User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 1:01:27 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I recall in one of my books on DS, that when the Iraqis picked up a Tomcat radar they'd just turn and open the distance at high speed. Which to my uninformed brain says they learned against the Iranians that if they basically did what you said the Phoenix couldn't get them. Missiles have a very tough time completing an intercept against a target flying directly away...it takes a *lot* of missile fuel to chase down a retreating target, even one that isn't hauling a$$ like a Foxbat. Most air-to-air BVR tactics use dragging out (a 180-turn, and flying away from the adversary) at a particular range as a method of trashing shots that are already in flight. It doesn't do anything to help defeat the other guy, but you've just reduced his missile count for when you re-commit to the engagement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 2:15:48 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: yep "I'd shoot all those fuckers all at once" Dos Gringos circa unknown Going from STT with AIM-7 to Track While Scan and AMRAAM was like being 5 years old on Christmas morning times about a million. @mach   Dos Gringos - I Wish I Had A Gun Just Like The A-10 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 2:25:53 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is even more amazing for people to realize that missiles are not laser guns (e.g. they take a considerable time-of-flight to actually make their way to the intercept) and that they don't have Pks of 1.0. Even the good missiles have effective Pks of closer to 0.5, and one-shot-one-kill is *extremely* rare. I got to see that for real during the "weapons airshow" the Stennis put on for the military of Singapore (and us). F-14's and F-18's popping off AIM-9's at flares in the sky. I saw more than one come off the rail, take off and run out of steam before it made it to the flare. I saw others that didn't make it to the flare before the flare dropped into the ocean. I saw others that lost lock on the flare and watched it go on it's merry way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 6:32:01 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd put that "99" into some serious airquotes just like the 54's 100 miles or whatever wiki range it has, but yeah point stands its a far better missile in general. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: the AMRAAM can do what the AIM-54 does and does it better. AIM-120D has a range of 99 miles and a better tech, lighter weight, and is compatible with all of our airframes. I'd put that "99" into some serious airquotes just like the 54's 100 miles or whatever wiki range it has, but yeah point stands its a far better missile in general. He, that’s what I was getting at, that the 120 is a much better all around AAM than the 54 for pretty much anything other than lumbering Soviet bombers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 6:54:31 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did we ever fire a Phoenix in anger? I believe three times and they all missed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 7:00:59 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: https://hushkit.net/2022/09/30/we-flew-the-f-14-tomcat-heres-why-it-was-the-most-important-cold-war-warplane/ The F-14 had the capability of destroying ANY opposing aircraft ANY where in the world. No other Cold War aircraft had the single mission capability to send two nuggets on a “standard” mission from the CV and trap two Aces a few hours later. The AIM-54 and the AWG-9 enabled incredible combat capability. With the AWG-9 able to track two dozen separate targets and feed the data to a swarm of million-dollar missiles doing their job, two JO's could find themselves at the tactical pointy end of a powerful strategic spear. The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 7:09:15 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. No offense, but there’s a lot of ignorance in this post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 8:23:51 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What exactly is the question? The AWG-9 afaik was the first AA radar capable of actually doing TWS... That didn't mean it did it well, but for the early 1970's with literally a 3 dollar calculator computer processor (in modern 1980's terms) its not half bad, considering the rest of the uncivilized world didn't have anywhere near that capability till a decade or more later. Perhaps I read it wrong, but an earlier comment seemed to indicate, to my brain anyway, that the AWG-9 either didn't have TWS or couldn't do it while guiding a Sparrow for some reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 8:27:52 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No offense, but there’s a lot of ignorance in this post. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. No offense, but there’s a lot of ignorance in this post. He is not all that wrong. Even when the 14 for the F110 engines, it still wasnt that great the 14 was limited to 6.5G's but could pull 7.5 IF needed One of the main issues that eventually forced retirement This is exactly what it was designed to do. The "Bombcat" wasnt really all that great as it wasnt designed to do ATG One of the biggest disadvantages that an F14 has is its swing wings. I read of F15 pilots training with F14 pilots saying the wings would telegraph what the airplane was doing and going to do. It was a big, expensive, complicated airframe that was quickly surpassed by smaller, cheaper airframes. People give it mythical status because of a movie. Actual, real world performance differs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 8:35:00 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Perhaps I read it wrong, but an earlier comment seemed to indicate, to my brain anyway, that the AWG-9 either didn't have TWS or couldn't do it while guiding a Sparrow for some reason. