Syria Buying MiG-31s, MiG-35s for $1 billion (But are they really for Iran?)

Defense Industry Daily ^ | 22 June 2007

[Yo-Yo]

The most interesting paragraph:

Iran's two air forces (regular and Revolutionary Guard) would find the MiG-31's style crimped by the absence of air-to-air refueling capabilities, but cruise missile defense is important to them given the likelihood of BGM-109 Tomahawks being used in any American strike. MiG-31s could also step into the 'fighter AWACS' role that has been played to date by Iran's dwindling but ingeniously maintained fleet of F-14A Tomcat fighters. This would be only marginally useful against a full American offensive, but could make a big difference to Iran's ability to cover limited targets against an Israeli strike on its nuclear bomb-making facilities.

[KingSnorky]

And who’s gonna fly ‘em? :-)

[wastedyears]

I remember hearing we had trouble with the MiGs when they were put into service, but I forgot what jet we fielded that was able to take them on.

[nicmarlo]

ingeniously maintained fleet of F-14A Tomcat fighters. This would be only marginally useful against a full American offensive, but could make a big difference to Iran's ability to cover limited targets against an Israeli strike on its nuclear bomb-making facilities.

Very interesting. What do you think, Czar?

[darkwing104]

A back-door deal with Iran is doubtful at best. It would take time to train Pilots, Maintainers and supply replacement parts to keep the airframe flight worthy. Russia doesn't need to go through Syria. They can deal directly with Iran...Cut out the middle guy.

[Yo-Yo]

I remember hearing we had trouble with the MiGs when they were put into service, but I forgot what jet we fielded that was able to take them on.

Which time? In Korea, the F-80 Shooting Star was no match for the MiG-15, so we brough in the F-86 Sabre.

In Vietnam, The MiG-21 gave the F-4 a hard time, leading to the F-14.

Simultaneously, the MiG-25 scared the pants off the West, leading to the F-15.

[elhombrelibre]

"Russia the seller, Iran the financier, Syria the bullies labor" ping. The ultimate target is obviously Israel.

[Yorlik803]

But Israel could beat them. IAF could be flying P51s or FW190s and still give the Muzzies a hard time.
The machine aint worth crap unless you have good Pilots.

[Roccus]

“The ultimate target is obviously Israel.”
______________________________________________________

No doubt...I’m just concerned with how fast and how effective our response would be if Israel is attacked. IOW, is the US going to do something decisive immediately, or will it have to be debated first?

[jonascord]

The MiG-25 was the big bogeyman of the Cold War, since the data we had on it was sketchy, and after the supersonic run from Syria to Egypt, tracked by the Israelis at Mach 3. We redesigned the F-16 to go against what we THOUGHT were the MiG-25's abilities, and it turned out that any Soviet pilot would be performing a rather elaborate suicide if he went against the F-16.

Also, remember that the Russians still have two versions of their military equipment. Standard is for themselves, and the "monkey model" for export. The term "monkey model" is for who they believe will be running it.

[wastedyears]

Now we’ll have the F-22 which will scare the pants off everybody.

[wastedyears]

Mach 3??? Jeez, that’s a fast piece of fighting aluminum.

[Diogenesis]

Time to be two generations ahead of them with
a jet miniaturized chemical oxygen iodine laser.

[elhombrelibre]

Our problem today is that the consensus on supporting democracies and/or allies against dictatorships, which was pretty strong after WWII, has completely broken down. For example, Pelosi goes to Damascus to curry favor with Assad instead of making clear that if push comes to shove she’d stand behind our government and Israel. An ambiguous approach to Assad does not help and may lead him to miscalculate. So I think you’re right. We could have fools wanting to debate what to do rather than knowing the thing to do is to assist Israel as needed (including our strategic bombers if needed) as Israel destroys Assad and his regime if he takes a hostile action against Israel. We’re at a crucial moment in history where we could actually destroy the regimes implacable to peace.

[elhombrelibre]

Of course, the pilots do matter. But I want our side to have every advantage. I’m sure we’ll agree. War is not a sporting event. The fate of Israel hangs in the balance with so many threats gathering. Russia has become a very malign force for pecuniary reasons. Iran is playing a grand strategy to eliminate Israel. This is their openly stated objective. Under those circumstances, Russia selling advanced jets to Syria, Iran’s ally as we all know, is recklessly irresponsible.

[GBA]

After reading the Luftwaffe pilot's account of flying early variant MiG-29s against NATO, I have renewed respect for the MiGs. If what that pilot said is true, then this sentence should be taken very seriously:

"In a situation where neither side had external advantages, when flown by pilots of comparable skill, and armed with similar missiles, it is likely that a MiG-35 would be an even adversary at least for any Israeli opponent, and any American aircraft other than the F-22A."

We don't have that many F-22s and it's anyone's guess as to the quality of the F-35 and whether or not it can live up to it's hype. And, let's not forget the Sukhois. All of these aircraft are being fielded by other countries, especially China. In the meantime, Russia is still making improvements to their aircraft (as are we, I hope).

[Roccus]

“We’re at a crucial moment in history where we could actually destroy the regimes implacable to peace.”
_________________________________________________________

We’ve seen that moment before, about six years ago.

[hgro]

Another chance for the U.S. Airforce to get experience in shooting down Russky planes.

[elhombrelibre]

I think the six year ago reference is to Iraq, right? I don’t see that as comparable. The reasons were much different.

[Mac94]

They have good birds ... always will. But, they lack alot of intangilbles. We have decades of combat experience, from WWII to Korea to Vietnam to the Middle East. Russian and Chinese Air Forces haven’t faced a real air to air enviroment since the early 1950’s. We have grown and learned and adapted based on experience and have developed a complete system of battle management that is combat tested. It isn’t just the pilot and warplane. They have great warplanes ... but we have better everything else from pilots to AWACS to electronic warfare to command and control, etc.

The only thing we are untested in and could cause problems against a major foes (Russia and China) would be facing an enemy with the ability to hit our airbases hard with SSM and cruise missile capability. Operating combat ops under fire with critical infrastructure degraded or destroyed is something we haven’t had to face in a long time. We train for it, but this is an area where our systems are untested.

As for dealing with Syria or Iran ... these would be nice birds in their inventory ... but would be meaningless in the overall balance against us or Israel because of their shortcomings in so many other key areas.