it gives only basic descriptions, from top to bottom:
1. moveable antenna part with gyro-stabill. in roll
2. combined waveguide
3. compensation channel waveguide
4. fixed parabolic mirror
5. inspection openings
6. fixed antenna base
1. moveable antenna part with gyro-stabill. in roll
2. combined waveguide
3. compensation channel waveguide
4. moveable cone mirror
5. fixed antenna base
I will speak about the radars delivered with the Mig-23 variants to Iraq (Mig-23MS, MF, and ML). The radar delivered with the Mig-23MS was the Almaz-23 which was the same delivered with the mig-21bis. That radar was good for nothing; just to summarize. The radar delivered with the Mig-23MF was a Sapfir-23E but interestingly had no capability to launch the R-13M or the R-60. This is an interesting point since the radar mentioned in the second reply by overscan, does have the capability to launch the am weapons. The radar supplied with the Mig-23ML was the Sapfir-23M and not the NOO3. Again it had no capability to launch the R-13M. The technical documentation of the Sapfir-23E was very meager; the main technical documentation was for the Sapfir-23M radar. Here the PRF is 1 KHz and 5 KHz. The quasi-continuous frequency is 100 KHz; it is used only in guiding the R-23R and R-24R Semi Active Radar Homing Missiles. The difference between the western approach and the eastern approach is that the western (not always; the French didn’t adopt this approach in the Matra Super-530 missile) approach use a pure carrier while the eastern approach was to use high repetition pulse. The Soviets never used the western solution for guidance; in fact they criticize it in their scientific literature.
Why "only" for missile guidance? Is it not possible to also perform target tracking, with quasi-continuous illumination? I thought that quasi-continuous was just a Russian word for high pulse repetition frequency (HPRF). Western and Russian MiG-29 radars use HPRF for normal tracking all the time, why not MiG-23?
Also - why is a radar necessary at all, to employ R-13 and R-60 heat-seeking missiles? Even MiG-21 and aircraft like Su-25 without any radar can use them, no?
Dilbert, I think is something with the stores managment system of Iraq's MiG-23MF and ML (SUO) not being capable to handle the R-13M and R-60 (MF) and R-13M (ML) and not directly related to the radar itself.
I hope that Ahmad could provide us interesting accounts of Sapfir-23's actions of the IrAF like he did on ACIG.org for the benefit of all people here
That is interesting - that the Iraqi MiG-23's radars can't work with the R-3S and R-13. So, it is not to the stores amangment system, it is more likely reffered to the radar's capability of calculating the Dmin and Dmax distances (max and min launch distance) for the current flight conditions, so all launches shall be done with visual aiming (missile seeker is 'boresighted' - the Fi-zero mode), with distances estimated by the pilot's Mk1 eyeball and brain.
As well, the MiG-23MF/ML also don't like the R-3S, and for it, only Deffective was calculated, instead of Dmin and Dmax, as pilots recall.
A fascinating thread – may I add my twopennyworth:
The more I look at the missile.ru Phazotron piccies, the more I agree with Overscan that their labelling sucks – or at least the person who prepared the webpage does – for instance the Sapfir-21 is also labelled RP-21: I thought Sapfir-21was the RP-22. I would almost kill for a wander round the museum- it opens up so many questions.
Mrdetonator’s first offering has a line diagram of “The 4-cone T/R” showing a symmetrical feed as in the Sapfir-21 – but also as in the later Smerch-A (if the missile.ru site is correctly labelled!) The line diagram also shows a high frequency waveguide feed for the KNP transmitter ie CW illumination for R-23R missiles – logical.
Since Amahd Rushdi says that by the Sapfir-23M quasicontinuous (aka interrupted continuous wave/HPRF) missile illumination is used, this would possibly remove the need for a separate CW illuminator channel – but given that the R-23R appears to use a much higher frequency than the main radar it opens up all sorts of questions as to how this revised radar addresses the problem.
