Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: OntosMk1 on October 13, 2004, 10:03:21 PM
-
After reading several books and watching a couple of cool programs about the air war in Korea I noticed that the common theme was that the Mig-15 was in every way better than the F-86 Sabre. It could roll faster, Climb quicker, and hit harder than the Sabre. So how did we knock so many of them out of the sky? What im really interested in is the Tactics the Sabre pilots used. They used a finger four formation and here is the interesting part, the element leader was the offensive part while the wingman's sole job was to protect his element leader. They were completely defensive. How is this possible? Even with the Russian fielding some of their best pilots the K/D ratio was still in our favor up to the cease fire. I guess im really wondering about the whole relationship of the flight leader and his wingman. I fail to see how one can fly souly in a defensive manner while still protecting his wing leader. :confused: :confused: anyone care to take a stab at this one?
-
*stab*
Oh crap I missed and got the dog.....
-
From what I've read the Mig-15 was only a slightly better performer. Not so much that something like the encounter situation wasn't a more important factor. Of course training and tactics were a more significant advantage as proven by the US record.
-
Remember its not only the Mig15 but also the Mig17.
In paper both migs, and particularly the Mig17, beat the Sabre.
However, the avg Sabre pilot had significantly better training than the enemy pilots did.
It was like placing a NASCAR driver against a student driver on the racetrack.
-
Ask Boroda....according to him the Mig15 had a 2000 to 1 kill ratio vs the F86
-
iirc the US had a lot of experienced pilots (from WW2), and drew on tactics learned in WW2, whereas the Koreans had very bad training, and no experience. It was only when the Russians sent in their pilots that things got hard for the US pilots.
-
MIG-17 was countered by the F-100 (both had afterbuners and 17 had two powerplants)
Mig -15 was slightly faster but at speed was not as nimble
15 could go higher and could climb faster
86 could dive faster (more stable) and could manuver on the edge better
Guns on 15 hit harder but fired slower and had much drop
guns in 86 were less powerful but easer to hit with
Yeager flew both and these were his impressions
-
Scooter yoiu are confusing Mig17 with Mig19.
And neither served in Korean war.
The Mig15 vs F86 matchup is very similar IMO to P51D and Bf109K4 matchup.
The Bf109 held every majoir performance advantage, speed, accell, climb. Had much heavier hitting 30mm cannon but was hardder to aim. The P51 had better handling and user friendlyness and could dive faster.
The Bf109K did very well against P51D if flown by the LW few remaining experete. But the P51D would decimate low quality pilots in the 109K.
Just as happened in Korea where the USAF had thir way with the Koreans and Chinese but apprently suffered a negative K/D aginst the few specially picked soviet aces who fought in the war.
-
It's all right here:
http://www.acepilots.com/planes/f86_sabre.html
-
Mig wasn't better than the Orenda powered CF-86.
-
Put the superior pilot in the inferior plane and the inferior plane wins every time.
-
Remind me, wasn't the MIG-15 a Russian port of a German design?
Wolf
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Remind me, wasn't the MIG-15 a Russian port of a German design?
Wolf
....with a British engine.
-
From all accounts, the Russian flown Mig-15s had a 3 to 1 kill ratio over U.S. F-86s.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
From all accounts, the Russian flown Mig-15s had a 3 to 1 kill ratio over U.S. F-86s.
Really??? who was the accountant?
-
I remember hearing somewhere that both the leading gunsight and pilot training are what made the difference.
-
Originally posted by Raubvogel
Ask Boroda....according to him the Mig15 had a 2000 to 1 kill ratio vs the F86
:rofl :rofl :rofl :aok
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
From all accounts, the Russian flown Mig-15s had a 3 to 1 kill ratio over U.S. F-86s.
Source?
-
umm no suntracker, thats false.
Sabre measures (charlie) has a good write up on the breakdown. The offcial number by the USAF is 10.32 to 1 sabres vs migs. Just in December 50/51 against the meat of the soviets 16 losses to 102 kills 6.37 k/d. The soviets from this source admit a 4/1 loss rate. I am sure boroda will say its bs. by 1953 with mostly NK and chinese pilots it moves to 12 losses to 287 kills. 24/1 k/d. Either way the sabres spanked um good. I figure its anywhere from 7/1 to 14/1.
