MiG-31: A fighter ahead of its time

“it’s earlier variant scored a first kill in a Gulf War against USN F-18.”

Where did you get that? First, it were F-15’s that scored first kills, and secondly, most importantly, the Gulf War Air Power Survey (GWAPS) lists a MiG-25 as one of many possibilities for the loss of the jet. So, while you state as fact the loss was due to a MiG-25, there are no facts to support that allegation.

“It’s radar proved to be immune to countermeasures as well,”

“Immune?” Not hardly. It is am improvement over standard doppler notch tactics and such, but hardly immune from electronic jamming/spoofing. ALL electronic sensors can be jammed or spoofed. . .the MiG-31 is by far one of the easiest scanned-array radars to be jammed or spoofed.

“Iraqi Foxbats disrupted numerous Allied sorties at the time”

Where did you get that? A close study of the air war, and even a cursory examination, reveals no such disruption took place. . .especially after the first night. “Disruption” was most always the result of SAM activity and not the result of A/A activity. Again, GWAPS (the definitive fact-based report on the air war).

Ahhh. . .you got me. . .upon looking at what you wrote you set a trap. . .you left out the sarcasm tag and I fell for it.

Good one.

“They still scored well in the Gulf War”

That is funny.

Thanks for the laugh.

It did not get Scott. The MiG was listed as a possible sources of the downing. It was never stated or determined to be the cause of the loss.

“A wing of F-111s or Tornadoes dropped their loads short of target and chased away by Foxbat is a mission kill. . .”

First, “mission kill” is not a term used by aviators, planners or weaponeers.

Second. . ."F-111 or Torandoes"? Yet you claim "mission kill" to MiG-25s?.

Third, unless you provide accurate facts and sources, you are just saying things. I provided an excellent academic source with facts, stats, interviews, ets. . .and what you are talking about never happened.

Some missions on the first and second night were terminated early (”aborted” is the correct term) but that was because they over-ran their OCA SEAD coverage.

Well, I am not an expert in military aviation. Most of the above I took from public forums. As for Mig vs F/A-18 it is often referred as a first engagement, at many sources. So does accounts on how hard Mig-25 was to intercept.

Public forums are full of ‘experts’ offering snippets of brilliance from their superior minds when, actually, their ‘facts’ are about as trustworthy as Bill Clinton in a backwater Bayou Cat-house.

Caution is best used when reading about technical capabilities of anything, especially aircraft.

A ‘first engagement’ is far from accurate and I think they are referring to “may be among the first engagements.”

As far as how hard to intercept, not really hard at all. In fact, easy. Here is why: Huge RCS, sun-sized thermal plume, massive physical size so easy to see.

Once seen (by whatever means), you can run an intercept on the jet very easily because it simply can't change direction without making a turn that would take up the entire state of Kansas.

Basically, see it and put it on the CATA and it is toast. Just draw a little lead and pull the trigger. Easy.

I suspect your sources are simply ignorant about A/A and simple tactics and confuse speed with difficulty to intercept. It's either they are a) ignorant, b) trying to sound smart, c) engaged in disinformation, or d) in love with the target. . .errr. . .jet. . .and simply cant stand having others calling their baby ugly.

Cheers