Crossiathh’s diagram of the feeds shows a separate feed bouncing off the back reflector. This cannot be the compensation channel (a receiver) – It must logically be a missile illuminator feed – and hence it could be at a different frequency as it does not need to use the front polariser. Bu if this is so then the quasicontinuous illumination of Amahd does not fit -unless as he suggests the russians always used quasicontinuous for missile illumination - it might allow a higher peak power.
Later …Further thoughts:
Perusing the permag article and reviewing other sources (including the missiles.ru piccies) it appears that the Sapfir-21, Smerch-A, and Taifun were all designed by FF Volkov -and kept the centre feed concept - while, in parallel a NIIP/NIIR consortium developed the Sapfir-23D then Sapfir-23ML and finally (after Belenko’s defection) the Sapfir-25. This series would all appear to be based on the offset feed - which, of course, culminated in the N-001 and N-019.
Processing: The Sapfir-23 series (third generation according to the permag article), using “external coherence” or clutter-referenced processing (SDTs) is an MTI technique rather than Pulse Doppler. The difference, I feel, is that MTI uses target doppler to discriminate between target and clutter while Pulse doppler actually goes further to measure target velocity (and requires REAL pulse coherence). This did not appear until the N-001/019 series.
Incidentally, what is the russian phrase for KNP? does the K stand for kvasi?
In other words the KNP means the “Continous Wave Illuminator”, which was used in the whole Sapfir-23 family radars providing the cw beam for the R-23R missiles. If Iraq received the Mig-23MF in 1982 (Ahmad`s data), the radar Sapfir-23E should had been the same design as those delivered to WP countries in late seventies. The lack of ability to fire the R-60 doesn’t seem illogical at all. Note, the Czechoslovakia received Mig-23MF in 1978 and till 1982 were not able to fire the R-60. The Mig-23ML received in 1981 handled it from the beginning. No wonder why Iraq or other third world countríes were not supplied with Soviets “state of art” weapons. The Soviets have been using a technical bulletin style of upgrade/maintenance events, so there was a technical bulletin about adapting the R-60 to the Mig-23MF weapon system. The R-60 adaptation required to add/change electronic blocks to the aircraft weapon system of the Mig-23MF. The R-60 (R-3S, R-13M) might be fired with assistance of all three aiming systems, the Sapfir radar, the IRST sensor and the optical gun-sight ASP-23DE. When using the Sapfir-23E, the AVM-23 automatically computes the Dmax, Dmin distances and indicates them on the SEI(HUD) and gives the PR command when the target is within the launch range(Deff). Aiming with the IRST TP-23M sensor in modes T(radar is on) and the T-Fi0(radar is off) differed in the way how the launch distance was obtained. In the T mode the radar remains in "kvasi" scan-mode but supplies the information about the target range. The AVM-23 gives only the Dmax distance prior to missile lauch. In the T-Fi0 mode the target range is provided by GCI or estimated by the pilot itself.
In case of radar or IRST malfunction the guided IR missile can be firred with the optical gun-sight using the mode “SYNCHRO/NEPOD"-fixed cross hair. The distance to the target is set either manually by pilot (turning the potentiometer on the POM throttle) or is supplied by the GCI. The optical aiming mode “NEPOD” requires to set the target size (small, medium, large) with the potentiometer “BAZA” located on the gun-sight. Otherwise the optical gun-sight is fed with radar data automatically (target range), therefore the "Ruchn/Autom" switch is located on the ASP-23.
Summing it up, the only strange thing for me is claiming that both Iraqi Mig-23MF/ML were not able to launch R-13M, the main close range A2A missile of the Mig-23 since beginning. But I doubt it was a Mig-23MF/ML weapon system flaw.
Having now perused it in detail (using overscan's translation plus a dictionary for the diagrams I am full of admiration for the incredible microwave engineering of the complex feed - incorporating main radar (with mutimode horns), E and H-plane sidelobe suppression + overall guard horn (the compensation horn) and Parol Tx/Rx. The sub-reflector means of polarising both frequency bands is phenominal!
I am wondering if the detail in this document reflects Sapfir 23/25 technology or whether some of the advanced detail is N-001/019. Whatever, as a microwave engineer I am impressed.
