Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23

Mikoyan-Gurevich
Industry	Aerospace, Defense
Founded	1939
Headquarters	Moscow, Soviet Union

Template:Infobox aircraft

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 (Russian: Микоян и Гуревич МиГ-23; NATO reporting name: Flogger) is a Soviet-designed fighter aircraft featuring variable-sweep wing technology, developed by the Mikoyan-Gurevich design bureau. As a member of the third generation of jet fighters, it shares its era with comparable Soviet models such as the Su-17 "Fitter". Notably, it was the first Soviet fighter equipped with a look-down/shoot-down radar system, the RP-23 Sapfir, and among the pioneers to carry beyond-visual-range missiles. Production commenced in 1969, ultimately exceeding 5,000 units, establishing it as the most extensively manufactured variable-geometry wing aircraft globally. Although largely phased out, some export operators continue to operate it in limited numbers.

The fundamental airframe also served as the foundation for the Mikoyan MiG-27, a ground-attack variant distinguished by replacing the original nose radar with an optical suite incorporating a laser designator and a TV camera, among other modifications.

Development

Following the limitations of the earlier MiG-21, which was swift and maneuverable but constrained by outdated radar, restricted range, and minimal weapons capacity—often limited to just two short-range R-3/K-13 (AA-2 "Atoll") missiles—the need for a successor emerged in the early 1960s. The new design was tasked with surpassing the MiG-21 in performance and operational radius while integrating advanced avionics and armaments capable of engaging targets at beyond visual range. A critical requirement set by the Soviet Air Force (VVS) was significantly reduced take-off distance. Additionally, improved low-altitude speed and handling characteristics were sought, although extreme maneuverability was not prioritized. These criteria led Mikoyan to evaluate two primary approaches: utilizing lift jets to augment vertical thrust or implementing variable-sweep wings—a concept developed by TsAGI applicable both to entirely new designs and adaptations of existing airframes.^[1]^[2]

The lift jet approach resulted in the "23-01," also identified as the MiG-23PD (from Russian Podyomnye Dvigatyeli, meaning lift jets), featuring a tailed delta configuration similar to the MiG-21 but equipped with two lift jets embedded within the fuselage. Its maiden flight occurred on 3 April 1967; however, this concept proved inefficient since the lift jets became dead weight once airborne.^[3]^[4] Concurrently, development proceeded on an alternative design led by A.A Andreyev’s team at Mikoyan, which focused on producing a variable-sweep wing prototype designated "23-11" starting in 1965.^[5]

File:Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MLD Flogger K USAF.jpg

MiG-23 parked

The "23-11" incorporated wings adjustable to sweep angles of 16°, 45°, and 72°, demonstrating greater promise than its lift jet counterpart. Its initial flight took place on 10 June 1967 under test pilot Aleksandr Vasilyevich Fedotov.^[6] Subsequent testing involved six additional flight prototypes and two static test airframes, all powered by the Tumansky R-27-300 turbojet engine delivering approximately 77 kN (17,300 lbf) of thrust. In December 1967, authorization was granted to commence serial production of this model. The first production variant, designated "MiG-23S" (NATO codename 'Flogger-A'), conducted its inaugural flight on 21 May 1969 with Fedotov at the controls.^[7]

Western designs such as the General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark and McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II influenced aspects of the MiG-23’s development. However, Soviet designers aimed for a lighter single-engine fighter prioritizing agility rather than heavy weight or inherent stability. While both the F-111 and MiG-23 were conceived as fighters, the F-111’s substantial mass and stable flight characteristics ultimately relegated it to an interdictor role rather than air superiority combat.^[8] Consequently, the MiG-23 maintained sufficient lightness and maneuverability to engage effectively in dogfighting scenarios against adversary fighters.

Armament

The weaponry equipped on the MiG-23 evolved alongside its successive variants. The earliest production model, the MiG-23S, featured the S-21 fire control system, which was adapted from the MiG-21S/SM. This system incorporated the RP-22SM Sapfir-21 radar paired with an ASP-PFD-21 lead computing gunsight and was capable of carrying only four R-3/K-13 (AA-2 "Atoll") air-to-air missiles, typically composed of two semi-active radar homing (SARH) R-3Rs and two infrared homing (IR) R-3Ss, in addition to a Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon. In a ground strike role, the MiG-23S could be outfitted with two Kh-23 (AS-7 "Kerry") radio-guided air-to-surface missiles, two to four UB-16 rocket pods loaded with S-5 or S-24 rockets, or carry up to 2,000 kilograms of assorted bombs.

The 1971 edition of the MiG-23 introduced the Sapfir-23L radar and TP-23 infrared search and track (IRST) system, enabling it to launch the new beyond-visual-range (BVR) R-23 (AA-7 "Apex") missile, though initially only the SARH R-23R variant was compatible. Nevertheless, the Sapfir-23L radar was regarded as unreliable and lacked look-down/shoot-down capabilities.

File:MiG-23 armament.jpg

MiG-23M "Flogger-B" equipped with R-23 and R-60 missiles

The MiG-23M represented the definitive first-generation fighter model, incorporating the enhanced Sapfir-23D radar with look-down/shoot-down functionality. This version could carry two R-23 missiles—either SARH R-23R or IR R-23T variants—alongside two R-60 (AA-8 "Aphid") missiles. Beginning with aircraft number 3201, the introduction of the APU-60-2 double-rail launcher expanded missile capacity to eight R-60s. The aircraft could also transport up to 3,000 kilograms of bombs and rockets; from serial number 3701 onward, it gained capability to fire Kh-23 and Kh-23M air-to-surface missiles. Additionally, every VVS MiG-23M was equipped to carry a single nuclear bomb beneath the fuselage via a specialized adapter, either a 10-kiloton RN-24 or a 30-kiloton RN-40.

In the subsequent generation MiG-23ML, a new SUV-2ML weapons control system enabled simultaneous carriage of both types of R-23 missiles. The standard loadout featured an R-23R on the starboard wing pylon and an R-23T on the port side. Apart from other munitions—including a nuclear bomb—the MiG-23ML could also be armed with two UPK-23-250 gun pods mounting 23 mm cannons on underwing pylons. From 1981 onwards, the MiG-23MLA variant was capable of deploying upgraded Vympel R-24R/T missiles.

The final fighter iteration, the MiG-23MLD, maintained compatibility with enhanced R-24R/T missiles and could additionally carry pairs of B8M1 rocket pods containing twenty S-8 rockets each, Kh-23/Kh-23M air-to-surface missiles, or a single RN-24 or RN-40 nuclear bomb. Its maximum bomb load was limited to 2,000 kilograms; typical configurations included four FAB-500 general-purpose bombs or ZAB-500 napalm bombs. Alternative arrangements comprised sixteen FAB-100 GP bombs mounted on four ejector racks, four FAB-250 GP bombs, or two RBK-500 cluster bombs.

Cockpit

File:Cockpit Mig23 high resolution.jpg

High-resolution image of the MiG-23 cockpit

File:MiG Ejector Seat.jpg

KM-1 ejection seat

The MiG-23 cockpit represented a step forward in ergonomics compared to earlier Soviet fighter designs. Despite this, pilots still faced a considerable workload, needing to operate numerous switches and monitor multiple gauges, unlike more contemporary aircraft equipped with HOTAS systems. The instrument panel incorporated a white stripe designed to assist pilots in centering the control column during loss-of-control scenarios.^[9] ^[10] To prevent pilots from surpassing a 17° angle of attack, the control stick featured a "knuckle rapper" that tapped the pilot’s knuckles as this threshold was approached.^[9]

Visibility from the cockpit was somewhat limited in the MiG-23, although forward sightlines were improved relative to the MiG-21.^[10] Rearward visibility was notably restricted, partly due to the design of the ejection seat which curved around the pilot’s head, forcing them to lean forward to see sideways or behind. To aid rearward observation, a mirror or 'periscope' was installed within the canopy’s center rail, similar to that found on the MiG-17. This periscope featured an infinity focus, providing a clear but narrow view directly behind the aircraft.^[9]^[10]

The KM-1 ejection seat used in the MiG-23 was engineered for operation at extreme altitudes and speeds, incorporating leg stirrups, shoulder harnesses, a pelvic D-ring, and a three-parachute deployment system. Ejection procedures were somewhat lengthy: pilots needed to position their feet in the stirrups, release the control column, grasp two trigger handles, then squeeze and lift them. Upon initiation, a small parachute roughly the size of a large handkerchief deployed from a telescoping rod extending from the rear top of the seat as it cleared the windscreen windbreak. This initial chute helped orient the seat into the windblast and stabilize its flight path over and behind the vertical stabilizer. Following separation of this chute and rod, a larger drogue parachute deployed to decelerate the seat further, allowing for main parachute deployment. At low altitudes, a barometric sensor accelerated drogue chute separation. However, one limitation of the KM-1 was its lack of zero-zero capability; it required a minimum speed of 90 knots for safe ejection.^[11]

From the MiG-23 Edition 1971 onward, the head-down radar scope was replaced by an ASP-23D gunsight combined with a head-up display (HUD), which projected radar data directly onto its glass.^[12] Later models such as the MiG-23MLA upgraded this system to an ASP-17ML gunsight/HUD.^[13] Due to radar information being confined to the HUD’s combining glass, only a narrow scanning sector was available. Consequently, pilots had to maintain close altitude alignment and position themselves well ahead of targets for effective detection, relying heavily on precise ground-controlled interception (GCI) guidance.^[14] Pilots from Israel who operated captured MiG-23s reported that its systems were relatively straightforward to use.^[15]

Control surfaces

The MiG-23 was one of the pioneering Soviet fighters to incorporate variable-geometry wings. These wings were hydraulically actuated via a compact lever positioned beneath the throttle in the cockpit. Pilots could select from three primary sweep angles tailored to various flight regimes. The first setting, with wings fully extended at 16°, was utilized during takeoff, landing, or cruising at speeds up to Mach 0.7. The intermediate sweep angle of 45° was employed for standard fighter maneuvers, high-speed cruising, or intercepting targets at low altitude. The wings were swept fully back to 72° for high-altitude interceptions or rapid low-level dashes.^[16]

File:Aircraft engine MiG-23 sweep wing mechanism.jpg

MiG-23 wing-sweep mechanism

Rather than traditional ailerons, the MiG-23 used spoilers to manage roll control when the wings were set at 16° and 45°. Additionally, the wings featured trailing edge flaps and leading edge slats designed to enhance short takeoff and landing capabilities.^[16] Although cockpit instrumentation displayed wing sweep positions, their movement, and associated Mach limits, it lacked guidance on the optimal wing configuration for current flight conditions.^[17]

Pitch and roll control were managed by two tailerons, which worked in tandem with wing control surfaces during non-fully swept wing configurations. The aircraft also incorporated a sizable vertical stabilizer, housing the brake parachute used during landings. To improve directional stability at high velocities, a ventral fin was installed; this fin pivoted sideways upon landing gear extension to avoid ground contact during takeoff and landing.^[10]^[16]

With the introduction of the Edition 1971 variant, known as Edition 2 wings, the surface area increased by approximately 20%, prompting adjustments to wing sweep angles to 18°, 47°40', and 74°40'—though cockpit displays and manuals retained the original angle designations for simplicity. A dogtooth extension was added while leading-edge slats were removed to streamline production; however, this change intensified stability challenges at high angles of attack and complicated takeoff and landing operations.^[12] The subsequent definitive Edition 3 wing configuration, debuted on the MiG-23M, preserved Edition 2 dimensions but reinstated the leading-edge slats.^[18]

The MiG-23MLD featured reinforced wing pivots that enabled a fourth sweep position at 33°, intended to decrease turning radius and facilitate rapid deceleration in close combat. Despite these advantages, handling became more demanding and acceleration performance declined noticeably at this setting. Consequently, usage of the 33° sweep was generally restricted to seasoned pilots, with operational doctrine continuing to favor the 45° position during engagements.^[15]

Engine

The initial powerplant for the MiG-23 was the Tumansky R-29-300 engine, delivering a thrust of 122 kN (12,500 kgf; 27,500 lbf), which provided ample power even at the aircraft's maximum velocity of Mach 2.4. This engine featured rapid acceleration capabilities, requiring only 3 to 4 seconds to transition from idle to full thrust, and the afterburner could be ignited in under a second. The aircraft’s maximum speed was limited by the structural integrity of the canopy rather than engine output. To maintain optimal temperatures for both avionics and pilot comfort, louvers in the engine intake supplied air to the environmental control system.