-
The Sabre was much heavier than the MiG and had a superior diving speed. Both the MiG and the F-86 could go supersonic in a dive, but the Sabre was much more stable than the MiG in the transonic speed regime. One way for a Sabre to shake a MiG sitting on its tail was for the F-86 pilot to open his throttle all the way up and go over into a dive, pulling its pursuer down to lower altitudes where the F-86 had a performance advantage. Above Mach 0.86, the MiG-15 suffered from severe directional snaking, which made the aircraft a poor gun platform at these high speeds. Buffeting in the MiG began at Mach 0.91, and a nose-up tendency initiated at Mach 0.93. The high-speed stability problems of the MiG-15 were so severe that it was not all that uncommon for a MiG to go into the transonic regime during an air battle, only to lose its entire vertical tail assembly during violent combat maneuvering. The rate of roll of the MiG was too slow, and lateral-directional stability was poor at high altitudes and speeds.
Sounds like both A/C had their respective achilles heal. I'd have to go with superior American pilot training.
-
The leaders wingman flew defensive tactics for the group leader. That is the wingman cleared his 6. The finger 4 was divided into 2 elements. The 2nd element would cover the wingman in much the same way the wingman covered the group leader.. If all 4 were engaged with no cover left, it would be time to go and the F86 would use it's superior dive and speed to escape..
I fail to see how one can fly souly in a defensive manner while still protecting his wing leader. anyone care to take a stab at this one?
And perhaps you are visualizing the fight wrong. Defensive manner meaning they did not break from their group to attack. Their sole purpose was to cover. Offensive tactics left to the flight leader. These are not furball defensive tactics, these are hit and run attacks performed by the flight leader to be covered out to safety to again attack. Remember attacking from disadvantage was still considered a bad idea..
-
quick question...
Can MiG-15 go supersonic like the '86 if it went on dive?
-
Originally posted by 1K3
quick question...
Can MiG-15 go supersonic like the '86 if it went on dive?
No.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Mig wasn't better than the Orenda powered CF-86.
LOL, whoever said that every thread here has some Canadian making some patheic anbd pointles "See Mister, Canada is better, See See See Huh See!!" had you pegged Thrawn...
And to think I have seen you smugly criticize excessive US flag waving on this board...
:rofl :rofl
-
Grun are you saying that the Canadair version wasn't better?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Grun are you saying that the Canadair version wasn't better?
:rofl :rofl :rofl :aok
-
So you admit that Canada is the greatest nation ever to have existed?
-
Originally posted by 1K3
quick question...
Can MiG-15 go supersonic like the '86 if it went on dive?
The short answer, as you saw, was "No".
But, it's very possiable that Mig-15's did go supersonic in dives but because they lacked the the power boosted contols necessary to pull out, they only did it once.
-
Originally posted by Raubvogel
Ask Boroda....according to him the Mig15 had a 2000 to 1 kill ratio vs the F86
Again the money for the fish! :D
USAF shot more MiGs then were ever deployed in Korea. Lost only 70-something. Nice, especially after you understand that most of 64th IAK victories were confirmed by wrecks that felt down to friendly territory.
You have to understand that Americans have a very tricky method of counting losses. To understand it - please simly compare the numbers of combat and "non-combat" losses reported by Americans in Korea.
You can make a search on this BBS, several years ago I even compared actual fight descriptions from Soviet and American sides. Most of the MiGs that Americans reported as "shot down" returned to base w/o a single bullet mark.
B-29 "Command Decision" got credits for 5 MiGs shot down. In real life NO MiG-15s were ever lost to B-29 gunners fire.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Remind me, wasn't the MIG-15 a Russian port of a German design?
Wolf
"After the war, the Ta 183 story continued. The Soviets found a complete set of plans for the Ta 183 in Berlin at the RLM offices, and began construction of six prototypes in March 1946 by the MIG design bureau. On July 2, 1947, the first Soviet-built Ta 183 took to the air powered by a British Rolls-Royce "Nene" turbojet. They discovered that the original Ta 183 design needed either automatic leading edge slots or wing boundry layer fences to alleviate low-speed stalling. Also, as a compromise between high-speed and low-speed flying, the horizontal stabilizer was moved approximately one-third down from the top of the vertical tail. The modified Ta 183 first flew on December 30, 1947 and in May 1948 was ordered into production as the MIG 15."
http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html
-
Originally posted by Otto
The short answer, as you saw, was "No".
