ECM /recon version of mig23

[Monk78]

The Soviets spend considerable resources developing the mig25RB and BM

What purpose did the RB version really fulfill ? Was it not a waste?.

Recon foxbat was undoubtedly useful but would it not be better to supplement it with dedicated SEAD/ recon / ECM. Version. Of mig23UB? Rather than RB and BM foxbats?

 

[Blue cat]

The Soviets spend considerable resources developing the mig25RB and BM

What purpose did the RB version really fulfill ? Was it not a waste?.

Recon foxbat was undoubtedly useful but would it not be better to supplement it with dedicated SEAD/ recon / ECM. Version. Of mig23UB? Rather than RB and BM foxbats?

It provided the USSR with a high performance manned aircraft capable of flying recon missions against many likely air defense systems. In the context of the Cold war and the USA having the SR71, a reconnaissance version of the Mig 25 was probably needed by the USSR for political as well as military reasons.

 

[Monk78]

It provided the USSR with a high performance manned aircraft capable of flying recon missions against many likely air defense systems. In the context of the Cold war and the USA having the SR71, a reconnaissance version of the Mig 25 was probably needed by the USSR for political as well as military reasons.

But you do not need a recon bomber to do that
I understand the value of the pure recon type

 

[Bougnas]

There was an ECM version of the Su-24 which was better suited for that with a two-man crew.

 

[Monk78]

There was an ECM version of the Su-24 which was better suited for that with a two-man crew.

That was developed only in late 80s and maybe like 10 were built

 

[CV12Hornet]

The Soviets spend considerable resources developing the mig25RB and BM

What purpose did the RB version really fulfill ? Was it not a waste?.

Recon foxbat was undoubtedly useful but would it not be better to supplement it with dedicated SEAD/ recon / ECM. Version. Of mig23UB? Rather than RB and BM foxbats?

There's indication in some sources that the RB had nuclear capability, though there's nothing really proven about this claim. Assuming it was nuclear-capable, that would justify the addition of bombing equipment, though yes, as a conventional bomber it would have been of dubious value.

Overall, I'd tend to agree that sticking with straight recon MiG-25Rs would've been a better idea - all else being equal being so much faster than the MiG-23 is a major advantage - but it's entirely possible a pure recon aircraft was too specialized for the Soviets' blood and bomb-dropping was added on to make it more politically palatable.

The BM, on the other hand, was not related to the MiG-25R line, and in fact was very much a dedicated, separate variant. Though my sources don't say why the MiG-25 specifically was utilized for the job over the MiG-23, I strongly suspect it was a size issue. The Soviet preference for standoff SEAD, rather than the up close and personal tactics of American Wild Weasels, required an extremely large, powerful, and sophisticated RHAWS system that probably wouldn't have fit in a smaller aircraft like the MiG-23. Not to mention the four Kh-58 missiles. Hell, even American SEAD tactics were largely conducted with large planes. The Thunderchief and Phantom aren't as big as the MiG-25, but they're not small aircraft and are a good deal bigger than the MiG-23.

As for ECM aircraft, the Soviets seemed to have been mostly content with the Yak-28PP - not the worst idea, given the long careers of the EKA-3 and EA-6B - and no ECM variant of the MiG-25 was even proposed.

 

[Blue cat]

There's indication in some sources that the RB had nuclear capability, though there's nothing really proven about this claim. Assuming it was nuclear-capable, that would justify the addition of bombing equipment, though yes, as a conventional bomber it would have been of dubious value.

Overall, I'd tend to agree that sticking with straight recon MiG-25Rs would've been a better idea - all else being equal being so much faster than the MiG-23 is a major advantage - but it's entirely possible a pure recon aircraft was too specialized for the Soviets' blood and bomb-dropping was added on to make it more politically palatable.

The BM, on the other hand, was not related to the MiG-25R line, and in fact was very much a dedicated, separate variant. Though my sources don't say why the MiG-25 specifically was utilized for the job over the MiG-23, I strongly suspect it was a size issue. The Soviet preference for standoff SEAD, rather than the up close and personal tactics of American Wild Weasels, required an extremely large, powerful, and sophisticated RHAWS system that probably wouldn't have fit in a smaller aircraft like the MiG-23. Not to mention the four Kh-58 missiles. Hell, even American SEAD tactics were largely conducted with large planes. The Thunderchief and Phantom aren't as big as the MiG-25, but they're not small aircraft and are a good deal bigger than the MiG-23.