Comparable to early variants of the F-4 Phantom’s J79 engine, the R-29 produced visible smoke when operating without afterburner engagement. The engine casing reached very high temperatures during operation, occasionally causing false fire warnings. Additionally, the engine’s operational lifespan was relatively short, typically lasting only a few hundred sorties before necessitating replacement. This limited durability was partly due to Russian design philosophy aiming for engine service lives around 150 hours. Furthermore, this approach facilitated revenue generation from export customers through sales of replacement engines in exchange for hard currency. Engine replacement was a complex procedure since it required splitting the aircraft fuselage at its midpoint.

Early MiG-23 models also faced challenges with the engine’s inability to withstand high yaw maneuvering stresses. In situations where the aircraft entered a spin, bending of the engine shaft could occur, causing compressor blades to contact each other and release debris into the turbine section. This debris could damage turbine blades and ultimately lead to complete engine failure. The introduction of the R-29B-300 variant remedied this structural weakness.

Fuel

The MiG-23 prototype contained three internal fuel tanks within its fuselage, with capacities of approximately 1,920, 820 and 710 litres (510, 220 and 190 US gal) respectively. Additionally, each wing housed three integral fuel tanks holding 62.5, 137.5 and 200 litres (16.5, 36.3 and 52.8 US gal) each. Notably, the second fuselage tank doubled as the wing carry-through box and was constructed using thick plates of VNS-2 steel alloy welded together for structural strength. The 1971 redesign of the MiG-23 incorporated a fourth fuselage tank with a volume of 470 litres (120 US gal) placed toward the rear section.

This fuel arrangement granted the MiG-23 superior endurance compared to a clean F-4 Phantom (without external drop tanks). At an endurance cruise speed of 230 knots, a single sortie could last up to one hour; however, engaging the afterburner would reduce this endurance to approximately 45 minutes or less. With the introduction of the MiG-23M variant, pylons were installed under the variable-sweep wings capable of carrying 800 litres (210 US gal) drop tanks. These tanks could only be carried when wings were fully extended and had to be jettisoned if not in that position. The MiG-23ML further expanded fuel capacity by allowing a third 800-liter drop tank mounted beneath the fuselage.

Initial production models experienced structural issues with the No. 2 fuel tank in the fuselage developing fatigue cracks due to its integral role in airframe structure rather than being contained within flexible bladders. These hairline fractures led to fuel leakage and imposed severe g-force restrictions until corrective measures were implemented. Early solutions involved welding internal reinforcement plates and adding stiffeners on the external skin until manufacturing improvements resolved these problems in later versions.

Performance evaluations

Numerous adversaries of the USSR and its allied nations have had the chance to assess the MiG-23's capabilities firsthand. In mid-1977, following a shift in its political alliances, Egypt transferred several MiG-23MS and MiG-23BN aircraft to the United States. These jets were scrutinized under two covert programs, designated HAVE PAD and HAVE BOXER, respectively. Alongside other Soviet fighters, including additional MiG-23s obtained from various sources, these aircraft were incorporated into a classified training initiative called project Constant Peg, aimed at acquainting U.S. pilots with Soviet aviation technology. Furthermore, in 1991 a Cuban pilot defected to the U.S. flying a MiG-23BN, and in 1981 a Libyan MiG-23 pilot sought asylum in Greece; both aircraft were subsequently returned to their countries of origin.

Initial U.S. intelligence assessments suggested that the MiG-23 possessed decent turning ability and moderate acceleration. However, testing conducted during HAVE PAD disproved this notion. The fighter’s maneuverability was roughly on par with an early F-4E Phantom, yet it was easily outmatched in turns by more advanced American fighters such as the F-15 Eagle or F-4Es upgraded with leading-edge slats. At elevated angle of attack values, the MiG-23 exhibited significant instability and was prone to losing controlled flight. Conversely, its acceleration was exceptional, especially at low altitudes below 10,000 ft or 3,000 m and during transonic flight, where it could outpace any contemporary U.S. fighter. Its relatively small radar cross-section also made visual detection challenging. The overall conclusion from HAVE PAD was that while the MiG-23 was deficient as a dogfighter, it excelled as an interceptor capable of swift hit-and-run engagements. In skilled hands, it remained a formidable adversary.

Pilots involved in Constant Peg echoed these findings, emphasizing the MiG-23’s interceptor strengths but expressing reservations about its handling characteristics. Criticisms included an airframe vulnerable to overstressing; instability in yaw near Mach 1 and again approaching Mach 2; narrow landing gear prone to skidding under adverse conditions despite being designed for rough fields; and susceptibility to ingesting debris due to its low-slung engine intakes. These factors contributed to the aircraft’s reputation among American pilots as hazardous to operate.

Within Constant Peg circles, the MiG-23 earned nicknames such as "Looping Hog," reflecting its ungainly flight behavior and limited dogfighting maneuvers—it could reliably execute only large loops among basic fighter maneuvers (BFM). At sufficient speed, it could perform loops approximately 6.4 kilometres (4 mi) high, which were difficult for opponents to follow closely; after completing the loop, it would break inside adversaries’ turns and disengage beyond visual range before re-engaging from another angle. According to Col (ret.) John "Sax" Saxman, another tactic employed was the "no circle fight," where instead of engaging in one- or two-circle turning fights, the MiG-23 would accelerate past an opponent and re-enter combat from a different vector.

The MiG-23’s strengths and weaknesses were well understood by allied air forces operating the type, such as the East German Air Force. Template:Blockquote

The Constant Peg pilots aimed to impart these insights on the MiG-23’s combat employment to frontline Tactical Air Command units (known as Blue Air) during training exercises: Template:Blockquote Template:Blockquote

The fighter’s velocity served as a valuable training tool for scenarios likely in any conflict with Soviet forces: firstly at low altitude to demonstrate its capability to chase down any NATO or U.S. strike aircraft except for late-model F-111F Aardvark variants attempting fast penetration missions; secondly to simulate encounters with high-altitude interceptors like the MiG-25 Foxbat, which targeted critical assets such as aerial refueling tankers or airborne early warning and control platforms like the E-3 Sentry.

Early versions of the MiG-23M were also employed during Soviet evaluations of captured American Northrop F-5 fighters obtained from North Vietnam. The Soviets acknowledged that the F-5 exhibited superior agility at certain speeds and altitudes compared with early MiG-23Ms—an important factor motivating development of later models such as the MiG-23MLD and MiG-29. These comparative tests informed modifications across several fourth-generation Soviet aircraft designs. However, initial MiG-23 variants were not optimized for countering agile opponents like the F-5.

According to data from the MiG-23ML technical manual, this variant achieves an instantaneous turn rate of 16.7 degrees per second and sustains 14.1 degrees per second at 1 km (3,300 ft) altitude flying at approximately 490 kn (900 km/h), under maximum load factor of 7g. Completing a horizontal turn requires roughly 25 seconds on this model.

Near-ground maximum instantaneous turn rates are approximately 16.5 deg/s for both the MiG-23 model 71 and MiG-23M variants, increasing slightly to 18.3 deg/s on the MiG-23ML.[citation needed] Generally speaking, with wing sweep set at 45 degrees, these figures are notably inferior compared to aircraft employing wings swept at 16 degrees.

Maximum sustained turn rates close to ground level measure about 13.35 deg/s for model 71, 14.5 deg/s for MiG-23M, and 15.4 deg/s for MiG-23ML.[citation needed]

Regarding climb performance at low altitudes, there is a pronounced difference between early model 1971 variants and later ones like the MiG-23M; differences between the M and ML versions are smaller but still perceptible. The climb rate for the subvariant from 1971 stands around 174 m/s (34,300 ft/min), which is modest for fighters in this class. The more powerful engine on the MiG-23M raises this figure to approximately 222 m/s (43,700 ft/min), nearly 50 m/s (10,000 ft/min) higher—aligning better with expectations for a potent fighter aircraft. Weight reductions on the MiG-23ML further enhance climb rate up to around 242 m/s (47,600 ft/min), comparable with top-tier fighters from second through fourth generations.^[19]

Operational history

Aviation historians from Western and Russian backgrounds often hold contrasting views regarding the combat performance of their respective military aircraft and tactical doctrines. This divergence largely stems from nationalistic biases favoring their own aerospace industries and academic institutions. Additionally, these experts tend to endorse narratives aligned with their political perspectives, leading to the acceptance of numerous conflicting and mutually exclusive accounts.^[20]^[21]^[22] Prior to the widespread availability of portable cameras in recent years, photographic documentation of specific combat losses and successes was scarce, with only a limited number of engagements independently verified by both sides.^[23]

Soviet and Warsaw Pact

File:MiG-23-red12.jpg

MiG-23M

The MiG-23 officially entered service with the Soviet Air Forces (VVS) on 4 January 1974; however, even before its widespread deployment, it encountered numerous initial challenges. Stability concerns and restricted maneuverability led to multiple flight limitations being imposed during the mid-1970s as corrective measures were implemented. Although various upgrades were introduced, these operational constraints were only partially eased following the arrival of the MiG-23MLD variant. Nevertheless, the substantial deployment of MiG-23s across Central Europe posed a significant strategic threat in any potential conflict with Western forces.^[24]

Despite many pilots’ disappointment that the MiG-23 was less agile than the MiG-21 in turning engagements, it provided capabilities absent in the MiG-21, notably as a high-energy fighter equipped with beyond visual range (BVR) missiles. Throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, Soviet aviators continued to operate the MiG-23 in a rigid manner similar to that of the MiG-21—as a high-speed point-defense interceptor reliant on GCI guidance. It was only after the widespread introduction of the MiG-23MLD that pilots began employing it effectively as a genuine air-superiority fighter.^[24]

During the 1980s, accident rates for MiG-23s within the VVS averaged approximately 12.5 incidents per 100,000 flight hours. Warsaw Pact allies often experienced even higher loss rates: the Hungarian Air Force recorded 24.3 major accidents per 100,000 hours; East Germany’s air force had 20.4; Bulgaria’s air force suffered 18; and Poland’s air force reported 11.3 per 100,000 flying hours.^[25]

By 1990, more than 1,500 MiG-23 variants were operational within both the VVS and the V-PVO. Following the Soviet Union's collapse, Russia’s new air force began reducing its fighter fleet, deciding to retire single-engine aircraft like the MiG-23 and MiG-27 to storage status. The final model withdrawn was the MiG-23P air-defense version, which left active service on 1 May 1998.^[26]

After German reunification, no MiG-23s were integrated into the German Air Force, but twelve ex-East German MiGs were transferred to the United States. Upon Czechoslovakia’s division into Czech Republic and Slovakia, all MiG-23s went to the Czech Air Force and were retired by 1998. Hungary phased out its fleet in 1996; Poland followed in 1999; Romania in 2000; and Bulgaria by 2004.