But, it's very possiable that Mig-15's did go supersonic in dives but because they lacked the the power boosted contols necessary to pull out, they only did it once.
Not exactly so.
MiG-15s, especially MiG-15prim (first version with RD-45 engines) had a problem with so-called "valyozhka" (flip-over), when at certain speed plane turned belly-up and went into an uncontrolled dive. The problem was solved when the production quality was enforced - original MiG right and left wings could have a difference up to 15cm in measures because of bad production :rolleyes: Please notice that this damn thing flew even with different wings!
About German design: it's not true. Soviet aerodynamics was absolutely home-brewn. Ta-183 could probably never fly. Germans AFAIK didn't have a theory of swept-wing.
One of interesting things about MiG: Eugeniy Pepelyaev wrote that because of wing-fences MiG had a very little ability to slide, so avoiding enemy fire with pedals only was almost impossible.
Another Pepelyaev's experience: he lost a wingman once when intelligence raported that Sabres turn worse then MiGs at high alt. He engaged in a turnfight at 10,000m+ and lost it... After that he never tried to turn against Sabres.
I think that Sabres turned better because Americans had G-suits, and that's why capturing a Sabre was so important for volunteers: they need a compensator device to be studied in USSR.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
About German design: it's not true. Soviet aerodynamics was absolutely home-brewn. Ta-183 could probably never fly. Germans AFAIK didn't have a theory of swept-wing.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
"After the war, the Ta 183 story continued. The Soviets found a complete set of plans for the Ta 183 in Berlin at the RLM offices, and began construction of six prototypes in March 1946 by the MIG design bureau. On July 2, 1947, the first Soviet-built Ta 183 took to the air powered by a British Rolls-Royce "Nene" turbojet. They discovered that the original Ta 183 design needed either automatic leading edge slots or wing boundry layer fences to alleviate low-speed stalling. Also, as a compromise between high-speed and low-speed flying, the horizontal stabilizer was moved approximately one-third down from the top of the vertical tail. The modified Ta 183 first flew on December 30, 1947 and in May 1948 was ordered into production as the MIG 15."
http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html
It's not true, because everyone knows that Russians copied flying saucer design they have stolen from Area-51.
I love this fairy-tales about stolen designs. Now tell me that AK is a stolen StG-43 :D
-
Adolf Busemann ring a bell?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
:rofl
Look at wing fences. The aerodynamics of Ta-183 and Mig-15 is absolutely different. Only sick imagination or heavy drug usage can make someone think that this aircrafts are similar in design. MiG-25 and F-15 look much closer to each other.
-
I was speaking of your theory that the Soviets had no input other than their own in regards to swept-wing technology.
Busemann's 1935 theory was incomplete in the sense that only wings having supersonic sweep were considered.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
LOL, whoever said that every thread here has some Canadian making some patheic anbd pointles "See Mister, Canada is better, See See See Huh See!!" had you pegged Thrawn...
And to think I have seen you smugly criticize excessive US flag waving on this board...
:rofl :rofl
Actually the Canadair Sabre Mk6 with the Orenda 10 Engine was the definitive Sabre model and arguably the very best day fighter of that period.
-
Originally posted by storch
Actually the Canadair Sabre Mk6 with the Orenda 10 Engine was the definitive Sabre model and arguably the very best day fighter of that period.
That isnt the point storch, it nev4er was about the plane.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
That isnt the point storch, it nev4er was about the plane.
I know but I'm just saying in this instance he is correct IMHO.
-
I know. :)
-
http://hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27791&highlight=MiG15
Will look for more discussions like that tomorrow :)
-
Boroda using facts again but that dosen't mean I have to :)
Something different:
About five years ago the Airshow at the local base included a 'dogfight' between a Mig-15 and an F9F Panther. This was the first time I'd ever seen a Mig fly. I was VERY impressed. It was every inch a fighter plane. Very fast and very stable. It totally outclassed the Panther in the demo and the Mig had to wait till the F9F could get on it's tail to 'shoot' it down. (Hometown favorite)
Now, that really dosen't say much about the two planes in actual combat because this was all taking place in a very small area, under 3000' and with two pilots most likely had different ideas about how far they wanted to push there million dollar investments.