Interestingly in this document there is no KNP mentioned - this is another reason for thinking that the document is of a later version - perhaps using quasicontinuous illumination?
I was told by a Russian friend that it described a MiG-23 radar. IIRC, the roll limits given are a bit smaller than those of either N-019 or N-001.
I notice that the first figure overscan posted in this discussion has an image labelled "KNP transmitter (CW beam)".
If "KNP" is quasi-continuous (HPRF?), and CW continuous-wave, would this not be a contradiction? Were the same terms used in the original Russian labelling? I'm still trying to convince myself, regarding whether or not MiG-23 radar contained a coherent oscillator.
I believed that the N019/N001 were the first generation radars to incorporate IFF interregators in their radar antenna, but I can't say where I got that impression from.
I believe, from various hints, that the CW channel in Sapfir-23 has a role in the lookdown detection method. Unfortunately this is getting too deep for a non electrical engineer
Lewradar, I wonder if you could explain a little about what you mean about the design of the cassegrain antenna and specifically the subreflector. I understand that the subreflector must work for both the main radar and the IFF which are totally different frequencies- is this difficult?
Lewradar, I wonder if you could explain a little about what you mean about the design of the cassegrain antenna and specifically the subreflector. I understand that the subreflector must work for both the main radar and the IFF which are totally different frequencies- is this difficult?
The twist cassegrain concept is used to prevent aperture blocking. Essentially, the horn(s) emit horizontal RF which the front reflector (which is covered with an array of closely-spaced horizontal wires) reflects back to the sub-reflector.
The subreflector has to change the polarisation of the waves from horizontal to vertical so that they then pass through the horizontal wires unscathed.
The usual means of effecting this involves an array of wires at 45 degrees which reflects half the power of the horizontal signal. The other half passes through the wires a distance of quarter of a wavelength to the metal back surface of the sub-reflector where they are reflected. This extra path difference of half a wavelength (quarter there plus quarter back) results in the two 180 degree phase difference waves interacting to produce the required vertical polarised signal for transmission. Section 8.9 of the Cassegrain document explains this using vectors.
Thus if (say) 12 GHz and 1.5 GHz signals are to be so affected the sub reflector has to incorporate quarter wave thicknesses for both. Ris 10 in the document shows how this is effected: the basic thickness is a quarter wave for the 1.5 GHz signal. By incorporating a periodic array of small reflectors embedded in the material of the sub-relector at a depth of quarter wavelength for the 12 GHz signal this fulfills the requirement for both frequencies - both frequencies are changed to vertical polarisation for outward transmission.
[remember that the opposite effect will occur for received vertical pol signals and they will enter the horns as horizontal]
A difficult concept: Skolnik “Introduction to Radar systems” 2nd Edition explains the basic concept on pages 242-243. He calls it a twist reflector.
Since writing the above I have revisited the missiles.ru pictures from the Phazotron museum.
I am wondering if the detail in this document reflects Sapfir 23/25 technology or whether some of the advanced detail is N-001/019. Whatever, as a microwave engineer I am impressed.
look at the thickness of the subreflectors for Sapfir-23, -25 and smerch. Compared to these the N-019 sub reflector is much thicker.
Overscan said:
I believed that the N019/N001 were the first generation radars to incorporate IFF interregators in their radar antenna, but I can't say where I got that impression from.
Thank you for your explanation. I think I agree that this document describes N019, not Sapfir-23.
Here in the UK, Elliot/Marconi engineers decided to go with their existing expertise in inverse cassegrain antennas for Foxhunter given the low sidelobe levels demanded and their lack of experience in slotted waveguide planar arrays.
Phazotron and NIIP both tried to make a go at a planar array antenna design in the late 70s/early 80s but the manufacturing technology just wasn't there. They therefore revisited their existing technology and resurrected it one last time, while carrying on work on the planar arrays for future radars (N010, N011).
