the best fighter jets to this day and the MiG-23 just doesn't compare to the use of other fighter jets. 

MayCaesar

Yes, but that is expected from Soviet technology. Soviets practiced a different approach from Western military producers, cutting production costs and reducing technology complexity as much as possible - at the expense of quality and reliability. Soviets would rather produce 100 jets 20 of which fail and fall down in the very first combat, than 10 jets each of which will fly for decades and outdo any other currently existing jet by a large margin.

Soviet approach: "Produce as much as possible - if even a small fraction does not fail, then we are good to go". American approach: "Make every unit count, even if it comes out very expensive". Which approach is better? Depends on the circumstances. In 70-s, I would say both approaches were viable. Nowadays, given how fast technological evolution is occurring, the former approach is a suicide.

WordsMatter

@MayCaesar that's a great point and it comes out of the Soviet strategy in WWII. literally just keep throwing bodies at the enemy until you win. They used terrible equipment with poorly trained soldiers but sheer manpower won them the war. "British intelligence, American steel, Soviet blood" they just rolled the same strategy over into the cold war

AmericanFurryBoy

During its time it was amazing. Now? Not so much.

George_Horse

AmericanFurryBoy said:

During its time it was amazing. Now? Not so much.

It had a low kill ratio.