Well, he put entire paragraphs in underlined, bold and ALL CAPS. Can’t argue with that.
Also, every Real Man either is/was SOF soldier or knows one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFTT4Ve8-BE
I was especially fond of him taking **Stranger **to task over the alleged superiority of the F-14 (introduced 1974, retired 2006) over the SU-33 (introduced 85 to 90 depending on how you want to score the variants and still very much in production & use). Complete with misspelling Sukhoi.
I’ve shot F-14s in training. They’re strafe rags against a more modern fighter. If the ROE let them use the AWG-9/AIM-54 they were formidable. But only over water, not land. Otherwise they were not something we worried about. OTOH, we did worry about Flankers. A lot.
Lies! If you go up against the F-14, you’ve just pulled up into the highway to the unironically homoerotic danger zone!
Here’s my proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58QOBqAWNzE
Deeper analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRwud05YMHI
Was it lacks in maneuverability, acceleration, avionics, something else? I suspect the three factors I mentioned were their main liabilities in overland fights but I don’t know what specifically would make them inferior to the F-16.
All the above.
It was designed as a long range carrier-based interceptor to stop incoming Bears and Backfires before they could release their anti-ship missiles. It wasn’t designed to deal with dogfighters.
It was damn good at what it was for in the era it was relevant. The F-16 would suck at trying to defeat a bunch of Backfires at long range. We’d have to get up close to each to do any damage. Meantime the F-14 would have shot them 50 miles ago before they fanned out too much.
The AWG-9 radar was a marvel of its time. But it was designed for overwater use. Ground clutter suppression was sacrificed to achieve increased range. It was a non-computerized analog system and not readily upgradable as the tech advanced.
It was pretty much blind over land. Which didn’t matter for how the F-14 was intended to be employed in the beginning. But became an issue as the missions morphed away from fleet defense into counter-air escort for strike packages against land-based targets.
LSLGuy, not sure if you can say, but didn’t the AIM-54 have a poor (compared to AIM-120 or AIM-9) g-envelope? That is, couldn’t fighters have a better-than-even chance of outmaneuvering the missile, even if the missile had a large amount of smash (either because the motor was still burning or it was still very high)? I thought the AIM-54 was great for killing either bombers or other things not likely to dodge, like cruise missiles?
From what I’d read, one of the biggest problems with the F-14A was the incredibly garbage TF-33 engines the thing was saddled with. At least, AFAIK, it wasn’t as smoky as the F-4. Besides, you were a Viper guy: isn’t everyone not in a Raptor hating life when they’re in ACM with you?
Aside, I got to watch the Blue Angels do their thing this last weekend. OMG, what a lot of fun, sitting in a field south of the airshow center, watching the 4 and 6 ship formations set up and zip over our heads. I did get to see one of them really get on a break turn, that I’m not sure s/he was supposed to push quite that hard. It was an opposed pass, where one of them performed their usual smooth radius 180 turn to get back to the runway and airshow central. The other pilot tried that too, but I guess didn’t set up right for the turn, because S/he later cranked it so hard, you could see the alpha in the turn. That is, s/he had the nose cranked in one direction, while the plane’s center of gravity took a longer radius pathless tight path. The turn radius did shrink tremendously while the pilot was doing it though.
Still, I’d never seen a turn cranked that hard before during an airshow from either the T-birds or the Angels. The only other time I’d seen it was during a practice set for when the MiG-29 first came to the U.S. on a familiarization Glasnost-y sort of thing, and the pilot during his practice day was making that Fulcrum zip all over the sky. No Pugachev’s Cobra, but he was coming close with moves where the nose was pointing one place and the plane was going entirely another.
As to the full auto guy (and no one made a zombie crack about how everyone not named Nagan on The Walking Dead seems to love full auto on that show?), I certainly am not someone who’s been there and done that, but I haven’t found full auto 5.56 to be uncontrollable in short bursts. Seems like a great way to go black on ammo though if you’re constantly using it for rifles.
Truthfully, I didn’t bother reading his screed after the third font shift/bold/set of exclamation points. Whatever in the world is there to get that excited about on a multiple-year dead thread?