A polarization-twist antenna is a dual-reflector antenna in which the feed illuminates the first reflector, which consists of wires matched to the feed polarization (Fig. A71). Rays from this wire grid are reflected to the second reflector, consisting of a solid surface overlaid with a grid (or ribs) at 45°.Upon reflection from the second reflector, the polarization is rotated 90° to pass through the first reflector without blockage.
The feed-horn illuminates a wire-grid parabolic reflector, embedded in a plastic cover in front of the antenna system. This reflects power back to the tilting plate, on which are a series of ribs oriented at 45° to the incident polarization and l/4 deep, that
rotate the linear polarization through 90° and reflect it as a beam which passes through the parabolic reflector and into space.
The basic principle was already used with the RP-21. Attached you will find a picture of the planar mirror with a centred feed of a RP-21. Would like to know if there was a common usage with westerner radars.
The basic principle was already used with the RP-21. Attached you will find a picture of the planar mirror with a centred feed of a RP-21. Would like to know if there was a common usage with westerner radars.
Well, I'm currently reading a book about German-Soviet technology transfer after WW2.
It says that the autopilot of the MiG-23 was based on a german one. The authors didn't
mention the specific type. Any comments?
It was the RP-22SM I think, though I should check tonight.
RP-22 Sapfir was a monopulse radar, where RP-21 was conical scan. This meant that it was significantly more resistant to ECM. It also had a little more range.
RP-22 was not used on export MiG-21s until the MiG-21bis was exported in the 1970s and later, though it was fitted to Soviet MiG-21S (for Sapfir) and SM from the mid 1960s onwards.
I have question about parameters connected with cooperation between Saphir and Apex missiles.The main questions are:
how is the definition for the maximal angle of the target lock ?
and how is value of this angle for Apex missile
and Saphir radar ?.
Is this angle the same like the width of the radar beam in automatic tracking mode- plus minus 52 grad ?
For example in another manual I see parameters for another missile R-60 :
max angle of the target lock : plus minus 40 grad
angle of missile seeker view plus minus 2,5 grad
I've been browsing thru this topic , very interesting reads indeed. Seems at one point there was a discussion whether or not the Safir-23D/E has the waveguide transmitter in the middle of the antenna or not, like on RP-22 for instance ...i just came by couple of pics , hope this would help out sorting this quizz...
Would you guys say that from these pics that the transmitter looks to be in the middle ? i've stared at these pics ALOT, trying to match angles and writing on the antenna housing , it SEEMS to be in the middle for me ....what do you think ?
I personally think you don't really need to make angles
In my humble opinion Safir-23D/E (Izd. 323) truly has the waveguide transmitter in the middle of the movable reflector in the Cassegrain antenna and it is quite clearly shown in the polish service manual of the MiG-23MF.
In the composition of the RLS Izd. 323 presented below there is a continuous radiation transmitter KNP (in Polish: KCO - Kanał Ciągłego Opromieniowywania) to which transmitter antenna is located in the middle of the main relfector, just between the four separate tube channels A, B, C and D.
It's worth to mention that KCO itself is a rectangular waveguide and is particularly important because it enables guiding the R-23R missile with RGS seeker. The second dish of the antenna shown below is the classic fixed parabolic reflector, crucial to the principles of the Cassegrain antenna concept.
To achieve the basic principles of the amplitude-monopulse concept, the RLS antenna system consists of:
• two reflectors: parabolic (fixed) and flat (movable);
• (quad-channel) tube-antenna: four separate tube channels A, B, C and D, which are used to receive signals reflected from the target.
Impulses reflected from the target are being received by four antennas, channel (tubes) 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', which were mentioned ealier. Walue of the received pulse (signal) at the entrance of each antenna channel will depend on the target position relative to the tube antenna.
Signals received by antenna channel (tubes) "A", "B", "C", "D" after adequate formation are further brought to an electronic comparator, which calculates nessesary values. Output from the performed calculations (comparison of the received signals), as a result of operations conducted in the aggregation and comparison of input values, face the following three output signals: differential signals Ua and Up and the final summarized and approximated signal UΣ.