Between the late 1970s and late 1980s, the Soviet Air Force employed the MiG-23 as an aggressor aircraft akin to the United States Navy Fighter Weapons School's "Top Gun" program. This aircraft proved challenging for early-model MiG-29 pilots lacking experience. Training exercises demonstrated that a skilled pilot flying a MiG-23MLD could secure favorable kill ratios against MiG-29s by employing hit-and-run tactics rather than engaging in close dogfights. Aggressor units often adorned their aircraft with shark mouth nose art just behind the radome; many of these pilots were veterans of the Soviet–Afghan War. In the late '80s, these aggressor roles transitioned to MiG-29s bearing similar shark mouth markings.^[27]

Soviet–Afghan War

During operations over Afghanistan, Soviet MiG-23s frequently escorted missions near Pakistan and Iran’s borders—missions beyond the range capability of the shorter-legged MiG-21s. Some reports claim several were shot down during this conflict.

The earliest recorded deployment of MiG-23s in Afghanistan took place in April 1982 when aircraft from the 152nd IAP provided escort for a large-scale airstrike against Rabat-e-Jali in Nimruz province. This mission ended disastrously when insufficient air cover led to friendly helicopters inadvertently crossing into Iranian territory and being engaged by Iranian F-4 Phantoms.

From around 1987 onwards, Soviet and Afghan MiG-23s engaged Pakistani F-16 fighters on several occasions during border skirmishes in the Soviet–Afghan War. Two MiGs were reportedly downed by Pakistani F-16s while crossing into Pakistan^[28]—though these losses remain unconfirmed^[29]. Conversely, one Pakistani F-16 was shot down on April 29, 1987; Western sources attribute this incident to friendly fire,^[30] whereas both the Soviet-backed Afghan government at that time and Pakistan claimed Soviet jets shot down this aircraft—a report corroborated by contemporary coverage from The New York Times and Washington Post.^[31]^[32] According to Russian accounts of this engagement, Pakistani F-16s confronted Soviet MiG-23MLDs during bombing runs along their shared border; Soviet pilots reported being attacked before witnessing an F-16 explode mid-air—possibly due to gunfire from a pilot who did not officially claim a kill because rules prohibited attacking Pakistani aircraft without authorization.^[33]

In another incident in 1988 near Afghan airspace borders, Soviet MiG-23MLDs armed with R-23 missiles (NATO reporting name AA-7 "Apex") shot down two Iranian AH‑1J Cobra helicopters that had entered unauthorized territory. Similarly, on June 21, 1978—a decade earlier—a PVO-operated MiG‑23M piloted by Captain V. Shkinder destroyed two Iranian Boeing CH‑47 Chinook helicopters violating Soviet airspace; one was taken down with two R‑60 missiles while cannon fire eliminated the other.

Despite these air-to-air encounters occurring sporadically, most sorties flown over Afghanistan focused on close air support missions rather than aerial combat patrol or escort duties—which accounted for only about fifteen percent of total operations.^[34] Missions typically involved unguided bombs and cluster munitions targeting diverse objectives; advanced weaponry was seldom used due to challenging terrain conditions coupled with threats from man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA). Attack runs were generally conducted in pairs executing dives at approximately forty-five degrees before bomb release. After sustaining heavy losses during 1984–85 operations, tactical doctrines were revised to establish minimum attack altitudes initially set at around 3,500 meters (11,480 feet) then raised further to approximately 4,500 meters (14,760 feet). These adjustments reduced strike accuracy but effectively minimized casualties—none were recorded throughout 1986.^[35]

The two-seat variant, MiG‑23UB, also operated extensively during this conflict performing strike missions as well as reconnaissance and target designation roles. It was additionally used to acclimate incoming MiG‑27 pilots to Afghanistan’s high-altitude hot climate when deployed beginning in 1988. On occasion, these trainers functioned as improvised 'AWACS' platforms with an officer occupying the rear seat directing strike formations below—a concept informally termed "I am my own AWACS" among involved Soviet crews.^[36]

Naval aviation

On two separate occasions, Soviet Air Force-operated MiG‑23s were reassigned to naval aviation duties within the Soviet Navy. In 1984 an entire regiment was deployed to Vietnam tasked with escorting naval patrol flights conducted by Tupolev Tu‑95 bombers—forming what later became known as the 169th Guards Composite Air Regiment.^[37]Template:Unreliable source? Operating from Cam Ranh Bay airbase they completed over four hundred sorties until their withdrawal back to air force control in 1989.

The second transfer occurred between 1990 and 1994 when nine trainer-model MiG‑23UB aircraft supported pilot training for Northern Fleet aviation’s 88th Separate Fighter Bomber Regiment, preparing aviators for transition onto Mikoyan’s variable-sweep wing fighter-bomber—the MiG‑27.^[36]

Hostilities with Israel (post-1973)

File:Bassem Adel's MiG-23 in Megiddo Airfield, 1989.jpg

Bassem Adel's MiG-23 at Megiddo Airfield, 1989

File:MIG-23-hatzerim-1.jpg

MiG-23 exhibited in Israel following defection from Syria

Syria received its initial batch of MiG-23 aircraft in April 1974. Integrating the MiG-23 into operational status proved challenging due to substandard manufacturing quality, frequent mechanical failures, and the absence of comprehensive technical manuals. By year-end, Syrian forces had already lost approximately 13 MiG-23s to accidents or malfunctions. The initial combat-deployed MiG-23s were export models with significant restrictions. When compared to the MiG-21, these jets were more mechanically intricate, costlier to maintain, and exhibited reduced maneuverability. The first exported interceptor variant, the MiG-23MS, utilized the same armament system as the older MiG-21S and featured radar highly susceptible to electronic countermeasures (ECM), an area where Israeli forces excelled.

On 13 April 1974, following nearly 100 days of artillery duels and skirmishes along the Golan Heights, Syrian helicopters inserted commandos who launched an assault on the Israeli observation post at Jebel Sheikh. This action triggered intense air and ground confrontations lasting nearly a week during the War of Attrition in the Bashan Salient. On 19 April 1974, Captain al-Masry, piloting a MiG-23MS on a weapons test flight, encountered a formation of Israeli Air Force F-4E jets and successfully downed two after launching three missiles. While preparing to engage a third F-4 with cannon fire, he was mistakenly shot down by Syrian surface-to-air missile fire. Following this engagement, Syria received an additional 24 MiG-23MS interceptors along with a similar number of MiG-23BN attack variants over the next year. In 1977, Syria procured between 28 and 30 MiG-23MF models, with deliveries commencing in 1978.

Between 1981 and 1985, Syrian forces employed MiG-23MF, MiG-23MS, and MiG-23BN aircraft during combat operations over Lebanon. On 26 April 1981, Syria asserted that two Israeli A-4 Skyhawks attacking a camp near Sidon were shot down by two MiG-23MS fighters. However, Israeli records do not confirm any aircraft losses on that date. According to Russian historian Vladimir Ilyin, Syrian losses in June 1982 included six MiG-23MFs, four MiG-23MSs, and fourteen MiG-23BNs; an additional fighter was lost in July that year. Israeli forces claimed to have shot down two MiG-23s in 1985—a claim denied by Syrian sources. Overall, between 1982 and 1985, Syria lost approximately 11 to 13 MiG-23 fighters in aerial combat. Israel acknowledges only one confirmed loss during this period: a BQM-34 Firebee drone destroyed by a Syrian MiG-23MF on 6 June 1982.

In the early 2000s, Israeli unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) frequently conducted reconnaissance flights over Lebanon and occasionally penetrated Syrian airspace. Syrian MiG-23s were regularly scrambled in response and reportedly succeeded in shooting down multiple UAVs beginning in July 2001. Between 2001 and 2006, Syrian forces are believed to have downed up to ten Israeli UAVs annually over their territory.

Syrian Civil War

A MiG-23MS from the Syrian Air Force gained symbolic significance during the Siege of Abu al-Duhur Airbase: on 7 March 2012, Syrian opposition forces struck the abandoned aircraft using a 9K115-2 Metis-M anti-tank guided missile. By March 2013, rebels had taken control of the base and displayed the battered and deteriorated MiG. Eventually, in May 2013, the Syrian Air Force targeted the wreckage with bombing runs to ensure its complete destruction.Template:Fix/category^{[citation needed]}

On 24 July 2012, Syrian MiG-23BNs conducted bombing raids over Aleppo, marking the initial deployment of fixed-wing aircraft for airstrikes in the Syrian civil war.^[38]^[39]^[40]

Reports on 13 August 2012 indicated that a Syrian MiG-23BN was downed near Deir ez-Zor by Free Syrian Army fighters; however, government officials attributed its loss to mechanical failure.^[41]

Following this event, MiG-23s along with other Syrian Air Force fighter jets have frequently been observed conducting strikes against rebel forces. Opposition groups have claimed multiple instances of MiGs being either shot down or destroyed while on the ground.

On 23 March 2014, a Turkish F-16 fired an AIM-9 Sidewinder missile that successfully shot down a Syrian MiG-23 near Kessab. The pilot ejected safely and was retrieved by allied forces. According to Turkish authorities, the Syrian jet had breached Turkish airspace and was intercepted after several radio warnings as it neared the border. Another MiG-23 subsequently returned to Syria after crossing into Turkish airspace.^[42]

In June 2017, Syrian MiG-23MLD fighters shot down Jordanian Selex ES Falco UAVs near Derra. On the 15th, one UAV was destroyed, followed by another on the 16th; both were engaged using R-24R missiles.^[43]

A Syrian MiG-23 crashed in Deir ez-Zor Governorate on 9 September 2020; details regarding the pilot’s status remain undisclosed.^[44]

During the 2024 Syrian opposition offensive, rebel forces succeeded in seizing several abandoned MiG-23 and Aero L-39 Albatros jets following their capture of Aleppo.^[45]

Iraq

Iraq acquired its initial MiG-23 fleet in 1973 to phase out its existing Hawker Hunter and MiG-17F aircraft. Deliveries spanned from 1974 through 1978, comprising 18 MiG-23MS interceptors, approximately 36 to 40 MiG-23BN attack planes, and several MiG-23UB trainers. The Iraqi Air Force faced considerable challenges integrating these new jets. Training conducted in the Soviet Union offered limited flight hours, and the lack of technical manuals or operational guides forced Iraqi personnel to conduct their own flight testing. Furthermore, the MiG-23's flight characteristics and avionics were widely criticized, compounded by substandard build quality of the airframes. Consequently, by 1978, at least a dozen MiG-23s had been lost due to accidents. To offset these losses, Iraq procured an additional batch of MiG-23MS aircraft in the late 1970s.

Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988)

File:MiG-23IraqAF-atBelgradeMuseum Combined.jpg

Ex-Iraqi MiG-23ML displayed in Belgrade

During the Iran–Iraq War, the MiG-23 served in both air-to-air combat and ground attack missions. On the conflict’s first day (22 September), Iraqi forces deployed both MiG-23MS and MiG-23BN variants in strikes targeting Iranian airfields. The following day saw an Iraqi MiG-23MS successfully down an Iranian Northrop F-5E; however, it also marked the initial loss of three Iraqi MiG-23BNs shot down by Iranian fighters and air defense systems. In subsequent months, further MiG-23BN losses occurred, exacerbated by a Soviet embargo imposed on Iraq in response to the war. By the close of 1980, pilots flying MiG-23MS interceptors claimed three F-5E kills exclusively over Iraqi territory.

Despite these restrictions, five MiG-23MFs delivered before hostilities commenced were rapidly deployed during late 1981. Inspired by the success of Mirage F1 units that downed two F-14 Tomcats on 15 November 1981, Iraqi MiG-23 interceptor pilots attempted similar surprise tactics against Iranian Tomcats shortly thereafter. However, Iranian pilots adapted quickly: while F-14s maintained high-altitude combat air patrols, pairs of F-5Es or F-4 Phantoms patrolled lower altitudes to detect approaching Iraqi fighters early. This tactic proved effective when two MiG-23MFs were shot down by F-14s on 25 November after being spotted by F-5 escorts. Similar losses continued during this period. Meanwhile, MiG-23BN squadrons sustained significant casualties mainly due to engagements with F-14s and MIM-23B I-HAWK surface-to-air missile systems. Notably, the 1970s-era Iraqi MiG-23BNs were equipped with only rudimentary radar warning receivers and lacked electronic countermeasure (ECM) suites despite prior payments for such systems. In 1982, following the Soviet embargo lift, deliveries resumed with 18 additional MiG-23MF interceptors and 18 ECM-equipped MiG-23BN attack aircraft.

Between 1983 and 1984, Iraqi MiG-23MFs frequently intercepted Iranian RF-4E reconnaissance flights over Iraq. Although unarmed, these reconnaissance planes were difficult targets as each was escorted by two F-14 Tomcats; on 1 January 1984, an F-14 shot down a MiG-23MF during escort duty. Later that month and again in June, MiG-23MFs succeeded in shooting down RF-4Es. This period also saw Iraq receive its first batch of MiG-23ML variants—at least 64 were ordered overall. On 11 August 1984, an Iraqi MiG-23ML engaged and destroyed an F-14 piloted by IRIAF Colonel Hashem All-e-Agha over the Persian Gulf using an R-60MK missile. Another notable incident occurred on 2 September 1986 when an Iraqi MiG-23ML shot down Iranian Captain Ahmad Moradi Talebi’s F-14A as he attempted defection.

On 20 February 1986, an Iraqi MiG-23ML shot down Colonel Abdolbaghi Darvish’s Iranian Fokker F27 Friendship (F27–600), resulting in the deaths of all 51 onboard; the aircraft was carrying a delegation of military and government officials.

From 1984 onward, as Iran’s air force faced depletion of both pilots and aircraft, it ceased frontline fighter operations. Consequently, Iraq expanded its strike missions deeper into Iranian territory utilizing MiG-23BNs within larger strike formations that included bombers, fighter escorts (often composed of MiG-23MF/MLs), and suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) assets. These missions also included close air support roles. The reduced presence of Iranian interceptors combined with enhanced escort protection and electronic warfare support significantly lowered Iraqi losses compared to early war periods.

Postwar Iraqi Air Force records indicate total losses of 38 MiG-23BNs, three MiG-23MS interceptors, one MiG-23MF, and one MiG-23ML throughout the conflict. However, official figures for interceptor-type losses are believed understated; pilot casualties flying MiG-23MS/MFs are approximately double the reported number for all interceptor variants combined. Conversely, Iraqi pilots claimed about 20 aerial kills with seven confirmed after verification against Iranian records.

Kuwait Invasion and Gulf War (1990–1991)

On 2 August 1990, Iraqi forces employed MiG-23BN and Su-22 aircraft as their primary strike units during the invasion of Kuwait. Several Iraqi planes and helicopters were intercepted and destroyed by Kuwaiti air defense systems, notably the MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missile batteries, including at least one MiG-23BN.

During the Gulf War, Iraqi MiG-23 fighters launched R-60 missiles that inflicted damage on two EF-111A Raven electronic warfare aircraft.

Captured Iraqi records following the invasion of Iraq disclosed that at the onset of Operation Desert Storm, Iraq possessed a fleet of 127 MiG-23s, comprising 38 MiG-23BN attack variants and 21 trainer models. Throughout the conflict, the United States Air Force claimed to have shot down eight Iraqi MiG-23s using F-15 fighters. Iraqi documentation confirms the loss of 43 MiG-23s due to various causes, with an additional 10 aircraft sustaining damage and 12 escaping to Iran. Consequently, Iraq's inventory was reduced to 63 MiG-23s after hostilities ended, including 18 MiG-23BNs and 12 trainers.

The United States attributed F-16C losses to surface-to-air missiles such as the 2K12 Kub and S-125 Neva/Pechora, rather than enemy fighter aircraft. Similarly, no Tornado combat losses were reported as a result of air-to-air engagements according to both the Royal Air Force and Italian Air Force records.

No-Fly Zones and the Iraq Conflict (1991–2003)

On 17 January 1993, an Iraqi MiG-23 was shot down by a USAF F-16C using an AMRAAM missile. Later, on 9 September 1999, a solitary MiG-23 breached the no-fly zone and approached a formation of F-14s. One of the F-14s launched an AIM-54 Phoenix missile at the intruder but failed to hit it, prompting the MiG to retreat northward. The aircraft subsequently crashed during its landing attempt.

During Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, the Iraqi Air Force was effectively grounded. Numerous aircraft were discovered in poor condition at various Iraqi airbases following the invasion. This campaign effectively marked the termination of MiG-23 operational service within Iraq.

Cuba

Cuban Involvement in Angola

Throughout the Cuban intervention in Angola, Cuban MiG-23MLs engaged with South African Mirage F1 pilots on multiple occasions, including one engagement that caused significant damage to a Mirage F1.

On 27 September 1987, amid Operation Moduler, two Cuban MiG-23 pilots ambushed a pair of Mirage fighters. Alberto Ley Rivas targeted Captain Arthur Douglas Piercy’s Mirage with two R-23Rs (some accounts suggest an R-60), while another Cuban pilot fired a single R-60 missile at a Mirage piloted by Captain Carlo Gagiano. Although the missiles locked onto their targets, only one R-23R detonated close enough to impair the landing hydraulics of Piercy’s aircraft and possibly damaged its drag chute. This damage likely contributed to Piercy’s Mirage veering off the runway upon landing, causing the nose gear to collapse. The impact was severe enough to trigger Piercy’s ejection seat at ground level, resulting in paralysis. The aircraft was deemed a total loss, but many parts were salvaged to repair another Mirage F1 that had been damaged in an accident. Overall, Cuban forces claimed six air victories involving MiG-23s—one confirmed destroyed, one damaged, and four unconfirmed.

Angolan MiG-23s held superiority over South African Air Force (SAAF) Mirage F1CZ and F1AZ fighters regarding thrust and acceleration, as well as radar and avionics systems, plus air-to-air missile capabilities. Equipped with R-23 and R-60 missiles, pilots from the FAPA/DAA had the capacity to engage SAAF aircraft from multiple angles. Due to an international arms embargo restricting access to advanced weaponry, SAAF pilots relied on outdated versions of the French Matra R.550 Magic missile or early-model V-3 Kukri missiles, which were inferior in range and effectiveness compared to the Soviet R-60 and R-23 missiles. Despite these disadvantages, SAAF pilots managed to maneuver within firing range and launch air-to-air missiles at MiG-23s—gun camera footage confirms these engagements—but their missiles either missed or detonated ineffectively behind the target’s exhaust plume instead of tracking the hot airframe.

UNITA insurgents opposing Cuban and MPLA forces successfully downed several MiG-23s using American-supplied FIM-92 Stinger man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS). Additionally, South African ground units destroyed a MiG-23 attacking the Calueque Dam by deploying the Ystervark (porcupine) 20 mm anti-aircraft cannon.

Libya

File:F-4J of VF-74 with Libyan MiG-23 over Gulf of Sidra 1981.jpg

A Libyan MiG-23 over the Gulf of Sidra in August 1981, trailed by an F-4 shortly before the initial Gulf of Sidra confrontation

File:MiG-23 (12549280683).jpg

Libyan MiG-23

Between 1975 and 1978, Libya acquired 54 MiG-23MS and 15 MiG-23UB aircraft, along with an additional 35 to 38 MiG-23BNs. These jets were assigned to the 1040th, 1050th, 1060th, and 1070th Squadrons. Notably, the 1040th and 1050th Squadrons were operated by personnel from the Syrian Air Force.

During the Libyan–Egyptian War in 1977, one Libyan MiG-23MS was downed by an Egyptian MiG-21 while providing support for an attack on Mersa Matruh airfield. This loss compelled the remaining Libyan MiGs to abort their mission. In a 1979 aerial engagement, two Libyan Air Force MiG-23MS fighters confronted two Egyptian Air Force MiG-21MFs equipped with Western air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-9P3 Sidewinder. The Libyan pilots attempted to outturn the more agile Egyptian fighters but failed; one MiG-23MS was downed by Maj. Sal Mohammad using an AIM-9P3 Sidewinder missile, while the other escaped by leveraging its superior speed.

On 18 July 1980, wreckage from a Libyan MiG-23MS was discovered on the northern slope of the Sila massif in Calabria, Italy. The pilot, Captain Ezzedin Fadhel Khalil, was found deceased still strapped to his ejection seat.

In August 1981, Libyan MiG-23MS fighters participated in the standoff with the US Navy that triggered the first Gulf of Sidra incident, although no actual combat occurred involving these aircraft during this episode.

By the mid-1980s, Libya introduced upgraded variants of the MiG-23 into service. Approximately 20 MiG-23MFs arrived in 1984 to rearm the 1060th Squadron. Additionally, around 48 MiG-23MLDs were procured during this time frame. The newly formed 1023rd and 1024th Squadrons were tasked with operating these models.

Libyan MiG-23s played various roles in the Chadian–Libyan conflict, commencing in 1981. Initially, both MiG-23MS and MiG-23BN versions were deployed primarily for ground attack missions. As the conflict progressed, combat air patrols were also conducted utilizing more advanced variants such as the MiG-23MF and MiG-23MLD. On 5 January 1987, a Libyan MiG-23 was shot down. Later that year, on 5 September, Chadian forces launched a ground assault on Maaten al-Sarra Air Base in Libya, destroying multiple Libyan aircraft on the tarmac including three MiG-23s. Subsequently, on 8 October 1987, a MiG-23BN was brought down by ground fire; its pilot was rescued by helicopter.

During the 1986 Gulf of Sidra confrontation, Libyan MiG-23 interceptors engaged aggressively with American fighters but neither side fired weapons despite attempts by Libyan pilots to achieve firing positions behind U.S. aircraft.

In the Second Gulf of Sidra incident of 1989, two Libyan MiG-23MF fighters were shot down by U.S. Navy F-14As.

Libyan Civil War

Throughout the 2011 Libyan civil war, Libyan Air Force MiG-23s conducted bombing operations against rebel forces. On 15 March 2011, opposition sources reported rebels had seized a MiG-23 and a helicopter which they used to sink two loyalist vessels and strike tank positions.

On 19 March 2011, a Free Libyan Air Force MiG-23BN was mistakenly shot down over Benghazi by rebel air defenses that misidentified it as a loyalist plane; its pilot died after ejecting too late.