But, if you ever see a Mig-15 fly you'll never believe the air war over Korea was anything but dangerous.
-
Boroda,
In reference to our ICQ conversation about the F4U4C dogfight with the Mig15 - it is in the International Airpower Review Vol11. The pilot was Capt. Jesse Folmar of the USMC VMF-312 from the USS Sicily for an interdiction against the Chinese troop conventrations around Chinnamppo. His wingie Lt. Walter Daniels couldnt find any activity when they were about to turn to the coast and 2 Mig15s appeared and setup a firing pass on the F4U's. The Marines Jet'd their ord and turned into the formation. ONe of the Migs made a firing pass and as it turned up and to the left, Folmar turned inside it and fired a burst of 20mm - impacting all along the side and it began to leave a trail of vapor and fuel that quickly turned black. At this instant the jet began decelerating repidly and moments later the pilot ejected. Folmar stated the pilot appeared to be a ball of black smoke and when his chute opened he could tell the pilots suite was on fire. The Mig15 hit the water in a vertical position.
However, more Migs arrived and a monite later, according to Folmar, oraange golf balls enveloped him - he felt a jolt and looking outside the cockpit, he saw his left wing was gutted all the way to his inboard gun. So, he bailed out - was rescured 8 minutes later after hitting the water. An incredible kill for a ww2 prop fighter, even though it did not end the way it should've.
Wolf
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I don't know about the German design ... probably was based on German aerodynamic research to some degree at least. Engine was a copy of the RR Nene.
There was a German prototype (3 prototypes were built) of a new Focke-Wulfe jet fighter. It was the TA-192 IIRC. The MiG-15 bears a striking resemblence to the TA-192. The Soviets captured the 3 prototypes. Experts say it would have been a match for either the MiG-15 or the F-86 Sabre.....and....it would have been armed with wire-guided missiles that had been successfully test fired from FW190's.
-
Originally posted by OIO
Remember its not only the Mig15 but also the Mig17.
In paper both migs, and particularly the Mig17, beat the Sabre.
The only problem was that there were no MiG-17s in Korea. Just the MiG-15 and MiG-15bis.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
From all accounts, the Russian flown Mig-15s had a 3 to 1 kill ratio over U.S. F-86s.
LOLOLOLOL
Unfortunately, this is certified baloney.
Tell ya what, do some research on the Korean war before you make a fool of yourself.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Otto
About five years ago the Airshow at the local base included a 'dogfight' between a Mig-15 and an F9F Panther. This was the first time I'd ever seen a Mig fly. I was VERY impressed. It was every inch a fighter plane. Very fast and very stable. It totally outclassed the Panther in the demo and the Mig had to wait till the F9F could get on it's tail to 'shoot' it down. (Hometown favorite)
Yeah, the MiG-15bis could out-perform the F9F in virtually every dogfighter category. Nonetheless, MiGs generally got their butts waxed when they ran into Panthers. Here's a terrific example. (http://home.att.net/~historyworld/VF-781.html)
My regards,
Widewing
-
If you wish to learn about the F-86 and MiG-15, here's some sites that will get you started.
F-86 (http://home.att.net/~Historyworld/F-86.html)
More detail on F-86 (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p86.html)
MiG-15 (http://home.att.net/~Historyworld/MiG-15.html)
More MiG-15 (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/airdef/mig-15.htm)
Some Korean air war history (http://www.afa.org/magazine/1990/0690jetwar.html)
More history (http://www.afa.org/magazine/valor/0584valor.asp)
And yet more history (http://www.afa.org/magazine/july2003/0703korea.asp)
My regards,
Widewing
-
ah crap you're right my mind hopped from korea to vietnam in the airwar part :P
I will go flush me head in the toilet now. :o
-
My statistics here came from an article in the Sept-Oct 1994 issue of Command magazine and the TV series "Wings of the Red Star". The 64th Fighter Aviation Corps was sent to fight in Korea in Nov 1950. They performed very well, shooting down over 1,300 UN aircraft of all types while losing only 345 of their own. 16 Soviet pilots made ace, with the top scorer being Evgeni Pepelyaev with 23 kills. This info comes from the magazine article, and the author got his info from various US and Russian publications. The 2:1 MiG-15 vs. F-86 statistic is from the "Red Star" series. It should be mentioned that American and Soviet info do not contradict each other with regards to kill tallies. Only if an American plane is brought down over the combat area was it counted as a "loss". U.S. Air Force does not count planes damaged beyond repair or forced to land on the way home. The Soviets do, so their figures are naturally higher with regards to kills.