The last picture shows the bank and pitch stabilization angles of the Safir-23D/E (Izd. 323) antenna complex and finally, the search and observation zones. The observation zone vary on the angular values φho and φpo which can be moved manually or automatically, according to signals from ARL-SM in the range of values of maximum border angles φhg and φpg.
Special thanks and credits for Czesio for all pictures ad decrtiption of the Izd. 323 antenna presented above
Link here: http://81.210.9.116/~apacz/smf/index.php?topic=9711.msg206033#msg206033
First i'll admit that i dont know much technical stuff about radars , klystron tubes and emitters and so on ...so ,sorry John , i dont understand any of the stuff you just posted!
Now , i just looked around the net , and looked onto my comp , and i'm quite confused...
I found a russian pic of a Mig-23ML said to be from 82nd series, and on its nose , on both sides, concerning the radar there were these stencils: "Bloki Izd 324ML"
I know from here , and other places that the RP-23 radar has the Izd. number 323...annoyingly enough, i couldnt find any Mig-23M/MF stencils close enough to show just that , i can vaguely make Izd.323E in one of the pics from Y. Gordons book , but i'm not sure...
Now , i have seen export MLs and MLDs showing N-003E and N-008E respectively on their nose ...i also found a soviet MLD showing N-008 ...so far so good.
I still didnt found any Mig-23P radar nose stencils , i've read somehere that its suposed to be written N-006...does anyone have such a pic ?
The question is however this : if the Izd.323 is the Safir-23D/E...is the Izd. 324ML the Safir-23ML ? and why does the export MLs i saw have N-003E on their nose , is N-003 the same as Izd.324ML ?or are they different ?
As someone here posted earlier ...yes its quite enough to drive someone mad! ;D
Now , i have seen export MLs and MLDs showing N-003E and N-008E respectively on their nose ...i also found a soviet MLD showing N-008 ...so far so good.
I still didnt found any Mig-23P radar nose stencils , i've read somehere that its suposed to be written N-006...does anyone have such a pic ?
The question is however this : if the Izd.323 is the Safir-23D/E...is the Izd. 324ML the Safir-23ML ? and why does the export MLs i saw have N-003E on their nose , is N-003 the same as Izd.324ML ?or are they different ?
As someone here posted earlier ...yes its quite enough to drive someone mad! ;D
1. AFAIK the Izd.323 was indeed the Sapfir-23DIII (letters "DIII" probably derived from the "Delta aSh" mode, added before it went to mass production) stenciled as "S-23" on soviet or "S-23E" on export Migs-23M/MF(23-11A/23-11B).
2. Almost certainly the izd.324ML was the Sapfir-23ML a further development of izd.323, stenciled later on soviet a/c as N-003 and N-003E on all export Mig-23ML/MLA (izd.23-12/23-12A).
3. Not much is known about the N-006 which was a radar installed into Mig-23P(izd.23-14) and never exported to foreign countries. The N-006 stencils appeared on the nose, but unfortunately no one has published or put online photos of Mig-23P cockpit so far.
4. The N-008 was the latest development installed to all izd.23-18 and izd.23-22, aircrafts usually designated as Mig-23MLD. Some basic information is known about the N-008E, e.g. what radar modes were added and what they were for when compared to N-003, mostly from Bulgarian sources. You can also search cockpit pictures on airliners.net, but sad again they are not high-res.
P.S. this is a discussion that went hot several years ago on many aircraft forums, but since then it somehow faded out.
Here is one N-006 pic, but cant find more even if had many....hmm. linkhttp://fotki.yandex.ru/users/beretta-93/album/72990?p=9
Now , i have seen export MLs and MLDs showing N-003E and N-008E respectively on their nose ...i also found a soviet MLD showing N-008 ...so far so good.
I still didnt found any Mig-23P radar nose stencils , i've read somehere that its suposed to be written N-006...does anyone have such a pic ?
The question is however this : if the Izd.323 is the Safir-23D/E...is the Izd. 324ML the Safir-23ML ? and why does the export MLs i saw have N-003E on their nose , is N-003 the same as Izd.324ML ?or are they different ?