Later, on 26 March 2011, French Air Force strikes destroyed five MiG-23s along with two Mi-35 helicopters parked at Misrata airport; initial reports incorrectly identified these fixed-wing aircraft as G-2 Galebs.

On 9 April, NATO aircraft intercepted a rebel-operated MiG-23 over Benghazi for violating the UN no-fly zone and escorted it back to base.

A limited number of surviving MiG-23s from NATO bombings and civil war engagements were employed during clashes between forces loyal to Libya’s House of Representatives and those aligned with the General National Congress during the Second Libyan Civil War; both factions operated small fleets of these jets.

On 23 March 2015, a New General National Congress-operated MiG-23UB was downed—likely by an Igla-S MANPADS—while bombing Al Watiya airbase held by House of Representatives forces; both crew members perished.

At early 2016, House of Representatives forces possessed three operational MiG-23s: two MLA variants and one UB model. All three were lost within months: first, serial number 6472 crashed near Benina airbase on January 4 following an airstrike; second, serial number 6132 went down on February 8 during strikes against Islamic State near Derna; lastly, serial number 7834 crashed west of Benghazi on February 12—claimed shot down by Islamic State though officially attributed to anti-aircraft fire. In each case, crews ejected safely except for some ambiguity regarding causes of initial crashes.

On February 28, 2016, a previously grounded MiG-23MLA bearing serial number 6453 was restored to flight readiness after several years out of service. By March that year, it became Libya’s sole active MiG-23 conducting missions targeting hostile positions and vehicles.

In subsequent weeks, both the Libyan National Army Air Force and rival Libyan Dawn Air Force refurbished several additional aircraft—including MiG-23BNs, MLs, and UBs—which were observed flying sorties over Libya striking enemy targets.

On December 6, 2019, a Libyan National Army (LNA) MiG-23MLD was shot down near Tripoli by forces loyal to the Government of National Accord (GNA) amid ongoing civil conflict. This particular jet (serial number 26144) had been resurrected from storage using wings from two separate airframes and returned to flight status in August after approximately two decades grounded. It crashed near Al Zawiya city following an engagement over Yarmouk frontline; its pilot Amer Jagem ejected and was captured. Video footage showed the aircraft diving for attack while soldiers fired a Strela-2M MANPADS in response. The LNA claimed technical failure caused the loss rather than enemy fire.

Egypt

File:MIG-23 Jet - Flickr - The Central Intelligence Agency.jpg

A Hungarian MiG-23MF in flight

Egypt was among the earliest international buyers, acquiring in 1974 a total of eight MiG-23MS interceptors, eight MiG-23BN ground-attack aircraft, and four MiG-23UB trainers. These were organized into a single squadron stationed at Mersa Matruh. However, by 1975, all Egyptian MiG-23s had been retired from operational service and placed into storage due to Egypt’s shift in foreign policy towards alignment with Western powers, which resulted in the cessation of Soviet support.

In 1978, China procured from Egypt a variety of Soviet-origin aircraft and missiles: two MiG-23MS interceptors, two MiG-23BN strike fighters, two MiG-23UB trainers, ten MiG-21MF fighters, along with ten KSR-2 (AS-5 Kelt) air-to-surface missiles. This transaction was part of an exchange deal where China provided Egypt with Shenyang J-6 jets, spare parts, and technical assistance for the Egyptian fleet operating Soviet-supplied MiG-17s and MiG-21s. The Chinese utilized these aircraft to develop their J-9 fighter project, which ultimately remained at the research stage without progressing to production.

Subsequently, the remaining six MiG-23MS units and six MiG-23BNs, as well as sixteen MiG-21MFs, two Sukhoi Su-20 Fitters, two MiG-21Us, two Mil Mi-8 Hips helicopters, and ten KSR-2 missiles were sold to the Foreign Technology Division—a specialized branch of the USAF tasked with analyzing foreign military technologies. In return, Egypt received weapons and spare parts support that included AIM-9J/P Sidewinder missiles, which were then integrated onto the remaining Egyptian MiG-21 fighters.

Ethiopia

The Soviet Union supplied MiG-23s to Mengistu Haile Mariam’s Derg, which were extensively deployed by the Ethiopian Air Force during the Ethiopian Civil War against various insurgent groups. A 1990 report by Human Rights Watch documented that these operations frequently involved the use of napalm, phosphorus munitions, and cluster bombs not only targeting rebel forces but also deliberately affecting civilian populations in both Eritrea and Ethiopia as well as humanitarian aid convoys.

During the conflict with Eritrea from May 1998 to June 2000, Ethiopian MiG-23s conducted ground attack missions including multiple strikes on Asmara’s airport in Eritrea’s capital city. Eritrean forces flying Mikoyan MiG-29 fighters claimed to have shot down three Ethiopian MiG-23BN aircraft during this period.

On 29 November 2020, reports emerged of an Ethiopian Air Force MiG-23 crashing near Abiy Addi, approximately 50 kilometers west of Mekelle, amid the ongoing Tigray conflict. Images circulated—though their authenticity remains uncertain—depicted the captured pilot wearing a Zsh-7 helmet (typically used with Su-27 and MiG-29 aircraft), a flight suit, holding a MiG-23 English-language manual alongside photos of the crash site showing burnt aircraft debris. The Tigray People's Liberation Front claimed responsibility for shooting down the jet and capturing its pilot.

India

Kargil War (1999)

File:MiG-23 Bn Aircraft.jpg

MiG-23BN deployed in Operation Safed Sagar

On 26 May, Indian military forces initiated aerial bombardments during the Kargil War. Various ground-attack jets such as the MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-27, and Mirage 2000 were employed to strike Pakistani defensive positions.^[46]

Sudan

Beginning in 1987, Sudan was supplied with significant military equipment, including twelve MiG-23MS and one MiG-23UB aircraft provided by Libya, a former adversary. These jets were swiftly deployed in combat against the South Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) during the Second Sudanese Civil War in 1988. Several of these aircraft were lost due to ground fire or accidents. Libya withdrew its military advisors by 1990, after which the remaining four MiG-23s were placed into storage. From 2010 onward, Sudan undertook local refurbishment efforts on its MiG-23 fleet, receiving technical assistance from Russian, Belarusian, and Ethiopian specialists. Images of freshly overhauled and repainted jets surfaced online. In 2016, one aircraft crash-landed and caught fire during flight trials.^[47]^[48]

First-generation

Ye-231: Known as "Flogger-A," this was the prototype MiG-23 developed for experimental evaluation. While sharing the fundamental design characteristics with subsequent MiG-23/-27 models, it lacked the distinctive sawtooth leading edge found on later versions. It also incorporated design aspects similar to the Sukhoi Su-24, though the Su-24 underwent more extensive modifications.^[49]

MiG-23: The pre-production "Flogger-A" model was unarmed with weapon hardpoints but featured guns and adopted the sawtooth leading edge characteristic of future MiG-23s. This iteration marked the divergence between the MiG-23/-27 lineage and the Su-24 design.^[49]

MiG-23S: The first production variant, also designated "Flogger-A," served as an interim model closely resembling the prototype externally. Due to delays with the Sapfir-23 radar, it utilized the RP-22SM Sapfir radar without an IRST. Initial MiG-23S aircraft were powered by an R-27F-300 turbojet delivering 67.62 kN (15,200 lb_f) dry thrust and 78.5 kN (17,600 lb_f) with afterburner; later versions employed an upgraded R-27F2M-300 engine producing 64.53 kN (14,510 lb_f) dry and 98 kN (22,000 lb_f) with afterburner.^[50]

The maiden flight of the MiG-23S occurred on 21 May 1969. Between July 1969 and mid-1973, eleven units underwent extensive testing by both the Ministry of Aircraft Industry and Soviet Air Force (VVS). During this period, several design flaws emerged—such as hazardous behavior at elevated AoA, susceptibility to spins under specific conditions, and structural cracks at wing-fuselage joints—resulting in multiple fatal accidents. Approximately sixty production-standard MiG-23Ss were constructed from 1969 into the early 1970s but only briefly served in front-line roles within the 4th TsBPiPLS and 979th IAP before being withdrawn due to reliability concerns.^[50]

MiG-23: Another transitional model replacing the MiG-23S from late 1970 onward was simply known as the MiG-23 or "MiG-23 Edition 1971." This version introduced the Sapfir-23 radar—though initially using the unreliable Sapfir-23L lacking look-down/shoot-down capability—enabling deployment of R-23R SARH missiles alongside a TP-23 IRST and ASP-23D gunsight/HUD. Modifications included a fuselage redesign moving tail surfaces aft by 86 cm (34 in), ribbed air brakes, and an additional fuel tank holding 470 L (100 imp gal; 120 US gal). The Edition 2 wing design increased surface area by twenty percent to enhance wing loading, altered sweep angles, added a prominent leading-edge dogtooth, but eliminated leading-edge slats—simplifying manufacturing at some cost to stability and control. Powerplant remained a R-27F2-300 turbojet rated at 67.62 kN (15,200 lb_f) dry thrust and 98 kN (22,000 lb_f) with afterburners.^[12]

Approximately eighty Edition 1971 units were produced in that year. These aircraft briefly operated within frontline VVS fighter regiments before transitioning to training roles by 1978.^[12]

File:MiG-23 Flogger B.jpg

MiG-23M "Flogger-B" exhibited at the National Museum of the History of Ukraine in the Second World War, Kyiv

MiG-23M: Referred to as "Flogger-B," this was the most widely manufactured first-generation model. First flown in June 1972, it became the primary air superiority fighter for VVS units, featuring genuine look-down/shoot-down radar capability. Initial examples carried Sapfir-23L radar, soon replaced by improved Sapfir versions (Sapfir-23D and from 1975 Sapfir-23D-III), enabling carriage of two R-23 missiles plus R-60 missiles. Electronic upgrades included SAU-23A three-axis automatic flight control/autopilot systems and Polyot-11-23 navigation equipment. The definitive Edition 3 wing maintained Edition 2’s layout but reintroduced leading-edge slats to enhance handling qualities. Propulsion came from an enhanced Tumansky R-29-300 (izdeliye 55a) turbojet delivering 81.35 kN (18,290 lb_f) dry thrust and 122.5 kN (27,500 lb_f) with afterburners. Plumbed pylons allowed carriage of 800-litre external drop tanks when wings were fully extended.^[18]

Manufacturing commenced at Znamya Truda factory in 1972, reaching production rates exceeding thirty aircraft monthly by 1974, peaking near forty units per month. The first operational deployment occurred within the 4th TsBPiPLS in 1973, followed by frontline VVS regiments stationed in East Germany. By mid-decade, select Soviet Air Defence Forces (PVO) regiments had also adopted this model. Structural issues with airframe components and wing sweep mechanisms led to a self-imposed limit of five G-forces until quality improvements in 1977 allowed unrestricted basic fighter maneuvers for squadrons equipped with MiG-23Ms.^[18] Production totaled approximately 1,300 units for VVS and PVO between 1972 and 1978.^[49]

MiG-23MF: Identified as "Flogger-B," this export variant was produced from 1978 through 1983 at Znamya Truda for foreign customers. One version (izdeliye 2A or 23–11A), intended for Warsaw Pact allies, closely resembled the MiG–23M but differed slightly in communication systems and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) equipment. The other version (izdeliya 2B or 23–11B) targeted certain Third World nations; it retained Sapfir–23D–III radar (renamed Sapfir–23E) but lacked electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) features and exhibited reduced performance overall. Communication gear was downgraded compared to domestic models; some units omitted Lasour-SMA datalink systems. Until 1981 deliveries included R–13M missiles instead of R–60s.^[18]