As for ECM aircraft, the Soviets seemed to have been mostly content with the Yak-28PP - not the worst idea, given the long careers of the EKA-3 and EA-6B - and no ECM variant of the MiG-25 was even proposed.

Interesting.. I sort of took it for granted that the bombing capability included the ability to use nuclear weapons, but I never really looked into that in any detail. Thanks.

 

[Crowbar Six]

The Mig23 was a bit too tight to add a lot of additional electronics and the pilot workload in even the fighter version was very high, in SEAD it would likely have been fatal. . The Russians preferred bigger, roomier aircraft as pointed out like the Yak 28, for electronic reconnaissance the Soviets had a lot of converted Bombers, Transports and even helicopters in the inventory.

 

[Monk78]

for electronic reconnaissance the Soviets had a lot of converted Bombers, Transports and even helicopters in the inventory.

But wouldn’t they be much less survivable ?

 

[Crowbar Six]

ELINT tends to be a little less in your face than SEAD. The Russians used various aircraft for ELINT including various variants of TU16, AN26 etc, though they used Mi 8 as comm jammer aircraft.

 

[Monk78]

ELINT tends to be a little less in your face than SEAD. The Russians used various aircraft for ELINT including various variants of TU16, AN26 etc, though they used Mi 8 as comm jammer aircraft.

how did they plan the mi8 to keep up with supersonic aircraft to escort them ?

 

[cpip]

how did they plan the mi8 to keep up with supersonic aircraft to escort them ?

My understanding was that it wasn't supposed to escort the aircraft, just suppress a given set of AD radars to open the space for the supersonic aircraft to fly through the hole in the radar net.

 

[ShySusan]

But wouldn’t they be much less survivable ?

The USAF uses Boeing 707s for ELINT. Those are even less survivable than converted bombers or choppers. Not that they didn't use those as well. The B-47 and B-57 had very long careers as recon planes long after they were withdrawn from front line combat roles.

Now, if you're talking about Electronic Attack, i.e. jamming radars and radios, then you want a bit more of a tactical airframe like the EA-6B Prowler or the EF-111 Raven. But in both those cases, you're dealing with a much bigger aircraft to haul around the needed equipment than the MIG-23.

 

[Crowbar Six]

ELINT tends to be a little less in your face than SEAD. The Russians used various aircraft for ELINT including various variants of TU16, AN26 etc, though they used Mi 8 as comm jammer aircraft.

how did they plan the mi8 to keep up with supersonic aircraft to escort them ?

They were tactical jammers used to interfere with NATO Voice and tactical data nets. The US used Blackhawks for similar roles.

 

[mtpalmer1]

I've long wondered why the MiG-23 didn't get the dedicated recce/ECM-escort treatment given that pretty much every** other platform in the inventory did. A handful of organic ECM jam-cans amidst a massed MiG-23 strike seems reasonably plausible to me as what-ifs go. A MiG-23UB with a slightly larger dorsal hump and a tail fairing not dissimilar to an EF-111A sounds like quite an oddly attractive proposition actually!

On the recce front, if the MiG-23 isn't seen as a survivable platform for the tactical recce role, how about a MiG-23UB-based Tu-141/-143 drone controller or similar?

** Please note this is intended as hyperbole and not an absolute statement! Although a Yak-18R could be fun.....

 

[CV12Hornet]

Another factor, I think, is that this is right around when tactical reconnaissance started moving away from dedicated aircraft to pods. MiG-27s were used as recon platforms, just with a pod slung under them.

 

[Monk78]

Another factor, I think, is that this is right around when tactical reconnaissance started moving away from dedicated aircraft to pods. MiG-27s were used as recon platforms, just with a pod slung under them.

Good point
But I wonder how good were Soviet pod based jammers /recce equipment
Seems like they used a version of su17 U for that purpose too

did the bigger Soviet ECM platforms like tu16 tu22 an 12 have the ability to jam airborne radars of NATO fighters too ? Or just ground based ones

 

[Monk78]

Today russia has many mobile ground based jammers aimed against AWACS and western strike aircraft, I wonder if they tried that during the cold war even if in a rudimentary form ? or fitting jammers on their tactical strike planes that can jam radars of enemy fighters ?

 

[CV12Hornet]

Today russia has many mobile ground based jammers aimed against AWACS and western strike aircraft, I wonder if they tried that during the cold war even if in a rudimentary form ? or fitting jammers on their tactical strike planes that can jam radars of enemy fighters ?

While this site doesn't have dates in service, it does appear the Soviets utilized ground-based jammers, yes. As far as jammers on their tactical aircraft...