MiG-15s piloted by Soviets outscored the F-86 guys at around 2:1
http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/SovietAces.html
During the time that the "Honchos" (the nickname given by the Sabre pilots to excellent MiG pilots) were in Korea, between April 1951 and January 1952, they shot down or damaged beyond repair 142 UN aircraft against 68 losses, an overall 2:1 kill ratio.
http://www.acepilots.com/russian/rus_aces.html
-
I knew it was only a matter of time before Commissar Boroda showed up and presented the REAL truth.
-
pssst suntracker, we are talking sabre vs mig. not UN aircraft vs mig.
edit: yikes his source is wings of the red star, weeeeee.
-
Originally posted by Dnil
pssst suntracker, we are talking sabre vs mig. not UN aircraft vs mig.
edit: yikes his source is wings of the red star, weeeeee.
Waddaya mean???? we all know how completely honest and forthcoming russians are!
-
pssst suntracker, we are talking sabre vs mig. not UN aircraft vs mig.
I know, one paragraph talks about UN aircraft, but gives direct information about the Mig15 vs F86.
I find it interesting how people wiggle and squirm when confronted with data that pulls them out of their 'circle of comfort'. "Oh lord, the soviets were better pilots than us in Korea? What ever shall we do?!?!"
-
Funny how you take info from that website as the truth but anyone elses as false. I gave you a great document to look up. You can find it at Maxwell airforce base. From the USAF historical branch. There is a ton of info on this stuff and the vast majority points to conclusion that are complete opposite of yours.
I think we will just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.
-
Originally posted by Dnil
Funny how you take info from that website as the truth but anyone elses as false. I gave you a great document to look up. You can find it at Maxwell airforce base. From the USAF historical branch. There is a ton of info on this stuff and the vast majority points to conclusion that are complete opposite of yours.
I think we will just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that.
I have Soviet data, declassified after 40 years in 1993, when they actually OPPOSED official propaganda (saying that Americans were superior to Soviets in every field).
Soviet pilots were superior to "UN" forces.
150 fighters opposing the whole power of the Western world.
Sleeping in cockpits, on "alert number one". Ready to take off and fight agressors who wanted to destroy Yalu river (Amnokkan) powerstations... Half of the pilots from first shift (winter 1950 - spring 1951) 64th IAK were forced to be removed from duty because of mental and physical exaustion...
And they still remained absolutely superior to "UN forces", only Sabres were formidable enemy for them.
You have to understand that Soviet pilots were anti-aircraft defence unit. They were fighting to protect. And they were always fighting the enemy that had numeric superiority. Their goal was not to shoot down Sabres, but to protect strategic objects like powerstation levees and railway nods from "UN airforce".
-
Originally posted by Boroda
I have Soviet data, declassified after 40 years in 1993, when they actually OPPOSED official propaganda (saying that Americans were superior to Soviets in every field).
Ia meant that official propaganda in the 90s was telling us that Americans were superior to Soviets in every field.
-
Hey Boroda maybe you and Oleg and do a Korea era flight sim, everyone knows all of the Soviet Data is correct on history and flight models would be great.
-
Oleg is a little bit upset about what me and my friends are doing, as well as +HT+, so it's not a question :(
-
I think this looks more like a TA183 than Mig15 does.
(http://www.kmlager.com/albums/album13/saab_j29_65_223.jpg)
http://www.kmlager.com/gallery/album13/saab_j29_65_223 (http://www.kmlager.com/gallery/album13/saab_j29_65_223)
http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/29tunnan.htm (http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/29tunnan.htm)
-
Boroda, in WWII the western allies rushed to grab all the German technology that they could. What makes you believe the Soviets were any different?