MiG–23MS: Known as "Flogger-E," this export downgrade was designed for Third World operators considered unsuitable for advanced technology like that on MiG–23MFs. Although sharing airframe and engine with MiG–23M, it carried armaments comparable to those on MiG–21S/SM fighters. Its downgraded RP–22SM radar resulted in a noticeably shorter nose radome while removing undernose IRST sensors altogether. Missile compatibility was limited to up to four R–3S or R–3R air-to-air missiles initially; later versions incorporated improved R–13M missiles. Produced at Znamya Truda between 1973 and 1978, fifty-four units were supplied to Syria, eighteen to Iraq, eight to Egypt, and fifty-four to Libya. Egypt transferred several of its MiG–23MS jets to China and the United States for technical analysis.^[18]

MiG–23U: Dubbed "Flogger-C," this twin-seat trainer variant derived from the MiG–23S appeared six months following its single-seat counterpart’s introduction. Its principal alteration involved adding a second cockpit where previously an equipment bay existed—necessitating relocation of systems into a redesigned nose section. It retained a GSh–23L cannon with two hundred rounds capacity and could carry up to 3,000 kg (6,600 lb) of ordnance payloads including bombs. Equipped with S–21 weapon control centered around Sapfir–21M radar, it could deploy R–3S and R–13M missiles as well as featuring a fourth fuel tank holding 470 L (100 imp gal; 120 US gal) similar to earlier models like Edition 1971 and MiG–23M.^[51] Production began at Irkutsk in 1971 before transitioning into manufacturing of its successor variant—the MiG–23UB.^[52]

MiG–23UB: Another two-seat trainer variant that first flew on April 10th, 1970 with production starting later that year at Irkutsk Aviation Plant. This model featured SAU–23UB automatic flight control system alongside Polyot–11–23 navigation suite comprising RSBN–6S tactical navigation aid, SKV–2N2 reference gyro, plus DV–30/DV–10 air data systems. Early batches possessed Sapfir–21M radar but this was soon removed in favor of ballast blocks housed beneath a conical metal fairing on later production aircraft starting in early '70s. From that year onward production incorporated Edition 3 wings while post-'79 deliveries destined for MiG‑ M/ML units received SOUA angle-of-attitude limiters capped at twenty-eight degrees AoA for safety reasons. Production continued until '78 for domestic VVS/PVO use while exports proceeded until '85 totaling over one thousand units produced—760 allocated domestically.^[51]

MiG‑ UM: A modification program initiated in ’84 at Aircraft Factory No. 39 involved upgrading approximately two hundred fifty-one existing MiG‑ UB trainers into this improved standard intended mainly for foreign operators already operating earlier variants.[citation needed]

Second-generation

File:MiG-23ML van de Tsjechische luchtmacht 2193-006-082 0009.jpg

MiG-23ML in service with the Czech Air Force, 1994

MiG-23ML: ("Flogger-G", Model 23-12, Izdyelie 3) Initial MiG-23 models exhibited several design limitations, such as inadequate airframe durability, engine output, maneuverability, and radar capability. To address these issues, a significant airframe redesign produced the MiG-23ML (L - Lyogkiy, meaning lightweight), which NATO designated as "Flogger-G". The aircraft’s empty weight was lowered by approximately 1,250 kg (2,760 lb) through removal of the fourth fuselage fuel tank. Aerodynamic enhancements reduced drag by eliminating the dorsal fin extension. The lighter airframe combined with redesigned main landing gear altered the aircraft's ground stance, lowering the nose compared to the earlier variants' nose-up posture. Structural reinforcements—particularly to the wing pivot mechanism—allowed the airframe to sustain up to 8.5 G at speeds below Mach 0.85 and 7.5 G at higher velocities. This upgrade also permitted increasing the angle of attack (AoA) limiter to between 20°–22° with fully swept wings and 28°–30° when wings were extended.^[13]

The propulsion system was upgraded to the R-35F-300 engine, delivering a maximum dry thrust of 83.82 kN (18,840 lb_f) and afterburning thrust up to 128.08 kN (28,790 lb_f). This enhanced powerplant improved the thrust-to-weight ratio to approximately 0.83 (compared to 0.77 in the MiG-23M), though operational conditions typically resulted in lower effective ratios due to engine 'detuning'. Additionally, specific fuel consumption at maximum afterburn was reduced to 1.96 kg/kgf·h from the previous R-27F2M-300’s 2.09. Following initial reliability challenges, overhaul intervals extended to 450 hours, while full military power or afterburner use remained limited to ten hours per cycle.^[13]

The avionics suite saw substantial upgrades as well. The S-23ML configuration included the Sapfir-23ML radar coupled with a TP-23M IRST sensor.^[53] Navigation was improved via the Polyot-21-23 system; data link functionality was enhanced through Lasour-23SML; flight control was managed by SAU-23AM; and altitude measurement employed the RV-5R Reper-M radar altimeter—all representing advancements over prior equipment. The new SUV-2ML weapons control system enabled deployment of both variants of R-23 beyond-visual-range missiles, while underwing pylons could carry UPK-23-250 23mm gun pods.^[13]

The Mikoyan design bureau estimated that the MiG-23ML’s combat capabilities surpassed those of the MiG-23M by roughly 20%. Its instantaneous turn rate reached 16.7° per second at a cornering speed of 780 km/h (480 mph) and an AoA of 27°, with an average turn rate of 14.1° per second. Executing a full 360° turn at 1,000 m (3,300 ft) altitude took about 27 seconds under sustained 6.5 G forces, starting from 900 km/h (560 mph) and decelerating to 540 km/h (340 mph). At this altitude, acceleration from 600 km/h (370 mph) to 1,000 km/h (620 mph) using full afterburner required 12 seconds, while climb rate peaked at 215 m/s (710 ft/s), diminishing with altitude gain. Overall, reaching 15,000 m (49,000 ft) altitude and accelerating to Mach 2.1 on full afterburner took approximately 4.3 minutes.^[13]

The prototype MiG-23ML took its maiden flight on 21 January 1975 and rapidly entered production within that year; however, exports continued with the MiG-23MF for another seven years. Between 1978 and 1983, over 1,100 MiG-23ML units—including derivatives like the MiG-23MLA—were manufactured for Soviet and foreign operators.^[13]

File:MiG-23 Flogger G.jpg

Soviet MiG-23MLA "Flogger-G"

MiG-23MLA: ("Flogger-G") This later iteration of the "ML" series was designated as "MiG-23MLA". Its first flight occurred in 1977, with production commencing in 1978 and export deliveries starting in 1981. Externally identical to the "ML", internally it featured an upgraded Sapfir-23MLA (N003) radar offering extended range, enhanced reliability, improved electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM), and frequency spacing that enabled cooperative group search without radar interference between aircraft. The variant also incorporated an ASP-17ML HUD/gunsight and gained compatibility with advanced Vympel R-24R/T missiles beginning in 1981. A TP-23M IRST sensor remained standard, capable of detecting high-altitude fighter-sized targets at up to 15 km (9.3 mi), or bomber-sized targets at ranges approaching 45 km (28 mi), though its scanning field was narrower than radar coverage—limited to 60° azimuth and 15° elevation. Like earlier export models such as the MiG-23MF, two distinct ML subvariants were produced for foreign clients: one closely resembling Soviet standards for Warsaw Pact nations, and a downgraded radar version sold to Third World allies.^[13]

MiG-23P: ("Flogger-L", Model 23-14, Izdyelie 6) Developed as a specialized interceptor for PVO Strany air defense forces, this variant served as an economical interim replacement for aging Su-9/Su-11 and MiG-19P/PM aircraft still in service. The MiG-23P (P - Perekhvatchik, meaning interceptor) retained the airframe and engine of the MiG-23ML but featured avionics tailored for PVO operational requirements. Its upgraded Sapfir-23P (N006) radar worked in tandem with an ASP-23P gunsight/HUD (later superseded by ASP-23ML-P) enhancing look-down/shoot-down capability against emerging low-level threats such as F-111 aircraft.^[54] The IRST system was removed.^[55] The SAU-23P autopilot integrated a digital computer linked with Lasur-M datalink allowing ground-controlled interception (GCI) guidance; pilots primarily managed throttle and weapons during intercept missions. Approximately 500 units were produced between 1978 and 1981 exclusively for Soviet use—no exports occurred.^[55] The type remained active beyond Soviet dissolution until final units retired in 1998. Notably, in simulated beyond visual range engagements flown by skilled pilots, the MiG-23P demonstrated performance equal or superior to that of the Su-27.^[54]

File:MiG-23MLD2.jpg

Soviet MiG-23MLD "Flogger-K"

MiG-23MLD: ("Flogger-K", Model 23-18) Representing the pinnacle of MiG-23 fighter development, the MLD variant focused on enhancing maneuverability at high angles of attack—a known shortcoming of earlier M/ML models. Modifications included installing vortex generators on the pitot boom and transforming wing leading-edge roots into sawtooth shapes functioning as additional vortex generators. Flight controls incorporated an SOS-3-4 synthetic stick-stop/signals limiter akin to that used on MiG-29s to improve handling safety during high-AoA maneuvers. Wing pivot mechanisms were reinforced enabling a new fourth wing sweep position at 33°, designed to reduce turning radius and facilitate rapid deceleration during dogfights; however, flying with wings swept at this angle proved challenging due to poor acceleration and was generally reserved for experienced pilots while manuals recommended using the standard 45° sweep.^[15]

Avionics were substantially upgraded with introduction of Sapfir-23MLA-II (N008) radar featuring extended detection range, greater reliability, enhanced ECM resistance, improved look-down/shoot-down performance over complex terrain, and a close-range vertical scan mode covering a narrow frontal sector for dogfight scenarios. Detection range against bomber-sized targets at medium-to-high altitudes reached up to 70 km (43 mi). Additional systems included SPO-15L Beryoza radar warning receiver; A321 Klystron digital tactical radio navigation with automatic landing capability; SAU-23–18 automatic flight control system; and SARP–12–24 crash-resistant flight recorder for improved survivability measures. Defensive countermeasures comprised two six-round downward-firing chaff/flare dispensers located on the under-fuselage centerline pylon supplemented by dual thirty-round upward-firing BVP–50–60 dispensers.^[15]

No new-build MLD fighters were delivered directly to Soviet Air Forces since production shifted towards more advanced MiG–29s; instead existing ML/MLA airframes were upgraded to MLD standard at three VVS maintenance facilities located in Kubinka, Chuhuiv, and Lviv between May 1982 and May 1985—totaling approximately 560 conversions. Export versions differed by being newly manufactured but lacking some aerodynamic refinements present on Soviet MLDs; sixteen units were supplied to Bulgaria and fifty units delivered to Syria between 1982 and 1984. These export deliveries marked the final production run of single-seat MiG–23 fighters.^[15]

Ground-attack variants

MiG-23B: ("Flogger-F") Developed to fulfill the requirement for a modern fighter-bomber, the MiG-23B closely resembled the MiG-23S but featured a redesigned forward fuselage and a dielectric nose section positioned just above the pylon. The nose, characterized by a flat bottom and tapered profile, housed the PrNK Sokol-23 ground attack sighting system instead of a radar. This system comprised an analogue computer, a laser rangefinder, and a PBK-3 bomb sight. Enhancements were made to the navigation and autopilot systems to improve bombing precision, while reinforced pylons allowed the aircraft to carry up to 3,000 kg of bombs. To boost survivability, the Flogger-F incorporated an electronic warfare (EW) package and an inert gas system within the fuel tanks to reduce fire risk. Pilot protection and visibility were improved by elevating the seat position and armoring the cockpit windscreen. Unlike previous models powered by the R-29 engine, the MiG-23B utilized the Lyulka AL-21 turbojet.

