"M" *@*.* wrote in message
...
Tom Cooper
in the weeks after the BM was splashed the Iraqi, Libyan and
Syrian air forces have all cancelled their orders for MiG-25PDZ
and MiG-25RBV, instead going for Su-24MKs.
I find this a bit strange, perhaps you could elaborate a bit?
Su-24 and MiG-25 seem like very different type of aircraft to me.
25P-series being interceptors and 25RB-series being hihg-altitude
recce-bombers. Su-24, on the other hand, excels in the low-level
strike/bomber role (eg the M-series), also having tac recce and EW
versions.
No problem.
You need to see the situation from Arab standpoint. The matter was such that
already since mid-1970s Iraq and Libya were pushing Moscow to deliver a
bomber that could fly from Iraq (or Libya), bomb Israel, and continue
towards Libya (or Iraq), doing this at high speed and least possible danger
for itself. Theoretically, the idea was not bad, however: Israel is very
narrow on west-east axis, so a Tu-22B making a supersonic dash would give
the Israelis a very small chance of interception. The Soviets, however,
reacted by delivering Tu-22Bs, which were a nightmare to maintain and fly,
and armed only with "iron" bombs: IrAF and LARAF needed years to get them
into working condition, and never became capable to operate them completely
independent from Soviet help. So, although the type saw quite some use
against Iran and in Chad Arabs were soon demanding something else.
Eventually, the negative experiences with Tu-22Bs in war against Iran (at
least six were shot down by 1984), and the poor state of Soviet economy,
brought Moscow to the idea of supplying Su-24s instead. The first examples
of this version were shown to the Syrians already in 1986. The Syrians,
however, were more satisfied with MiG-25, then - compared to F-15s and
F-16s - it was offering at least the advantage of speed, aside the fact that
they already operated the type. The same was the case also with Libyan and
Iraqi air forces (and Algerians, which operate MiG-25s but also became the
fourth Su-24-customer). So, instead of developing a completely new variant
of Su-24, the idea was born to equip MiG-25s with IFR-probes and more
advanced weapons - some of which was already tested for the MiG-25BM
project. Given their increased endurance such Foxbats could bomb Israel (or
any other place) while operating at very high levels and speeds, and
dropping their weapons from outside the range of most of the Israeli air
defences.
However, in 1986 the first Soviet-flown MiG-25BM was shot down over Iran.
Several Foxbats were already shot down or damaged in 1981, 1982 and 1983,
but such cases were considered as "accidents" due to pure Iraqi and Soviet
arogance. Well, not only their: see in any book or article about Iranian
F-14s what is being said about their capability to utilize AIM-54s in
combat...
Then, in the following year additional similar cases followed, culminating
with the loss of another BM in November 1987, and at least four RBs in
winter and spring of 1988. Except for a single MiG-25RB shot down over
Esfahan by IRIAF MIM-23Bs (and this is the one mentioned in Gordon's book,
and also the example on which Venik is so much hanging - solely because this
was a widely publicised affair), all the others were shot down by
F-14/AIM-54 combo. Upon hearing about this, and concluding that MiG-25s were
previously also shot down by Israeli F-15s, the Arabs cancelled all the
orders for IFR-equipped MiG-25s, turning for Su-24 instead, and hoping that
something that could fly low and haul more ordnance over a longer range
would function better than Foxbats. In 1988 Moscow consequently ordered all
the further development work on MiG-25s to be cancelled, and the Su-24MK
became a reality.
In particular, I can't imagine that someone would purchase Su-24's for
the interceptor role, ie instead of MiG-25PDZ. But Tom seems to imply
this above, and this I find strange.
I think you might have misinterpreted me he it was certainly not my
intention to explain that the Su-24 would've replaced MiG-25 in interceptor
role. Of course, the MiG-25 and Su-24 are completely different. As you
observed, one is designed for high-speed/high level, other for low level
opertions. But, the intention was not to replace PD(e)/PDS' by Su-24. The
main point of the IFR-equipped Foxbat development was to get a strike
fighter with IFR-capability. PDZ was actually an idea that came out of
necessity to develop a BM that wouldn't have to haul the huge 5.000l drop
tank, but as such a PDZ was only used for testing. IFR-equipped RBs were the
major idea - not the other way around, as explained by Gordon. That was OK
with Arabs, however, then their main interest was to get an IFR-equipped
strike-variant. If the Soviets would've then also equipped Arab PD(e)/PDS'
with IFR-probes I don't know, but surely the Arabs could have found this a
"nice to have" idea.
Once the IFR-equipped Foxbats were cancelled the Su-24 was added as
fighter-bomber in IrAF, SyAAF, LARAF and QJJ, relegating local MiG-25RBs to
pure recce tasks. MiG-25PD(e)/PDS' remained main interceptors of all of
these air forces.
It seems that F-14 did influence the design of MiG-31 quite a bit,
and it'd be very interesting to hear comments on how the Soviet
experience with Iranian Tomcats affected the development of MiG-31.
That's what I'm trying to get in the moment. For the time being the sole
ex-Soviet Foxbat-pilot that was in Iraq in 1987 I've found so far, insists
that the BM in question was lost in an "accident". He wouldn't negate that
the MiG-25-development was subsequently cancelled, but also he woudn't
accept that either the BM downed in 1986 or the one shot down in 1987 was
hit by AIM-54s even after being confronted with materials from two
independent sources: just like most of the West (especially the USA), the
Soviets/Russians think the Iranian F-14s were "dead". From what I've heard,
however, the USAF was monitoring that deployment very carefully, and also
all the three missions flown by BMs against Mehrabad in November 1987. I've
found a USAFIA document confirming a loss of a BM (to IRIAF F-14s) over Iran
in Nov 1987, and indicating that there are sat photos of the wreckage. So, I
guess a FOIA inquiry or two more will be needed to get the final result. It
just takes awfull a lot of time to unearth all of this...
BTW, if some self-advertising is permitted: Venik said he read one of my
books (he wouldn't say which), and this was a "baloney". Here a review from
somebody who teaches War Studies on Royal Military College, in Canada:
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/engr...o3/book7_e.asp
--
Tom Cooper
Freelance Aviation Journalist & Historian
Vienna, Austria
*************************************************
Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585
African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/
Arab MiG-19 & MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...=S6550~ser=COM
*************************************************