Ocena teme:
  • 0 Glas(ov) - 0 Povprečje
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Iz sveta letalstva
#1
MIG je zakon :)

https://insajder.com/svet/americani-soki...riski-f-16
Odgovori
#2
Ne budali. To da ga Indijci znajo uporabljat še ne pomeni da je zakon ali pa da gre za verzijo, ki je prišla iz produkcije "pred stoletjem"...

https://theaviationist.com/2014/05/02/co...4-results/
Odgovori
#3
Ce je pilot slab...
F-15 je nekaj druga kot f-16.
Odgovori
#4
Mig 21 je sicer 70 let stara kanta a tudi na testih v ZDA se je izkazal za uporaben frčoplan v rokah dobrih pilotov.

https://www.slideshare.net/mishanbgd/mi-...days-terms
Odgovori
#5
Stara zgodba: Rusi generalno delajo bolj okretne in bolj vzdržjive lovce, ameri pa to nadoknadijo in presežejo z boljšo elektroniko.  Vedno je nek če..  Nobena okretnost ali hitrost ti ne pomaga, če ameri uporabljajo rakete za streljanje izven vidnega polja. Ko pa mig pride na par kilometrov pa je običajno v prednosti. Pri novih generacijah lovcev je elektornika že izenačena, in odločajo finese..
Odgovori
#6
Pri 0:13 se  prahstorični bombnik Su22 izogne Aim 9X  ,kasneje ga sestrelijo z Aim 120[/url]



Citat:[*]Home  News  How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?
[img=620x0]https://combataircraft.keypublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/06/160904-N-OI810-852-1024x669.jpg[/img]
How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?
Published: June 23rd, 2017



Photo: Sailors US Navy/MCS3C Nathan Burke
[*]
[size=undefined]
At approximately 18.43hrs local time on June 18, a US Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet operating over Syria shot down a Syrian Arab Air Force (SyAAF) Su-22M4 ‘Fitter’ fighter-bomber near Tabqah, Syria.
The F/A-18E (reported as BuNo 168914/AJ304) was assigned to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 87 ‘Golden Warriors’ (also known as ‘War Party’), which is assigned to Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 8.
Its pilot engaged the ‘Fitter’ and initially fired an AIM-9X Sidewinder close-range heat-seeking missile from a range of about half a mile, which was defeated by flares launched by the Su-22 pilot. The Super Hornet then re-engaged and fired an AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile), which hit the ‘Fitter’ despite being fired from relatively close range.
The pilot was able to eject and was later recovered safely, according to local sources.
It marked the first shootdown of a manned fighter by a US aircraft since May 4, 1999, when Lt Col Michael ‘Dog’ Geczy, US Air Force, downed a Serbian MiG-29 with an AIM-120 fired from his F-16CJ during Operation ‘Allied Force’.
 
However, the engagement poses some interesting questions, not least; how was a 1980s-era ‘Fitter’ able to defeat a cutting-edge US air-to-air heat-seeking missile?
Our good friend and contributor Angad Singh Tweeted this morning a fascinating feature he recalls, written by the great Bill Sweetman.[/size]

[size=undefined]

[url=http://aviationweek.com/blog/we-didn-t-know-what-90-percent-switches-did]http://aviationweek.com/blog/we-didn-t-k...itches-did
The linked feature Tweeted by Singh quotes John Manclark, who was the commander of the famous 4477th Test & Evaluation Squadron ‘Red Eagles’ from 1985-87, a top secret unit flying Soviet fighters to train US pilots and evaluate new equipment.
One particular exerpt makes fascinating reading:
“We had 210 maintainers,” Manclark recalled. “They were dedicated, just unbelievable, tech sergeants and master sergeants. The CIA gave us a flare dispenser from a Frogfoot [Su-25] that had been shot down in Afghanistan. We gave it to maintenance – it was just a thing with wires coming out of it. Four hours later they had it operational on a MiG-21.”
That proved to be a very important test. “In 1987 we had the AIM-9P, which was designed to reject flares, and when we used US flares against it would ignore them and go straight for the target. We had the Soviet flares – they were dirty, and none of them looked the same – and the AIM-9P said ‘I love that flare’.
“Why’d that happen? We had designed it to reject American flares. The Soviet flares had different burn time, intensity and separation. The same way, every time we tried to build a SAM simulator, when we got the real thing it wasn’t the same.
“I use the AIM-9P because it is out of the system and I can talk about it. The same thing happened to a lot of things that are still in the system and that I can’t talk about.”


The Syrian ‘Fitter’ in the latest incident appears to have had success with flares against the AIM-9X. There are also reports that the SyAAF ‘Fitters’ had received upgraded flare packs.
From 1979–82 40 new Su-22Ms were delivered to Syria. They flew around 40 sorties during the Lebanon War of 1982: while Israel claimed no fewer than eight shot down, Syria confirmed the loss of only one example.

Additional batches including 20 Su-22M3Ks were delivered in 1983, followed by no fewer than 42 Su-22M4Ks delivered between 1984 and 1985, while all surviving Su-22Ms were locally upgraded to Su-22M2K standard.