This http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html contradicts a couple things I said earlier. Most notably this article claims no TA-183 prototypes were built by the Germans and that the British not the Soviets captured the factory. (Can't find the other source that claimed there were in fact 3 prototypes built and that the Soviets captured them)
You also mentioned the wing fences were different between the TA-183 and the MiG-15. The article I linked addresses that issue. According to this article the Soviets modified the TA-183 by lowering the the horizontal stabilizers as a compromise between high speed and low speed flying. After building 6 TA-183 prototypes the Soviets discovered the TA-183 needed either leading edge slats or wing boundary layer fences to alleviate low speed stalls. You also mentioned that the Germans had no swept wing technology. Pictures of the TA-183 disprove this (TA-183 wings are swept back at 40 degrees), also the ME-262 has swept wings.
Boroda, it would have been incredibly stupid for the Soviets to NOT use captured technology.
I have not yet found information on just how many MiG-15's were sent to North Korea and how many were sent to China. More on that later hopefully.
-
Originally posted by Elfie
also the ME-262 has swept wings.
The Me 262 had swept wings for the same reason the C-47 had swept wings: Moving lift aft to the normal Cg of the airframe. In other words, balance. What was significant about the 262 was the wing's chord to thickness ratio (about 11% I believe).
My regards,
Widewing
-
The F-86 was originally designed with straight wings. Going off data from the 262, it was redesigned with swept wings and became 100mph faster.
-
GS are you implying the US may have used captured German technology in the development of the F-86 Sabre?? *gasp* ;)
-
Originally posted by Raubvogel
I knew it was only a matter of time before Commissar Boroda showed up and presented the REAL truth.
I think you mean zampolit, communist party officer, much the same role as the chaplain in the US army, except the religion is stalinism.
-
Actually GS, the biggest visual differences (imo) between the TA-183/MiG-15, ME-P1101/F-86 is the length of the fuselage. It is much shorter on the German aircraft than it is on the Soviet/American jets.
Although I have not seen any information that says we used German technology to design a specific aircraft I know we did in fact capture alot of German technology. This technology was studied and used by the US.
According to Boroda though, there is absolutely no way the Soviets did the same thing ;)
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p86_9.html
Soviet archives that have only recently come to light officially list 345 Soviet-piloted MiG-15s having been lost to UN aircraft of all types during the Korean conflict. There are no comparable figures available for Chinese or North Korean losses. By the early spring of 1953, most of the Soviet units had been withdrawn from combat, and most of the MiGs were now being flown by Chinese or North Korean pilots.
At the end of the Korean War, the seven American fighter Wings in Korea had 297 Sabres on hand, with 132 of them being with fighter-bomber Wings.
At any one time, only about 60 Sabres could be put into the air, assuming that everything was "right", with the rest of the force remaining at Kimpo or Suwon on alert or down for maintenance. Even when at maximum levels, the Sabre force was far outnumbered by the MiGs. By late 1951, there were enough MiGs available so that the Chinese forces attempted to move a couple of MiG squadrons into the base at Uiju, North Korea. UN air attacks soon made this base untenable, forcing the MiGs back across the Yalu.
A third squadron was added to the 51st FIG (the 39the FIS) in June of 1952. The number disparity still remained, with the MiGs outnumbering the Sabres about 1000 to 150 during late 1952
It is now known that there were Soviet fighter squadrons which participated in the air combat along the Yalu. They were rotated through the MiG bases on the northern side of the Yalu. Soviet Air Force MiGs operated from bases at Antung, Fengcheng, Tak Tung Kao, Takushan, Juantien, and others. At Mukden in Manchuria there were large numbers of MiGs waiting to replace those lost in battle or rotating home. Some Eastern Block units also participated. In addition, Soviet Units carried out extensive training of Chinese and North Korean pilots.
All of the above is copy/pasted from the same article (link to the article provided above)
Still having a hard time coming up with hard numbers for the actual amount of MiG's that were supplied to North Korea and China. Boroda? Maybe you can help us with this?
-
There was an interesting article in the August 2004 Issue of Flight Journal about chasing MiGs North of the Yalu River into China.