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What exactly is the question? The AWG-9 afaik was the first AA radar capable of actually doing TWS... That didn't mean it did it well, but for the early 1970's with literally a 3 dollar calculator computer processor (in modern 1980's terms) its not half bad, considering the rest of the uncivilized world didn't have anywhere near that capability till a decade or more later. Perhaps I read it wrong, but an earlier comment seemed to indicate, to my brain anyway, that the AWG-9 either didn't have TWS or couldn't do it while guiding a Sparrow for some reason. As I understand: The sparrow as a semi-active radar seeker needs the target painted for it by the radar of the shooter. TWS wouldn't give enough of a signal back to track by the missile's simpler systems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:19:49 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As I understand: The sparrow as a semi-active radar seeker needs the target painted for it by the radar of the shooter. TWS wouldn't give enough of a signal back to track by the missile's simpler systems. The AIM-7 requires continuous-wave high PRF energy being constantly reflected off the target for it to guide. Thus, it requires single-target-track. The AIM-54 and AIM-120 (as "active" missiles) don't, and thus they can be employed with TWS modes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:29:13 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The "Bombcat" wasnt really all that great as it wasnt designed to do ATG The issue with the "Bombcat" was that it had limitations in its employment capabilities that other peer multirole fighters like the Block 40/50 Viper, Hornet, and F-15E did not have. The F-14 could have been a perfectly capable GP/PGM/IAM bomber if it had a longer gestation period and more $$ poured into the targeting pod placement, 1553 bus plumbing, and integration of the A-G avionics. There's nothing inherently wrong with the airframe that would have prevented it from being a very capable mutirole fighter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:29:39 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Track-while-scan to the rescue...or now AESA radar which looks at everything simultaneously without the loss of track file fidelity that TWS had. My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:32:15 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the biggest disadvantages that an F14 has is its swing wings. I read of F15 pilots training with F14 pilots saying the wings would telegraph what the airplane was doing and going to do. I flew with a couple former Tomcat guys in the F-15E who said they could use the swing wings to decoy the bandit on their actual energy state based on that same concept. Ergo, if they wanted to fight two circle, they might hit the merge with the wings out so they "looked" slow and would bait the bandit into thinking they could win a rate fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:33:03 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... Definitely callsign-worthy. :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:33:19 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: yep "I'd shoot all those fuckers all at once" Dos Gringos circa unknown Going from STT with AIM-7 to Track While Scan and AMRAAM was like being 5 years old on Christmas morning times about a million. @mach  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=335GdTqtyLsI don't want to brag or anything but I am in that video with a cameo appearance.I am the guy on the left at 0:24 not joking. My only claim to fame
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:36:04 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. Let me show the predecessor to the F111. The original Phoenix shooter... Luckily the Navy put down the crackpipe. Yes, thats right, it was subsonic... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:36:21 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Probably BS, but I read somewhere that part of the reason the kill numbers of top German aces in WWII numbered in the hundreds came from them getting a "kill" if anyone in the flight they were leading got one, and that aircraft destroyed on the ground counted also. Ever come across that? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 100% true. Similar issues with fighter shoot-down claims. Rules for verification of kill claims changed through the war, too, as it became obvious that post-sortie self-reporting wasn't all that accurate. Probably BS, but I read somewhere that part of the reason the kill numbers of top German aces in WWII numbered in the hundreds came from them getting a "kill" if anyone in the flight they were leading got one, and that aircraft destroyed on the ground counted also. Ever come across that? Also, German, like Japanese pilots flew until they died. That worked well in the beginning of the war, but destroyed them in the end. They ended up with a few amazing pilots, and lots of baby seals, with instructors whose knowledge became very obsolete over time. The United States rotated their best pilots back stateside to becoming instructors, this improved the overall average of our pilots quality tremendously. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:36:24 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I got to see that for real during the "weapons airshow" the Stennis put on for the military of Singapore (and us). F-14's and F-18's popping off AIM-9's at flares in the sky. I saw more than one come off the rail, take off and run out of steam before it made it to the flare. I saw others that didn't make it to the flare before the flare dropped into the ocean. I saw others that lost lock on the flare and watched it go on it's merry way. Yep, exactly right. Pretty eye-opening to see in person rather than just hearing about it. You guys are lucky that they do demos like that for guys out on the boat, that would be fun to watch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:37:17 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Perhaps I read it wrong, but an earlier comment seemed to indicate, to my brain anyway, that the AWG-9 either didn't have TWS or couldn't do it while guiding a Sparrow for some reason. Thats correct, you need an STT mode to "paint" the target to guide sparrows. The only radar that could guide multiple Fox1's was the Mig31's Zaslon radar, but that was a PESA (impressive for the early 80's esp for the soviets) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:38:41 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One of the biggest disadvantages that an F14 has is its swing wings. I read of F15 pilots training with F14 pilots saying the wings would telegraph what the airplane was doing and going to do. The flip side of that story is that "experienced" tomcat pilots exploited this by manually moving the wings to show different energy states and fuck with OPFOR in a dogfight. But I bet the number of guys that could do that was rather limited. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:39:33 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Track-while-scan to the rescue...or now AESA radar which looks at everything simultaneously without the loss of track file fidelity that TWS had. My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... oof TWS is kinder and gentler than off boresight, plus it sounds more mysterious to the ladies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:41:24 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As is evidenced by threads like this, most folks don't understand the nuances of missile "ranges", especially with respect to launch speed and altitude, and target aspect, speed, and maneuvering. I don't blame folks who don't have that knowledge for hanging their hat on unclassified static numbers, as the fact that "there is no one single range number, it depends on these multiple dynamic variables" is a much more difficult concept to wrap your mind around. It is even more amazing for people to realize that missiles are not laser guns (e.g. they take a considerable time-of-flight to actually make their way to the intercept) and that they don't have Pks of 1.0. Even the good missiles have effective Pks of closer to 0.5, and one-shot-one-kill is *extremely* rare. Yup. I mean once you explain it to people though they usually get it pretty quick, since it makes perfect sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:46:07 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The flip side of that story is that "experienced" tomcat pilots exploited this by manually moving the wings to show different energy states and fuck with OPFOR in a dogfight. But I bet the number of guys that could do that was rather limited. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: One of the biggest disadvantages that an F14 has is its swing wings. I read of F15 pilots training with F14 pilots saying the wings would telegraph what the airplane was doing and going to do. The flip side of that story is that "experienced" tomcat pilots exploited this by manually moving the wings to show different energy states and fuck with OPFOR in a dogfight. But I bet the number of guys that could do that was rather limited. I was what's called an "adversary". In a nutshell, I pretended to be a Warsaw Pact pilot, simulating their weapons and tactics. I played with a lot of F-14s, sometimes three times a day. Not once, ever, did I see one try to trick me that way. That's just not how dogfights go. When the flying tennis court's wings came out, I knew he was out of energy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:46:19 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are you talking an all Sparrow engagement from the days of yore, or where the Eagle has AMRAAM? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Range was limited. The Tomcat against the Eagle in a BVR environment generally did similiar type F-16 tactics ( before they got amraam ) of a bomb burst hoping to get someone in un-targeted trying to exploit the limitations of single target track. Are you talking an all Sparrow engagement from the days of yore, or where the Eagle has AMRAAM? Days of yore, not sure if I even flew against Tomcats with Amraam. If I did it was even less of a contest and was probably VID ROE because of it, but I honestly can't recall. I remember one sortie during days of yore when I was a young Lt, 4v4 against Tomcats, they never came to the merge. We were DCA and they were OCA, They did a bomb burst came back hot, all got spiked and then they did a monty python "run away run way" It stuck in my mind because I wasn't expecting that as a youngin. All 3 engagements on the sortie happened exactly the same. There was no fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:49:59 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When the flying tennis court's wings came out, I knew he was out of energy. Hey, I thought the Eagle was the "flying tennis court"! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:52:00 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't want to brag or anything but I am in that video with a cameo appearance.I am the guy on the left at 0:24 not joking. My only claim to fame I've seen that clip many times in McD promo material -- cool! Where was it taken and what were the filming circumstances? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:54:43 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No offense, but there’s a lot of ignorance in this post. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. No offense, but there’s a lot of ignorance in this post. Fine, make the counter argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:55:45 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was what's called an "adversary". In a nutshell, I pretended to be a Warsaw Pact pilot, simulating their weapons and tactics. I played with a lot of F-14s, sometimes three times a day. Not once, ever, did I see one try to trick me that way. That's just not how dogfights go. When the flying tennis court's wings came out, I knew he was out of energy. Yeah I dont doubt that. There was a topgun instructor famous for doing it, and maybe a few others but I'm sure the average fleet pilot. Nah. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:56:56 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hey, I thought the Eagle was the "flying tennis court"! Oh no. The fighter pilots are now gonna have a who's bigger contest. ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:05:02 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oh no. The fighter pilots are now gonna have a who's bigger contest. ;) Well, it was always an insult battle between being "Rodan" and the "Flying Tennis Court". At least my Eagle community wasn't the one leading the LGBT revolution back in the 80s, as that was a favorite insult, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:15:45 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah I dont doubt that. There was a topgun instructor famous for doing it, and maybe a few others but I'm sure the average fleet pilot. Nah. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I was what's called an "adversary". In a nutshell, I pretended to be a Warsaw Pact pilot, simulating their weapons and tactics. I played with a lot of F-14s, sometimes three times a day. Not once, ever, did I see one try to trick me that way. That's just not how dogfights go. When the flying tennis court's wings came out, I knew he was out of energy. Yeah I dont doubt that. There was a topgun instructor famous for doing it, and maybe a few others but I'm sure the average fleet pilot. Nah. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:17:04 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The issue with the "Bombcat" was that it had limitations in its employment capabilities that other peer multirole fighters like the Block 40/50 Viper, Hornet, and F-15E did not have. The F-14 could have been a perfectly capable GP/PGM/IAM bomber if it had a longer gestation period and more $$ poured into the targeting pod placement, 1553 bus plumbing, and integration of the A-G avionics. There's nothing inherently wrong with the airframe that would have prevented it from being a very capable mutirole fighter. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The "Bombcat" wasnt really all that great as it wasnt designed to do ATG The issue with the "Bombcat" was that it had limitations in its employment capabilities that other peer multirole fighters like the Block 40/50 Viper, Hornet, and F-15E did not have. The F-14 could have been a perfectly capable GP/PGM/IAM bomber if it had a longer gestation period and more $$ poured into the targeting pod placement, 1553 bus plumbing, and integration of the A-G avionics. There's nothing inherently wrong with the airframe that would have prevented it from being a very capable mutirole fighter. You can piss enough money into just about anything to make it more capable but it is kind of a zero sum game. It’s 2005 and we are in the midst of sending pallets of money to Lockmart to burn to keep the F-22 plant warm. We also have two counter insurgency wars going. So let’s double down and take the family minivan and hang a bunch of expensive shit on it. Sure, we have to replace the engine because it sucks so bad compressor stalls alone destroyed 10% of our Tomcats and it had an extremely shitty thrust to weight ratio. Needs a new radar also. And once we retrain the entire F-14 community to be mud movers we will have a ‘multi role fighter’ with a huge RCS, not very maneuverable and oh, it takes two folks to fly |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:18:57 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: As I understand: The sparrow as a semi-active radar seeker needs the target painted for it by the radar of the shooter. TWS wouldn't give enough of a signal back to track by the missile's simpler systems. Quoted: The AIM-7 requires continuous-wave high PRF energy being constantly reflected off the target for it to guide. Thus, it requires single-target-track. The AIM-54 and AIM-120 (as "active" missiles) don't, and thus they can be employed with TWS modes. Makes sense. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:29:42 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let me show the predecessor to the F111. The original Phoenix shooter... Luckily the Navy put down the crackpipe. Yes, thats right, it was subsonic... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Douglas_F6D_Missileer_artists_impression.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The F-14 program was a failure. Not quite to the level of the F-111 it grew from, but pretty close. Shitty engine, G limitations, hard to land, toast in a dogfight, very expensive to operate, etc. And keep in mind the F-14 was basically a family van. It was built to haul a family to soccer practice; a fat mom (the radar) and six kids (the missiles). Once the Cold War ended it was such a one trick pony it could not find another role. Let me show the predecessor to the F111. The original Phoenix shooter... Luckily the Navy put down the crackpipe. Yes, thats right, it was subsonic... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Douglas_F6D_Missileer_artists_impression.jpg It still kissed the Tomcat on the mouth with the TF-30 though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:30:40 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Track-while-scan to the rescue...or now AESA radar which looks at everything simultaneously without the loss of track file fidelity that TWS had. My last deployment location, we had a comms guy who had eyes that looked in different directions. I started referring to him as TWS when he wasn't around. I think at least two of the other pilots (non-fighter types) actually peed themselves when I explained to them what "Track While Scan" meant without actually referencing his eyes. I suppose that's kinder than calling him "Off Boresight." Hey, I didn't do it to his face or in front of the other maintainers or support team... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 10:58:07 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @disco_jon75 This TWS character wasn't an Oregon ANG guy by chance, was he? We had a guy in my comms flight that fit that description. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 11:15:41 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, it was always an insult battle between being "Rodan" and the "Flying Tennis Court". At least my Eagle community wasn't the one leading the LGBT revolution back in the 80s, as that was a favorite insult, too. The Navy was always more forward thinking in that regard... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 12:39:01 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:oh, it takes two folks to fly Yeah....turns out, that's actually a good attribute in a strike aircraft.  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 8:34:47 PM EDT
[#40]
Yeah, seems like the two-seat, long-range, sensor-integrated sensor, aircraft with a big load of long range weapons is the trend.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 9:44:32 PM EDT
[#41]
I'll just sit back here with my AWG-10B memories and marvel at the new stuff!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2022 11:03:52 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll just sit back here with my AWG-10B memories and marvel at the new stuff! But will you regale us with tales of the "advanced" helmet mounted sight the Phantom (sometimes) had? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 1:09:36 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did we ever fire a Phoenix in anger? Three times I believe and all were colossal let downs. The Phoenix was designed to shoot down Russian bombers as in TU-95’s over the horizon, it is or was no match for fast, maneuverable fighters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 1:13:18 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 3 in fact and they all failed. Iran had somewhat better luck but mostly against stuff that didnt have RWRs or RWRs that could detect the AWG9 tracking it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Did we ever fire a Phoenix in anger? 3 in fact and they all failed. Iran had somewhat better luck but mostly against stuff that didnt have RWRs or RWRs that could detect the AWG9 tracking it. From my reading the sources claiming Iran's victories are from Iranian sources. They have been stated as propaganda. It makes sense, the milage Iran could get claiming they could make a missile work the mighty USA couldn’t. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 9:01:46 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From my reading the sources claiming Iran's victories are from Iranian sources. They have been stated as propaganda. It makes sense, the milage Iran could get claiming they could make a missile work the mighty USA couldn’t. I think it is more fair to just say that Iran's numbers haven't been able to be objectively verified by a 3rd party. This is different than saying the available public data is "propaganda". Cooper's book, which is really the only widely-available compilation of Iran's F-14 shootdown information*, has an appendix that lists all of the kills that Iran claimed, dates, type of aircraft, type of missile, and various other data. Cooper has said he compiled that data through a combination of Iranian files and interviews with the F-14 crews that he could get access to. It is actually a very nice book, well written and some great photos. Damn, the Tomcat looked sexy in that desert paint scheme. But, even looking at the data as presented in that list, there are a lot of holes in it. I loosely worked with Tom on another book he wrote (just provided some photos I took and some data on some stuff I saw in Iraq in 2003), and he does not appear to my eyes to be an Iranian propagandist by any stretch of the imagination. But, the Iranian source data, and the (lack of) methodical verification of the kills that they claim simply can't be matched up victory-for-loss with the Iraqi AF's data. And, yes, some of is probably some Iranian state-generated propaganda. So as Cooper's data is single-source, from a historian perspective the data is considered unreliable.  Attached File* There are two other books that I know of about the Iran/Iraq air war (one of which is only available in Polish!), and both seem to re-print Cooper's list rather than having data sourced on their own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 10:38:52 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't want to brag or anything but I am in that video with a cameo appearance.I am the guy on the left at 0:24 not joking. My only claim to fame LOL! Nice! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 1:09:32 PM EDT
[#47]
This video just popped into my YT feed. I thought it germane since there is a discussion of the TF-30.