However, the fleet was depleted and by 2014 only around a dozen Su-22M4Ks soldiered on. Iran donated 10 ex-Iraqi Su-22M4Ks to Syria, early in 2015. Tom Cooper wrote recently in Air Forces MonthlyPrior to the recent US strike on Shayrat, the SyAAF included around 30 Su-22M-3, Su-22M-4K and Su-22UM-3K jets with three squadrons; this number is now down to around ten aircraft, just five or six of which are operational.
Ultimately, having defeated the AIM-9X, the ‘Fitter’ wasn’t as successful against the radar-guided AMRAAM. However, this engagement will surely have a few Top Gun and Weapons School graduates scratching their heads and trying to understand exactly how and why a 30 year-old ‘Fitter’, probably in a poor state of condition, beat-off America’s best close-range missile.[/size]
Odgovori
#7
na SNAFU blogu je odličen komentar dogajanja v Kašmirju:


For the last week or so I was putting off work I had because I was too preoccupied trying to keep tabs on all the sources I could to monitor the situation as we were looking at a very real possibility of all-out war, which especially on the night of the 27th seemed all but inevitable.
Work is now piling on, situation has de-escalated (relatively, lot of artillery & small arms fire across the LoC continues but if you all could look at it through my eyes, you'd see it for what it is, and what it is is routine. Except with recent events behind them, both sides are pounding one another with increased fervour). I'd love to offer a more comprehensive account of events but for now I think the most credible report one can get would possibly be the IAF's official account of the events, which are pretty well-surmised word for word in this handout which I think was already posted on this blog before -

[Image: 9e94ce5baf24c93d4999ecc07e59dafddd6b4cd1...=800&h=794]
I'd have considered the official PAF reports (officially handed out through ISPR) as reliable...if it wasn't for their changing stances on various subjects, such as the number of pilots captured, and pretty apparent lying with regard to the whole "no F-16s used" statement they made (thoroughly disproven by the AMRAAM wreckage), which puts a question mark over the veracity of the rest of their claims, such as "shot down 2 IAF aircraft" or "none of our planes were shot down" claims.
All open-source claims aside, if we decide to just stick with the official reports coming from the two official sources, and determine that if for whatever reason the Pakistanis could not admit that the F-16s were used (probably as it's in violation of end-user agreements signed with US when the planes were procured under assistance for War on Terror), then it's obvious that they would not admit to the loss of an F-16 either, for the very same reasons. And besides, even as per the IAF account, the wreckage of the F-16 is supposed to have fallen on the Pakistani side of Kashmir. So for all intents & purposes, no official admittance of an F-16 loss is ever going to come from the Pakistanis. Until and unless a third party like the US takes some sort of inventory of the weapon systems and platforms provided to Pakistan (some reports, see below, state that it's actually done).
A new graphic has emerged from some Twitter sources that aims to detail the engagement, although it seems pretty poorly made in haste -

[Image: f170f26098ad4f1462cf729236fd6b5ab4c3ea32...=800&h=525]
There is also this report: https://www.news18.com/news...
...which seems to indicate that there could be some legal issue here with regard to the use of F-16 (if that's the case, then no wonder Pak vehemently denied their use).
Also, I recollect here a statement from a retired Indian Navy Sea Harrier pilot regarding the incident concerning the MiG-21 v F-16 combat (not word for word, sorry, but the essence of it, translated):
" The ROEs clearly prevented the aircraft from shooting at each other unless enemies were within 10kms of the LOC airspace. The PAF aircraft, after the initial incursion, went back across the LOC beyond 10kms, and the other IAF aircraft also maintained the ROE and stayed back. However the IAF WC and the F-16 pilot, out of need for personal glory or medals, appear to have engaged in a tangle and they both paid the price. The F16 got shot down and the engagement put Varthaman on that side of the LOC, where the remainder of the PAF flight was free to engage him. Hope this has lessons for both Air Forces as to why ROE needs to be respected "
He goes on to state that the WC actually not only put himself at risk but also his wingman, fortunately for the wingman though, he managed to shake off the AMRAAM (probably the same AMRAAM that fell in Indian territory).
A poster on the blog called Owl said it 2 days ago. He suspected the reason why the Su-30MKIs could not act while the MiG-21s were engaging was probably ROE. If what the retired Sea Harrier jock I talked to is true, then Owl called it.
Everything said and done, there's one thing that's for sure - with 32 combat aircraft involved, both sides backed by AEW planes, what transpired on the morning of February 27th was possibly one of the biggest (if not the biggest) air combat engagements in recent history.
Odgovori
#8
Največja zalost pa je v vsej zgodbi da je imel Indiski pilot sreco da ga je dobila v roke pakistanska vojska in je prezivel. Pakistanskega pilota pa je dobila v roke pakistanska drhal in so ga linčali do smrti....ker je drhal mislila da je Indijski pilot.
Se pa tudi z malo posodobljeno kanto in z izurjenostjo da marsikaj.
Odgovori
#9
Saj protiletalski raketi se da izogniti z nekaj sreče, jeklenimi živci in pravim tajmingom

https://defenseissues.net/2013/08/17/eva...r-missile/
Odgovori
#10
Legenda! Tudi Jackpot se da zadet "z nekaj sreče, jeklenimi živci in pravim tajmingom" :D
Odgovori
#11
Precej nenavadna oprema za te čase, kupola z dvemi dvocevnimi topi  v repu letala ,standard oprema sovjetskih transportnih letal.


[video=youtube]Standardna oprema vzhodnih transportnih letal    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_conti...S8ZdRiKqjo[/video]
Odgovori




Uporabnikov, ki berejo to temo: 1 Gost(ov)