" The first MiG was a piece of cake. I was going one way, and he the other way. And he was higher than I was. I did a 180 degree turn and nestled in on his butt. I looked around; nobody behind me, so I put my speed brakes out to get co-equal speed and fired .50 cal. bullets right up his rear! The MiG exploded, and the pilot jumped. It's unusual to see a man going by you in his seat with no airplane attached." Steve Bettinger, 2003. Pretty neat discription of an encounter.
Apparently the MiGs would run for home when the Sabres appeared.
Flight Journal is a great publication.
-
I surprised no one has mentioned a majro flaw in the mig design that led to many victorys for the 86.
The mig had a crappy environmental system. Data collected from a captured mig indicated that the migs could not persue the 86s in a dive because there canopys would fog up.
This led to tactics of taking the migs down to the deck to fight. The mig pilot could not see and would lose the 86 to only have it end up blasting it out of the sky.
Saw that on discovery chan. once. Really good show.
-
Hope this helps..:)
(1)The Sabre rolled faster
(2)The Mig had poor yaw control and would osscilate several times before it became stable enough to aim
(3)Below 15,00 feet any advantage the Mig had disappeared
(4)The Mig outclimbed the F86 at all altitudes...The higher the alt..the more performance advantage the Mig had
(5)The Mig can initially outdive the f86..but sustained dives al low alt..they are equal
(6)Above 20,000 ft the Mig is faster,more so the higher the alt..Below 20,000ft..they are roughly equal
(7)The Mig can out accelerate the sabre in a dive and more noticebly in a climb
(8)The Sabre can decellerate a little faster(w dive brakes deployed)
(9)The Mig has a much higher ceiling
(10)At 40,000ft..the F86 will stall trying to turn with a Mig..At 30,000 they are equal and below that the F86 will outturn the Mig
It's close but I'd give the Mig the edge in performance.
-
Also Boroda, at what point did the Soviets have the most number of (Soviet piloted) MiG's in China? And how many were there?
-
Gunslinger that was just a problem with the mig they captured. Isolated incident.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
I have Soviet data, declassified after 40 years in 1993, when they actually OPPOSED official propaganda (saying that Americans were superior to Soviets in every field).
Soviet pilots were superior to "UN" forces.
150 fighters opposing the whole power of the Western world.
Sleeping in cockpits, on "alert number one". Ready to take off and fight agressors who wanted to destroy Yalu river (Amnokkan) powerstations... Half of the pilots from first shift (winter 1950 - spring 1951) 64th IAK were forced to be removed from duty because of mental and physical exaustion...
And they still remained absolutely superior to "UN forces", only Sabres were formidable enemy for them.
You have to understand that Soviet pilots were anti-aircraft defence unit. They were fighting to protect. And they were always fighting the enemy that had numeric superiority. Their goal was not to shoot down Sabres, but to protect strategic objects like powerstation levees and railway nods from "UN airforce".
:rofl :rofl
Brave communists protecting their innocent North korean comrades from the dastardly american agression that began in june 1950!!
Yes comrade!!! Look at the red banner with pride!!!
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Gunslinger that was just a problem with the mig they captured. Isolated incident.
That's not what the 4 or 5 sabre pilots said in the interviews.....but hey...they were there, what do they know?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
No, but that's what the Russian pilots said. You know ... the ones that were flying the MiG's.
All in all I think it is safe to say that while the MiG did have some important performance advantages the Sabre was the better weapon system for air-to-air combat vs. fighters. Better view, better gun sight, G-suit, and easier to push to the limit. The MiG's gun package and climb rate made it better for bomber interception though ... which was the MiG's primary design goal.
OMG I agree with with Gunther!!!!
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
Hope this helps..:)
(1)The Sabre rolled faster
(2)The Mig had poor yaw control and would osscilate several times before it became stable enough to aim
(3)Below 15,00 feet any advantage the Mig had disappeared
(4)The Mig outclimbed the F86 at all altitudes...The higher the alt..the more performance advantage the Mig had
(5)The Mig can initially outdive the f86..but sustained dives al low alt..they are equal
(6)Above 20,000 ft the Mig is faster,more so the higher the alt..Below 20,000ft..they are roughly equal
(7)The Mig can out accelerate the sabre in a dive and more noticebly in a climb
(8)The Sabre can decellerate a little faster(w dive brakes deployed)
(9)The Mig has a much higher ceiling
(10)At 40,000ft..the F86 will stall trying to turn with a Mig..At 30,000 they are equal and below that the F86 will outturn the Mig
It's close but I'd give the Mig the edge in performance.