The initial MiG-23B prototype, designated "32-34", took flight on 20 August 1970. Although it retained the same wing design as the MiG-23S, later production models adopted the enhanced Edition 2 wing configuration. Due to prioritization of AL-21 engines for the Sukhoi Su-17 and Su-24, only three prototypes and 24 production units of the MiG-23B were manufactured between 1971 and 1972. Engine allocation constraints also prevented export sales of this variant.

MiG-23B: ("Flogger-A") This initial attack version of the Flogger was equipped with the AL-21F engine. Production was limited to 24 aircraft because AL-21F engines were primarily reserved for the Sukhoi Su-17/22 and Su-24 Fencer series. Armament included a GSh-23L cannon loaded with 200 rounds.

MiG-23BK: ("Flogger-H") Designed for export to Warsaw Pact nations, this variant incorporated the PrNK-23 targeting system along with additional radar warning receivers installed on the engine intakes.

MiG-23BN: ("Flogger-H") Representing an improved iteration of the MiG-23B, the MiG-23BN featured Edition 3 wings and was powered by the R-29 engine used in contemporary fighter models. It also received minor electronic and equipment upgrades. Notably, it omitted the dielectric nose section found on its predecessor. Manufactured from 1973 through 1985, a total of 624 units were produced; most were exported while only a few served within VVS squadrons. A simplified version tailored for Third World operators gained popularity due to its effectiveness. The final MiG-23BN in Indian service was flown on 6 March 2009 by Wing Commander Tapas Ranjan Sahu of 221 Squadron (Valiants).

MiG-23BM experimental aircraft: ("Flogger-D") Serving as a forerunner to the MiG-27, this experimental model differed from standard MiG-23BM versions by relocating its dielectric nose sections from pylons to wing roots.

MiG-27 (MiG-23BM): ("Flogger-D") Launched in 1975, this simplified ground attack variant eliminated radar and featured basic pitot air intakes along with an engine equipped with a two-position afterburner nozzle. An evolution of the MiG-23BK, it replaced the original PrNK-23 system with the PrNK-23M and swapped out the analogue computer for a digital one. This model entered operational service as the MiG-27.

Suggested variants and enhancements

MiG-23R: An intended reconnaissance model that never reached completion.
MiG-23MLGD (23-35): A derivative of the MiG-23MLD incorporating updated radar, electronic countermeasure systems, and a helmet-mounted display, partially similar to that used in the MiG-29.
MiG-23MLG (23-37): A MiG-23MLD subvariant equipped with electronic warfare systems and the R-73 missile.
MiG-23MLS (23-47): Another MiG-23MLD subvariant featuring electronic warfare capabilities alongside the R-73 missile.
MiG-23MLGD (23-57): A further subvariant of the MiG-23MLD.
MiG-23K: A carrier-capable fighter version based on the MiG-23ML, which was cancelled following the termination and redesign of the Soviet aircraft carrier program.
MiG-23A: Planned as a multi-role adaptation derived from the MiG-23K, this variant was to include three subtypes: MiG-23AI (fighter), MiG-23AB (ground attack), and MiG-23AR (reconnaissance). Its development was halted for the same reasons as the MiG-23K.
MiG-23MLK: A proposed model intended to be powered by either two new R-33 engines or a single R-100 engine.
MiG-23MD: An upgraded version of the MiG-23M designed to carry the Saphir-23MLA-2 radar system.
MiG-23ML-1: A variant planned to be armed with the new R-146 missile and powered by one of several engine options: a single R-100, an R-69F, or twin R-33 engines.
MiG-23-98: A modernization package offered by Mikoyan in the late 1990s, costing approximately US$1 million. It included upgraded radar, enhanced self-defense systems, avionics improvements, better cockpit ergonomics, helmet-mounted display integration, and compatibility with Vympel R-27 (NATO: AA-10 "Alamo") and Vympel R-77 (NATO: AA-12 "Adder") missiles. A more affordable option involved upgrading the existing Sapfir-23 radar along with newer missiles and avionics. Extensions to airframe service life were also proposed.
MiG-23-98-2: An export upgrade package offered to Angolan MiG-23MLs, enhancing radar capabilities to enable deployment of new air-to-air and air-to-ground ordnance.
MiG-23LL: Known as a flying laboratory, these aircraft were modified to test an innovative cockpit warning system utilizing a female voice alert to notify pilots about various flight parameters. The female voice was chosen deliberately to differentiate from ground communications, which in Soviet operations were almost exclusively male.

Operators

File:World operators of the MiG-23.png

Global operators of the MiG-23 (excluding evaluation-only users)

Current users

Template:ANG: National Air Force of Angola operates 22 MiG-23 aircraft as of December 2024.
Template:ETH: Ethiopian Air Force maintains 9 MiG-23 units in service as of December 2024.
Template:LBA: Libyan Air Force fields 2 MiG-23BNs under the internationally recognized Government of National Unity and 2 MiG-23MLs operated by the Libyan National Army as recorded in February 2024.
Template:PRK: North Korean Air Force possesses 56 operational MiG-23 aircraft as of December 2024.
Template:SUD: Sudanese Air Force has 3 MiG-23MS/UBs active as of December 2023. Four units were refurbished domestically in 2016 after nearly two decades in storage. One was lost during testing procedures.
Template:SYR: Syrian Air Force operates 87 MiG-23 fighters as of December 2024. Israeli sources claim at least 60 were destroyed during Operation Bashan Arrow.
Template:ZIM: Air Force of Zimbabwe retains 3 aircraft in service as of December 2024.

Former operators

Template:Country data Afghanistan: Afghan Air Force. In 1992, approximately 30 were operational; numerous aircraft were either shot down or destroyed on the ground during the Afghan civil war.
Template:DZA: Algerian Air Force. Ordered 40 MiG-23BNs in 1975, with initial deliveries beginning in 1976. Additionally, 16 MiG-23MFs arrived in 1982. The fleet was retired by 2008.
Template:BLR: Belarus Air Force. Maintained a fleet of 35 aircraft in 2000, which were subsequently dismantled.
Template:BUL: Bulgarian Air Force. Operated a total of 90 MiG-23s from 1976 until their decommissioning in 2004. The inventory included: 33 MiG-23BN, 12 MiG-23MF, 1 MiG-23ML, 8 MiG-23MLA, 21 MiG-23MLD, and 15 MiG-23UB.

File:Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23UB, Czech Republic - Air Force AN0704751.jpg

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23UB

Template:Country data Cote d'Ivoire: Cote d'Ivoire Air Force.
Template:CUB: Cuban Air Force; as of December 2023, operated 24 MiG-23 aircraft.
Template:CZE: Czech Air Force. Phased out the MiG-23 fleet in stages: BN and MF variants retired by 1994, while ML and UB models followed by 1998.
Template:CZS: Czechoslovak Air Force. Transferred their MiG-23s to the Czech Republic upon dissolution.
Template:Country data Democratic Republic of the Congo: DR Congo Air Force; maintained two MiG-23s as of December 2023, with one designated for pilot training.
Template:DDR: East German Air Force; after reunification, aircraft were transferred to the (West) German Air Force. The German Air Force subsequently donated two MiG-23s to the United States Air Force and placed one in a Florida museum. Remaining airframes were either distributed to other nations or scrapped.
Template:EGY: Egyptian Air Force. Utilized until Egypt aligned with Western nations. Six MiG-23BN/MS/UB models were sent to China in exchange for military equipment; China attempted reverse engineering for the Q-6 project but faced challenges replicating the R-29 turbofan engine. Consequently, only components influenced the design of the J-8II. At least eight units were transferred to the United States for evaluation purposes.

REDIRECT Template:DEU: German Air Force; inherited from East Germany in 1990 a total of 18 MiG-23BNs, 9 MiG-23MFs, 28 MiG-23MLs, and 8 MiG-23UB trainers.

File:Hungarian Air Force Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MF Lofting-2.jpg

Hungarian Air Force Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MF.

Template:HUN: Hungarian Air Force; operated 16 MiG-23s until their retirement in 1997, consisting of 12 MiG-23MFs and four MiG-23UB trainers (one acquired from the Soviet Air Force in 1990).

File:Monument of Indian MiG-23MF in Gandhinagar, 2007.jpg

An Indian MiG-23MF exhibited at a crossroads in Gandhinagar.

Template:IND: Indian Air Force. The ground attack variant MiG-23BN was retired on March 6, 2009, while the air defense interceptor version, MiG-23MF, was phased out by 2007. According to "World Air Forces 2020," fourteen MiG-23UB trainers remained in service.
Template:Country data Iraq: Iraqi Air Force. Operated until Saddam Hussein's regime ended. In 1991, twelve aircraft were flown to Iran.

File:MiG-23 on display in Tokmok (3968850428).jpg

MiG-23 displayed in Tokmok, Kyrgyzstan.

Template:KAZ: Kazakh Air Defense Forces. As of February 2024, two MiG-23UB trainers are held in storage awaiting sale.
Template:Country data Libyan Arab Jamahiriya: Libyan Air Force; prior to the First Libyan Civil War, possessed around 130 units of various models (MiG-23MS/ML/BN/UB), most kept in storage. Remaining aircraft have been transferred to successor authorities or rebel groups.
Template:NAM: Namibian Air Force; operated two MiG-23 aircraft during its service period.
Template:POL: Polish Air Force. Between 1979 and 1982, received a total of thirty-six single-seat MiG-23MF fighters and six two-seat MiG-23UB trainers. The fleet was fully retired by September 1999, with four losses recorded due to accidents.

File:Mig2312.jpg

Polish Air Force MiG-23

Template:ROU: Romanian Air Force. Utilized a total of forty-six aircraft from 1979 until withdrawal between 2001 and 2003; including thirty-six MiG-23MF fighters and ten trainers (MiG-23UB).
Template:RUS: Russian Air Force. Approximately five hundred units remain held in reserve status.
Template:TKM: Military of Turkmenistan.
Template:USSR: Aircraft were distributed among successor states following dissolution.

Template:SRI: Sri Lanka Air Force; operated one MiG-23UB trainer exclusively for training pilots destined for their MiG-27M fleet.
Template:Country data Uganda: Uganda People's Defence Force
Template:UKR: Ukrainian Air Force

File:MiG 23 Kyiv museum.jpg

Ukrainian MiG-23 displayed at the National Museum of the History of Ukraine in the Second World War, located in Kyiv

Template:UZB: Military of Uzbekistan

Evaluation-only operators

Template:CHN

File:Yellow Mig-23 MW.JPG

MiG-23 exhibited at the Minsk World theme park in Shenzhen, China

China acquired MiG-23 aircraft from Egypt and explored integrating its variable-sweep wing concept into the development of the Nanchang Q-6. Although the Q-6 project was ultimately canceled and never produced, several design elements from the MiG-23 were later adapted into the J-8II. Presently, multiple MiG-23s are showcased in Chinese aviation museums.