As someone here posted earlier ...yes its quite enough to drive someone mad! ;D
1. AFAIK the Izd.323 was indeed the Sapfir-23DIII (letters "DIII" probably derived from the "Delta aSh" mode, added before it went to mass production) stenciled as "S-23" on soviet or "S-23E" on export Migs-23M/MF(23-11A/23-11B).
2. Almost certainly the izd.324ML was the Sapfir-23ML a further development of izd.323, stenciled later on soviet a/c as N-003 and N-003E on all export Mig-23ML/MLA (izd.23-12/23-12A).
3. Not much is known about the N-006 which was a radar installed into Mig-23P(izd.23-14) and never exported to foreign countries. The N-006 stencils appeared on the nose, but unfortunately no one has published or put online photos of Mig-23P cockpit so far.
4. The N-008 was the latest development installed to all izd.23-18 and izd.23-22, aircrafts usually designated as Mig-23MLD. Some basic information is known about the N-008E, e.g. what radar modes were added and what they were for when compared to N-003, mostly from Bulgarian sources. You can also search cockpit pictures on airliners.net, but sad again they are not high-res.
P.S. this is a discussion that went hot several years ago on many aircraft forums, but since then it somehow faded out.
Here is one N-006 pic, but cant find more even if had many....hmm. linkhttp://fotki.yandex.ru/users/beretta-93/album/72990?p=9
Thanks , this is great info , especially the N-006 pic is new to me!
Yes i am aware of the discusions from various places about ML/MLA , guess i'm trying to revive them!
As for M/MF i was under the impression that stencils should read Izd. 323( 323E for export)...i have found a picture said to be of a polish MF showing clearly RLSN-323E on its nose( or maby its RPSN , i'm not sure ...i'll post the pic)
As for the ML nose stencils, do you know ( or anyone else ) of more a/c with either Izd.324ML or N-003 nose stencils ? You said "almost certainly" refering to the S-23ML , so i guess i could add that i was thinking if its possible that Izd.324ML and N-003 are actually different radar sets , and maby the ones with the N-003 are the bloody MLAs that everyone is burning their brains about! ( this posibility would make sense to a point...)! But i guess all this is just theory , without haveing actual solid proof...
The ML from the 82nd series with he Izd.324 stencils on the nose , is there any way to find out when the a/c of the 82nd series were built ? is it before or after 1978/79?
As for M/MF i was under the impression that stencils should read Izd. 323( 323E for export)...i have found a picture said to be of a polish MF showing clearly RLSN-323E on its nose( or maby its RPSN , i'm not sure ...i'll post the pic)
As for the ML nose stencils, do you know ( or anyone else ) of more a/c with either Izd.324ML or N-003 nose stencils ? You said "almost certainly" refering to the S-23ML , so i guess i could add that i was thinking if its possible that Izd.324ML and N-003 are actually different radar sets , and maby the ones with the N-003 are the bloody MLAs that everyone is burning their brains about! ( this posibility would make sense to a point...)! But i guess all this is just theory , without haveing actual solid proof...
The ML from the 82nd series with he Izd.324 stencils on the nose , is there any way to find out when the a/c of the 82nd series were built ? is it before or after 1978/79?
Regarding stencils in general, it depends what was painted in repair plants after maintenance overhauls, therefore you could see stencils either Izd. 323E(original from Soviet production plant) or later S-23E, both are well known designations from Mig-23MF aircraft documentation. Anyway, the Mig-23MF radar production plate is saying S-23DIII, so if you do not believe check it yourself somewhere.
Realize that almost each production serie could differ to previous one, it is an instant process of development and optimization. Those small changes are very hard to find unless you have the documentation of both e.g. inner airframe changes, different versions of hydraulic, fuel, flight control system aggregates,... etc, what is quite understandable especially when we are talking the "troubling" type as the Mig-23 was.