MiG-23B:

The MiG-23B featured a comprehensive Sokol-23S navigation-attack system, integrating a Fon laser rangefinder / marked target seeker (LRMTS) system in the nose; an ASP-17 reflector sight for level and dive attacks; a PBK-3 toss-bombing sight; the aircraft flight control system; and the aircraft navigation system, which incorporated a gyrocompass, Doppler radar, radar altimeter, radio direction finder, and radio navigation system receiver. The navigation system was linked to the autopilot to permit the aircraft to follow a simple preprogrammed flight path. The MiG-23B also featured a Siren-FSh ("Siren" translating as "lilac", incidentally) radio frequency (RF) jammer to deal with the fire-control radars of Western SAMs and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA), as well as a Sirena-10M RWR -- not to be confused with the Siren jammer.

MiG-27K:

An improved Siren jammer. A MiG-27K could be fitted with one of three different jammers -- SPS-141, SPS-142, or SPS-143 -- with each covering a different band. A set of MiG-27Ks sent out on a strike mission would in principle carry all three of jammers to permit wideband coverage. The Siren jammers featured a distinctive "pimple" on the nose of the aircraft.

Su-24:

A Filin-N defensive countermeasures system, including a Beryoza (Birch) SPO-15 radar warning receiver (RWR), with distinctive antenna fairings on the sides of the top of the tailfin and alongside the engine inlets; an SPS-161 jammer with an antenna under the brake parachute fairing; and a Geran-F (Germanium-F) jammer with an antenna under the rudder and under the nose.

Su-17M3:

The Su-17M3 also featured two six-round KDS-23 chaff-flare dispenser in the spinal hump, and was fitted with the modern SPO-15 Beryoza-L RWR. The aircraft could carry a SPS-141/142/143 radio-frequency jammer pod on an underwing pylon. A second set of belly pylons could be fitted, giving a 2 x 2 arrangement of belly pylons, but it's unusual to find pictures of machines with all four belly pylons fitted. A new "light" pylon was fitted in the middle of each fixed wing section, strictly to carry the R-60 / AA-8 Aphid AAM for self-defense.

Su-25:

The Su-25T also featured an advanced Irtysh countermeasures system, including a Gardeniya RF jammer; an SPO-15 Beryoza RHAWS; an SPO-32 Pastel (Crayon) radar warning receiver / electronic support measures (RWR/ESM) system, which not only warned of threats but targeted them for attack; and an L-166S1 Sukogruz infrared jammer, mounted in a fairing at the base of the vertical tailplane, to confound heat-seeking missiles. UV-26 chaff-flare dispensers were fitted into a new fairing at the base of the tailfin, providing a total capacity of 192 cartridges.

Su-25TM:

Along with stores such as dumb bombs and cluster munitions, laser-guided or TV-guided bombs and missiles, cannon pods, and heat-seeking AAMs, the Su-25TM could carry the R-77 (NATO AA-12 Adder) BVR missile and the Kh-35 (NATO AS-20 Kayak) antiship missile. The Su-25TM also included a receiver for the Russian GLONASS and comparable US GPS navigation satellite systems. In addition, the Russians developed towed decoy jammers that could be carried by the Su-25TM.

Su-25SM:

Other items in upgrade included carriage Omul (Salmon) countermeasures pod to provide jamming and emitter targeting capabilities; a dual-stores rack; and improved camouflage and measures to reduce the aircraft's radar cross section -- though attempting to make a Frogfoot carrying any serious amount of external stores "stealthy" was clearly absurd. The upgrade allowed the Su-25 to carry modern Russian guided weapons, and improved the aircraft's survivability.

 

[Riain]

One factor might well be that Soviet aircraft were about half a generation behind Western aircraft in terms of electronics, ARMs and even engines and metalurgy. So while Western tactical fighters had been using Shrikes and Standard ARMs since the 60s and the Martel since 1972 IIUC Soviet ARMs used by Egypt in 1973 were radar homing AS5s, a huge missile carried by the Tu16 medium bomber. In terms of electronics IIUC the Mig23 was more akin to the F4 than the F14/15, so it's likely that the sort of SEAD/DEAD jamming and radar attack missions proposed were either undertaken by bigger aircraft or avoided by using different tactics.

That the Soviets didn't make the Mig23 into a jamming and recce aircraft likely wasn't because they were too stupid to think about it. It's more likely that they knew what their industry was capable of and what missions they wanted to do and came up with the aircraft that best suited these limitations and requirements.