"rottenberg" wrote in message
om...
M *@*.* wrote in message
...
Nevertheless, I find Tom's comments on the Iran-Iraq war highly
interesting (I guess I should buy his book... .

Actually, I bought the book last Spring, and trying to wade through
it, I managed to get to the end of the war just last week (though I
guess that's a lot faster than it took to fight...still). If anybody
else on this thread has gotten II/AW:80-88, I was wondering how many
editions there were. Mine has almost no maps nor any index.

Sadly, Schiffer Publishing is not editing any manuscripts - as we've learned
only after the book was published, so the manuscript went in as it was.
Also, I don't know until today why the footnotes went missing or why was the
index not added: some readers haven't found this much of a problem, however,
because of a chronological organization of the book.

Subsequent books have rectified with most (if not all) of the problems - but
they were published by Osprey and SHI, respectivelly....

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.

You're probably correct. However, in the hopes of forestalling
unneccessary flaming, might I suggest that future posts linking
development of aircraft based on the experience of other aircraft
actually spell out what that influence is?

The sole problem in this case was: you can't talk that way with Venik,
because he ignores any other evidence but the one he likes. His sole source
for all this "well documented" matters he's talking about is Y. Gordon's
book "MiG-25 and MiG-31", published by Aerofax, and specifically the
following statements:

- (p.53)
"The Iraqi Air Force used its eight MiG-25RBs....One aircraft was shot
down by a Hawk missile, another was lost when an engine tossed a turbine
blade, forcing the pilot to eject. A newly refurbished aircraft crashed on
landing after a check flight in December 1987. No Iraqi MiG-25Ps were lost
in the Iran-Iraq war."

So much about "well documented facts" Venik was talking about. In fact,
something like two dozens of Foxbats were shot down or damaged during the
IPGW/Iran-Iraq War (number lost in accidents remains unknown): the first
already on 15 May 1981 (when an AIM-54A fired from a range of 108km damaged
a MiG-25RB), the last on 22 March 1988, when it was shot down by AIM-54 over
central western Iran. The losses included several MiG-25PD(e)s, including
one flown by the already mentioned top IrAF ace of that war, Lt.Col.
Mohammad "Sky Falcon" Rayyan, shot down by an F-5E in 1986. In interviews
with four former IrAF MiG-25-pilots and a Belgian merc who was permitted to
fly the type as well, I've found no confirmation for any incident in
December 1987, so it seems this was wrong info as well. The RB shot down by
MIM-23B HAWKs Gordon mentioned in his book, however, is a very well-known
case, which occurred on 14 January 1987, directly over the City of Esfahan
(see p.238 of IIWITA). It became as well-known (in the West) because the
pilot of that plane - 1st Lt. Saa'er Sobhi Ahmad-Ali - was subsequently
shown on Iranian TV, the Iranian regime praising an IRGCAF HQ-2 unit for
scoring the kill (HQ-2 is Chinese copy of SA-2; in fact, the kill was scored
by an IRIAF MIM-23B I-HAWK unit), and this was recorded in the book "The
Gulf War", by Edgar O'Ballance (which formed the basis for many subsequent
articles about that war, including "Kian Noush's" - published in AFM and
WAPJ in 1998 and 1999).

- (p.89)
"The appearance of the MiG-31s caused the USAF to curtail not only the
over flights of Soviet territory but flights over international waters near
Soviet borders."

Essentially, this is the only evidence Venik has about "USA changing
plans..." because of MiG-31's appearance. And, even this is wrong, then
Gordon was talking about deployment of six MiG-31s in the Far East, in
September 1983, in the days after the downing of KAL007. As such, however,
this statement stands no proof either, however, as in those days the USAF,
USN and JSDF/ADF planes were flying all the time over the Sakhalin area.
While a number of minor incidents of different kind occurred, the USAF never
stopped flying F-15 and E-3 sorties there.

Where did Venik find "evidence" for the SR-71 to have been retired because
of MiG-31 I don't know. I've never even heard about any; besides, the MiG-31
was in service already since 1981 or so, if my memory serves me well. I
actually have to wonder very much about this even being possible, given that
all the secrets of the MiG-31's Zaslon-system (and quite some other things)
were revealed to the CIA by an agent best known as "Donald" (arrested and
executed by the Soviets in 1986, if I recall this right), who used to work
in the institute from which later Vympel came into being.

Otoh, the primary roles of 31 and 14 are rather different, fleet
defence vs homeland air defence (against cruise missiles in
particular).

IMHO, it's the question of design. Grumman designed 303E to become an air
superiority fighter, armed with gun, four Sparrows and four Sidewinders and
capable of outmanoeuvring MiG-17 and MiG-21. When this capability was
reached (on the paper), they added the AWG-9 and AIM-54 (that's how paletts
came into existence). The F-14 became known as "fleet defender" (i.e.
interceptor) that was to defend USN carriers from Soviet bombers armed with
cruise missiles foremost for its role in the USN. It was very much, however,
designed to tackle enemy fighters, but also bombers, cruise missiles and
Foxbats (due to AIM-54). Interestingly, the Iranians first considered F-14 a
"flying radar..." - i.e. AWACS - "...with self-defence capability", later on
they found out it is a tremendous air superiority plane, i.e.
fighter-interceptor. For them, the F-14's capability to tackle MiG-25 (and
Soviet overflights) was a wellcome excuse for getting permission to buy
Tomcat; that's also why they were so sillent about the fact that one of
their F-4Es killed a Soviet MiG-25R (using AIM-7E-2) over the Caspian Sea
already in 1977.

The MiG-31, on the contrary, was always designed as pure interceptor, with
main role of defending northern USSR from B-1s and B-52s, as well as their
cruise missiles, and to do this with minimal support from SRDLOs or even
GCI. That's essentially, an area in which it excells, that's sure. However,
this does not mean that it's appearance has anything to do with retirement
of the SR-71: as first, the SR-71s operated around the USSR for years after
the MiG-31s entered service; as second even if there was more than one
successful "dry" interception this certainly wasn't a reason for its
retirement.
--


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

*************************************************