I agree that mentioned Mig-23ML from 82nd serie 0390308260 is an early produced ML supposedly equipped with gun sight ASP-23D/ASP-23DE. Later produced ML were upgraded with the ASP-17ML gun sight earning designation MLA as written in almost all Mig-23 publication together. Would you be able to distinguish between ASP-23D and ASP-17ML gun sight when seeing them in cockpit?
I spent a lot of time looking various Mig-23 documents, therefore I dare to say that the designation Izd.324ML denotes the same radar as later N-003/N-003E.
Ok i did some digging thru the net and my computer... about various Mig-23 versions cockpit and the gunsights, early Mig-23ML 82nd series has an ASP-23D, then a Mig-23P from 186th series SURPRISINGLY has the same type of gunsight aparently( i thought P/23-14s have ASP-17 aswell...)! Then a Mig-23MLD has an ASP-17ML (-for reference- all these are on the same picture , i will attack it along with several others...i have checked with Mig-23MF cockpits, as we know they too have ASP-23Ds...now i checked the cockpit of a czech Mig-23ML (22401?), and unless am i missing something, that is definetly an ASP-17ML!
I'm sure you will be able to check this info on your side , for instance german or bulgarian ML cockpits, i am assuming you will find ASP-17MLs there...
I dont wanna rush with conclusions here , but maby , just maby there is a solid tangible way to diferentiate between an ML and a so called MLA...i know from what i could gather around that the MLA designation was not taken into VVS service , it suposedly was an unoficial designation of the late model MLs with ASP-17 sights and capability to fire R-24s...adding to the confusion that the bulgarians call their ML 23-12As as MLAs , i guess the result is obvious!
But again , i dont wanna rush to conclusions, i might be wrong in all the above!
Anyway pics ...first the 3 cockpit , then a czech ML...
Ok i did some digging thru the net and my computer... about various Mig-23 versions cockpit and the gunsights, early Mig-23ML 82nd series has an ASP-23D, then a Mig-23P from 186th series SURPRISINGLY has the same type of gunsight aparently( i thought P/23-14s have ASP-17 aswell...)! Then a Mig-23MLD has an ASP-17ML (-for reference- all these are on the same picture , i will attack it along with several others...i have checked with Mig-23MF cockpits, as we know they too have ASP-23Ds...now i checked the cockpit of a czech Mig-23ML (22401?), and unless am i missing something, that is definetly an ASP-17ML!
I'm sure you will be able to check this info on your side , for instance german or bulgarian ML cockpits, i am assuming you will find ASP-17MLs there...
I dont wanna rush with conclusions here , but maby , just maby there is a solid tangible way to diferentiate between an ML and a so called MLA...i know from what i could gather around that the MLA designation was not taken into VVS service , it suposedly was an unoficial designation of the late model MLs with ASP-17 sights and capability to fire R-24s...adding to the confusion that the bulgarians call their ML 23-12As as MLAs , i guess the result is obvious!
But again , i dont wanna rush to conclusions, i might be wrong in all the above!
Anyway pics ...first the 3 cockpit , then a czech ML...
Bingo, I'm glad that you have taken those words right out of my mouth, but regarding the R-24 capability though I`m not sure. I assume a small modification had to be carried out on the weapon control system to be able to fire the R-24, even though late produced ML/MLA might have this feature from the beginning. Hopefully Chris will come and explain details how German MLA were suddenly able to use R-24 even if they were older than Czech ones. Btw. the Czech ML/MLA as I have seen recently has the designation "23-12A" written in its logbook.
overscan said:
It has been suggested that later model Soviet MiG-23ML had ASP-17 and Sapfir-23MLA (N006) radars, leading to the unofficial MiG-23MLA designation.
Hmm, I never understood it in this way. Could you please point at source who is suggesting that the Sapfir-23MLA is the N-006 and that only late soviet Mig-23ML got it? Did they specify construction numbers of those soviet MLA, otherwise how would we ever be able to identify them?. Clearly, the publication from Sergei Burdin, Mig-23 part2 is denying that. Please realize that it is also written that since 1981 the whole MLA production went abroad.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