 Tomcat Ramp Strike |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 1:29:57 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But will you regale us with tales of the "advanced" helmet mounted sight the Phantom (sometimes) had? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'll just sit back here with my AWG-10B memories and marvel at the new stuff! But will you regale us with tales of the "advanced" helmet mounted sight the Phantom (sometimes) had? VTAS was advanced for its time, but it just wasn't advanced enough for the pilots to WANT to use it. The biggest reason I am aware of is it added about 2 lbs to the weight of a normal helmet which in turn made the VTAS helmet way too damn heavy under G. VTAS helmets were pretty cool to play with on the flight line though! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 2:48:15 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: VTAS was advanced for its time, but it just wasn't advanced enough for the pilots to WANT to use it. The biggest reason I am aware of is it added about 2 lbs to the weight of a normal helmet which in turn made the VTAS helmet way too damn heavy under G. VTAS helmets were pretty cool to play with on the flight line though! IDK, as a system it gets compared alot to the Soviet Schmel system that was far more successful for a variety of reasons (including the fact it was very light), mainly due to how it was better integrated with the R73 and KOLS on the mig29 for example. I think VTAS was ok, but really it was limited by sidewinder seeker limits, and if you are talking about the 70's it was being used with rear aspect missiles like the 9G/H, which also had limited G reserves compared to later missiles. So like if you can't take an all aspect shot with an HMS whats the point? If your missile can't pull enough G like an R73 then you have a far more limited launch envelope etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2022 2:54:51 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think it is more fair to just say that Iran's numbers haven't been able to be objectively verified by a 3rd party. This is different than saying the available public data is "propaganda". Cooper's book, which is really the only widely-available compilation of Iran's F-14 shootdown information*, has an appendix that lists all of the kills that Iran claimed, dates, type of aircraft, type of missile, and various other data. Cooper has said he compiled that data through a combination of Iranian files and interviews with the F-14 crews that he could get access to. It is actually a very nice book, well written and some great photos. Damn, the Tomcat looked sexy in that desert paint scheme. But, even looking at the data as presented in that list, there are a lot of holes in it. I loosely worked with Tom on another book he wrote (just provided some photos I took and some data on some stuff I saw in Iraq in 2003), and he does not appear to my eyes to be an Iranian propagandist by any stretch of the imagination. But, the Iranian source data, and the (lack of) methodical verification of the kills that they claim simply can't be matched up victory-for-loss with the Iraqi AF's data. And, yes, some of is probably some Iranian state-generated propaganda. So as Cooper's data is single-source, from a historian perspective the data is considered unreliable. * There are two other books that I know of about the Iran/Iraq air war (one of which is only available in Polish!), and both seem to re-print Cooper's list rather than having data sourced on their own. Yeah more or less this, I mean I don't think Cooper has any real personal bias on the matter, but I do bet the pilots he talked to did and he just lets that go out unfiltered. So as an actual historical work its pretty flawed. My 2 cents on it is that at the start of the war its pretty clear the IRAF was the larger/better equipped/better trained AF. So it preformed well. As they ran out of missiles/parts etc. That changed. And that whole time the Iraqi AF was getting better, better fighters, better training, better pilots. So by the end of the war the opposite situation was the case. There is also the case that Cooper/Iran dont really make any distinction between actual models of stuff killed. Mig23 in 1980 most likely meant an export version of mig23bn (bomber model, usually misidentified by amateurs as a mig27). And like in that case it basically has no air to air capability at all, and functionally speaking not even a useful RWR), so like clubbing baby seals. By the end of the war, when the Iraqis basically possessed the 2nd best mig23's built with advanced radars, RWR's, missiles etc. And were shooting down F14's with em.. And that entry is still gonna read mig23... Same case for the Mirage F1's and mig21's Iraq operated. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