File:Flag placeholder.svg Israel

Israel obtained a single MiG-23 that was flown to their territory by a Syrian pilot who defected.^[56]

Template:USA

The United States acquired MiG-23 units from Egypt, primarily basing them at Nellis Air Force Base. The U.S. Air Force operated a limited fleet of MiG-23s under the designation YF-113, employing them for testing, evaluation, and as adversary aircraft in fighter training exercises from 1977 until 1988 within the "Constant Peg" program.^[57]

Template:Country data Yugoslavia Template:Namespace detect showall Template:Country data FR Yugoslavia Template:Namespace detect showall Yugoslavia

In the early 1990s, the Flight Test Center (VOC) utilized several former Iraqi MiG-23s.

Civilian owners

Template:USA: As reported by the FAA in 2009, eleven MiG-23s were privately owned within the United States.^[58]

Two ex-Czech MiG-23s, registered as N51734 and N5106E, are based at New Castle Airport in Wilmington, Delaware and are maintained for civilian use.^[59]
An ex-Bulgarian Air Force MiG-23 with registration N923UB is operational and exhibited at the Cold War Air Museum near Dallas, Texas.^[60]

Accidents and incidents

File:Mikoyan-Gurevich 23-51 MiG-23UB (N23UB, cn 1038107) (7-30-2023).jpg

N23UB, the MiG-23UB involved in the crash on 13 August 2023, shown at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh two weeks prior

Aircraft on exhibit

Technical details (MiG-23MLD)

File:Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23MF 3-view.svg

Three-view illustration of the MiG-23MF

Template:Aircraft specs

File:Monument Mig-23.jpg

Monument dedicated to the MiG-23

References

↑ Lake 1992, pp. 43–44.
↑ Mladenov 2004, p. 45
↑ Belyakov and Marmain 1992, pp. 351–355.
↑ Lake 1992, pp. 43–45.
↑ Lake 1992, p. 45.
↑ ...
↑ ...
↑ ...
↑ ^9.0 ^9.1 ^9.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch14
↑ ^10.0 ^10.1 ^10.2 ^10.3 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SecretMiGch4
↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch8
↑ ^12.0 ^12.1 ^12.2 ^12.3 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF7
↑ ^13.0 ^13.1 ^13.2 ^13.3 ^13.4 ^13.5 ^13.6 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF9
↑ Cooper & Dildy (2016), "Technical Specifications - MiG23ML "Flogger-G"
↑ ^15.0 ^15.1 ^15.2 ^15.3 ^15.4 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF12
↑ ^16.0 ^16.1 ^16.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF5
↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch7
↑ ^18.0 ^18.1 ^18.2 ^18.3 ^18.4 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF8
↑ "МIG-23ML"
↑ Babich 1999, pp. 24–25
↑ Ilyin 2000, pp. 36–37
↑ Hurley, Matthew M. "The BEKAA Valley Air Battle, June 1982: Lessons Mislearned?" Archived 23 September 2008 at the Wayback Machine Airpower Journal, Winter 1989. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ "Blooding the MiG-23." Archived 16 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine MiG-23 Flogger, The MiG-23 combat record. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ ^24.0 ^24.1 Mladenov (2016), Ch. 3 - The MiG-23's Painful Induction into Service
↑ Mladenov (2016), Ch 3 - Notoriety in Real-World Air Combat
↑ Walter J. Boyne (2002). Air Warfare: An International Encyclopedia. ABC-Clio. p. 416.
↑ Pazynich, Sergey. "Агрессоров" (Translation: From the history of Soviet 'Aggression')" (in Russian). Archived 26 May 2010 at the Wayback Machine airforce.ru. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Weintaub, Richard M. "Afghanistan Says It Downed F16 Fighter From Pakistan: U.S. Officials Say Soviet Pilots Involved." Washington Post, 2 May 1987. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ Weisman, Steven R. "Afghans down a Pakistani F-16, saying fighter jet crossed border." Archived 27 August 2010 at the Wayback Machine The New York Times, 2 May 1987. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ Markovskiy 1997, p. 28
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ ^36.0 ^36.1 Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ See further details at http://www.ww2.dk/new/air%20force/regiment/bap/169gvtbap.htm Archived 5 October 2018 at the Wayback Machine
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
↑ ^49.0 ^49.1 ^49.2 Civil Airworthiness Certification: Former Military High-Performance Aircraft. (2013). Stickshaker Pubs. 2-20
↑ ^50.0 ^50.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF6
↑ ^51.0 ^51.1 Mladenov (2016), Ch. 3 - Two-Seater Floggers
↑ Civil Airworthiness Certification: Former Military High–Performance Aircraft. (2013). Stickshaker Pubs. 2–22
↑ ...
↑ ^54.0 ^54.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF11
↑ ^55.0 ^55.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named CAC-2-23
↑ Brinkley, Joel. "Syrian pilot of MIG-23 is said to defect to Israel." Archived 24 May 2017 at the Wayback Machine The New York Times, 12 October 1989. Retrieved: 12 May 2010.
↑ Fulghum, David A. "MiGs in Nevada", Aviation Week & Space Technology, 27 November 2006.
↑ "MiG-23." Archived 5 September 2009 at the Wayback Machine U.S. FAA – Registry of Aircraft. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ "MiG-23." Archived 10 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine Warbirds of Delaware. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.
↑ "Mig-23." Archived 3 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine Cold War Air Museum. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

Bibliography

Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
{{cite journal |last =Markovskiy |first =Victor |title =Жаркое небо Афганистана: Часть IX |trans-title =Hot Sky of Afghanistan: Part IX |journal =Авиация и время [Aviation and Time] |year =1997 |issue =3 |language =ru |}
{{cite journal Last=Mladenov                        First＝Alexander　Title=Mikoyan MiG－23 Floggers Journal=Air International Date＝June 2004 Volume＝66 Issue＝6 Pages＝44－49 ISSN＝0306－5634}}
Template:Cite book Last=Mladenov First＝Alexander Title=Soviet Cold War Fighters Publisher＝Fonthill Media Location＝United Kingdom Date＝2016 ISBN＝978－1－78155－496－8
Template:Cite book Last＝Peck First＝Gaillard R. Jr. Title＝America's Secret MiG Squadron: The Red Eagles of Project CONSTANT PEG Publisher＝Osprey Publishing Location＝Oxford Year＝2012 ISBN＝978－1－84908－976－0
{{cite book　Last１＝Sweetman　First１＝Bill　Last２＝Gunston　First２＝Bill Title=Soviet Air Power: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Warsaw Pact Air Forces Today Publisher＝Salamander Books Location＝London Year＝1978 ISBN＝0－517－24948－0 Ref＝Sweetman}}

External links

Template:Mikoyan aircraft Template:USAF fighters Lua error in Module:Authority_control at line 159: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).

[WAPJ8_p43-4-1] Lake 1992, pp. 43–44.

[AI604_p45-2] Mladenov 2004, p. 45

[MgG_p351-5-3] Belyakov and Marmain 1992, pp. 351–355.

[WAPJ8_p43-5-4] Lake 1992, pp. 43–45.

[WAPJ8_p45-5] Lake 1992, p. 45.

[6] ...

[7] ...

[8] ...

[RedEaglesch14-9] 9.0 ^9.1 ^9.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch14

[SecretMiGch4-10] 10.0 ^10.1 ^10.2 ^10.3 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SecretMiGch4

[RedEaglesch8-11] Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch8

[SCWF7-12] 12.0 ^12.1 ^12.2 ^12.3 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF7

[SCWF9-13] 13.0 ^13.1 ^13.2 ^13.3 ^13.4 ^13.5 ^13.6 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF9

[14] Cooper & Dildy (2016), "Technical Specifications - MiG23ML "Flogger-G"

[SCWF12-15] 15.0 ^15.1 ^15.2 ^15.3 ^15.4 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF12

[SCWF5-16] 16.0 ^16.1 ^16.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF5

[RedEaglesch7-17] Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named RedEaglesch7

[SCWF8-18] 18.0 ^18.1 ^18.2 ^18.3 ^18.4 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF8

[19] "МIG-23ML"

[Babich-20] Babich 1999, pp. 24–25

[Ilyin-21] Ilyin 2000, pp. 36–37

[22] Hurley, Matthew M. "The BEKAA Valley Air Battle, June 1982: Lessons Mislearned?" Archived 23 September 2008 at the Wayback Machine Airpower Journal, Winter 1989. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[23] "Blooding the MiG-23." Archived 16 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine MiG-23 Flogger, The MiG-23 combat record. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[SCWF16-24] 24.0 ^24.1 Mladenov (2016), Ch. 3 - The MiG-23's Painful Induction into Service

[SCWF17-25] Mladenov (2016), Ch 3 - Notoriety in Real-World Air Combat

[26] Walter J. Boyne (2002). Air Warfare: An International Encyclopedia. ABC-Clio. p. 416.

[27] Pazynich, Sergey. "Агрессоров" (Translation: From the history of Soviet 'Aggression')" (in Russian). Archived 26 May 2010 at the Wayback Machine airforce.ru. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[28] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[29] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[30] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[Afghanistan_Says_It_Downed_F16_Fighter_From_Pakistan;_U.S._Officials_Say_Soviet_Pilots_Involved.-31] Weintaub, Richard M. "Afghanistan Says It Downed F16 Fighter From Pakistan: U.S. Officials Say Soviet Pilots Involved." Washington Post, 2 May 1987. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[Afghans_Down_a_Pakistani_F-16,_Saying_Fighter_Jet_Crossed_Border-32] Weisman, Steven R. "Afghans down a Pakistani F-16, saying fighter jet crossed border." Archived 27 August 2010 at the Wayback Machine The New York Times, 2 May 1987. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[Markovskiy-33] Markovskiy 1997, p. 28

[34] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[35] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[Gordon_2019_227-36] 36.0 ^36.1 Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[37] See further details at http://www.ww2.dk/new/air%20force/regiment/bap/169gvtbap.htm Archived 5 October 2018 at the Wayback Machine

[38] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[39] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[40] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[41] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[42] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[43] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[44] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[45] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[46] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[apnews.com-47] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[oryxspioenkop.com-48] Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2123: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).

[CAC-2-20-49] 49.0 ^49.1 ^49.2 Civil Airworthiness Certification: Former Military High-Performance Aircraft. (2013). Stickshaker Pubs. 2-20

[SCWF6-50] 50.0 ^50.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF6

[SCWF13-51] 51.0 ^51.1 Mladenov (2016), Ch. 3 - Two-Seater Floggers

[CAC–2–22-52] Civil Airworthiness Certification: Former Military High–Performance Aircraft. (2013). Stickshaker Pubs. 2–22

[53] ...

[SCWF11-54] 54.0 ^54.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SCWF11

[CAC-2-23-55] 55.0 ^55.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named CAC-2-23

[56] Brinkley, Joel. "Syrian pilot of MIG-23 is said to defect to Israel." Archived 24 May 2017 at the Wayback Machine The New York Times, 12 October 1989. Retrieved: 12 May 2010.

[57] Fulghum, David A. "MiGs in Nevada", Aviation Week & Space Technology, 27 November 2006.

[FAA-58] "MiG-23." Archived 5 September 2009 at the Wayback Machine U.S. FAA – Registry of Aircraft. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[59] "MiG-23." Archived 10 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine Warbirds of Delaware. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[60] "Mig-23." Archived 3 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine Cold War Air Museum. Retrieved: 28 January 2011.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]