This looks like you are comparing the F-86A to the MiG-15bis. Try comparing the F-86F to the MiG and you may change your opinion.
By the way, all Sabres could exceed Mach 1 in a dive, the Mig could not. From 35k, the Sabre would be above Mach 1 by 30k. If the MiG followed, he did so at great risk.
MiGs were very durable aircraft. Hundreds came home riddled by .50 cal. Had the USAF followed the Navy's lead and armed their fighters with four 20mm cannon, MiG losses would have been much higher, and they were very high as it was. No Sabre had 20mm cannon until the F-86H, which arrived in service about 10 months after the Korean cease fire. Navy encounters between F9Fs and MiGs demonstrated the killing power of the 20mm. If the Panther pilot got a gun solution on a MiG, it was doomed (their radar ranging gunsights were very effective). Likewise, the MiG needed only one 37mm hit on any fighter to ruin its pilot's day. The problem was that the 37mm wasn't of much use against fighter, and the two 23mm guns weren't much better. Neither the Sabre or the MiG had a gun package ideally suited for fighter to fighter combat. However, the Sabre's was better, but still far behind the Navy's F9F, F2H, and F3D-2.
By the way, here's an interesting stat. When escorted by Navy F3D night fighters, not a single B-29 was shot down by enemy aircraft. Quite a few Lavochkins, Yaks and even some MiGs were splashed by the Sky Knights. F3Ds absolutely owned the night sky over North Korea.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Rgr that..I was comparing the F86a to the captured Mig.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
This looks like you are comparing the F-86A to the MiG-15bis. Try comparing the F-86F to the MiG and you may change your opinion.
By the way, all Sabres could exceed Mach 1 in a dive, the Mig could not. From 35k, the Sabre would be above Mach 1 by 30k. If the MiG followed, he did so at great risk.
MiGs were very durable aircraft. Hundreds came home riddled by .50 cal. Had the USAF followed the Navy's lead and armed their fighters with four 20mm cannon, MiG losses would have been much higher, and they were very high as it was. No Sabre had 20mm cannon until the F-86H, which arrived in service about 10 months after the Korean cease fire. Navy encounters between F9Fs and MiGs demonstrated the killing power of the 20mm. If the Panther pilot got a gun solution on a MiG, it was doomed (their radar ranging gunsights were very effective). Likewise, the MiG needed only one 37mm hit on any fighter to ruin its pilot's day. The problem was that the 37mm wasn't of much use against fighter, and the two 23mm guns weren't much better. Neither the Sabre or the MiG had a gun package ideally suited for fighter to fighter combat. However, the Sabre's was better, but still far behind the Navy's F9F, F2H, and F3D-2.
By the way, here's an interesting stat. When escorted by Navy F3D night fighters, not a single B-29 was shot down by enemy aircraft. Quite a few Lavochkins, Yaks and even some MiGs were splashed by the Sky Knights. F3Ds absolutely owned the night sky over North Korea.
My regards,
Widewing
Didn't the F-86E come armed with 4x20mms?
-
Originally posted by storch
Didn't the F-86E come armed with 4x20mms?
I think Widewing is correct, the 20MM armed Sabre was the H model. Although one source I saw said they were combat tested but they had problems with the gun gas stalling the engine. A modified blast shield was made and solved the problem with to much gun gas entering the engine and stalling it.
-
I still think too many of you take an "aces high" approach when comparing to aircraft.
yes the thread is titled F-86 vs Mig-15 but rarely is the case when you had two aircraft go one on one with comprable pilots in each.
it's all about the tactics ;)
-
You know after reading till my eyeballs bled I've come to that same conclusion Gunslinger. I think the 86 drivers had better tactics than their opponents. An element fought as an element as to where the Russian pilots often solo'd and didnt rely on their wingman as much.