Sorry for the rant…I did preemptively apologize for it right before (to be fair lol)
I meant more about the use of AR-platforms on FA being used for suppression rather than the usually designated mobility guys who are in charge of the SAW/46/60/etc.
awww…my feelings are deeply, and irrevocably hurt…I don’t know how to respond.
I used the fonts, boldfaced caps, etc as I was just having the same argument with ten others about the same thing, and I spoke of those in the SOF community to underline that since they rarely will say a word about just about anything, for them to be vocal about the basic stuff (small unit tactical crap like FA’s use etc) was why I went off the deep end with about three cups of coffee in me.
Next time, minus the coffee, I will try not to sound like the pesky psycho even I feel that handful of paragraphs make me look like. Lol.
Apologies…
Oh and never claimed any service, in fact claimed the opposite, and then went on to say how those in the aforementioned communities that were close to myself, fiance, and family were the only real sources of any usable experience-based info.
My priv sec firm work was just something I went into because of the continuing, irrational rant powered by espresso and anger. I probably broke the NDAs w/ the org (or maybe not now that L-3 communications owns them…who knows) by being loudmouthed and angry.
Apologies again, though as I said, the whole “everyone either served or ‘pretends’ to know someone who did” thing is unneeded.
People like myself get sore when lumped into the airsoft, wannabe crowd after a childish rant. The funerals and the numerous years of great memories with said patriots upsets me when lumped in to that crowd, so please don’t make that particular mistake if possible, thanks.
If you’re as willing to correct your behavior as you seem, you may well have a great time here.
Thank you for this precious gift. That’s the funniest thing I’ve read in quite some time.
Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy will.
For mine eyes have perceived the Shrine of the Mall Ninja, which thou hast prepared in the face of all newbies.
A light to lighten the zombies, and the glory of thy people Is You Kidding?
Regards,
Shodan
I was being that guy at the time, and was arguing with someone else nearly the same day I wrote that rant (after too much espresso and a childish, immature tantrum at the very childish behavior I had been dealing with first from someone else) and I took my frustration out like a lunatic after, and I did it on your guys’ thread and for that, I apologized (and apologize again).
I hope that will suffice for the time being…I can’t really take back what I said, but I can tell you I’m not a “security guard at the nearby mall”-type thing. I worked at TITAN as priv sec contractor who did terp work there as I had grown up white but speaking fluent Spanish (and a couple of versions, and that’s all) and worked for three years only south of San Diego being a “trunk monkey” I guess.
It wasn’t glamorous and I never used full auto lol, so I’m not (nor was before) claiming to be an SME on that matter whatsoever. I fired my weapon one time ever…period. And never again, fortunately for me. My colleagues were those who had given years (decades in a couple cases) of service in the LE, military SOF, and other related organizations/communities. They were the ones I had grown up around in some cases also, and I guess post-DD-214, regular life didn’t suit them and…whatever, it’s already too long a story that no one cares about. Disregard…Apologies again.
But I have a question for you though, please, if you could:
Whenever I try to read up on what the AIM-9 capabilities are, I seem to get confused (more the jargon on it’s systems and how they were designed initially really than anything else).
I was wondering if the newer gen AIM-9s really has the abilities “as advertised”, when used during tight turns etc. I always knew it was short range (I wanted to be a fighter pilot as youngster, instead the old man convinced me onto a diff path) so I know the AIM-9 had a few issues in the Vietnam years, and Phantom pilots were in many cases forced to fire several etc even when presented with an easy target like a slow moving (but apparently very agile) MiG-17s and 19s.
I was curious how much had changed and if you (or anyone) knows a dumbed-down way to explain it’s progression to what it is today. Again, I don’t know the ins-and-outs and can’t really talk shop on avionics etc, as my knowledge is novice at best. I just was curious is all…
My Dad told a similar story from WWII, New Guinea . When bringing dispatches to the front in a jeep, there was often a “Jap” sniper, the other guys would just empty their Thompsons into the jungle in that general direction while the driver (usually Dad) accelerated. Note that they hated the drum magazine, they used multiple 20 round magazines.
Real combat vets almost never talk about combat. Sadistic DIs, crappy food, and black humor- yes, but you have to get them drunk to get combat stories. I sat around with my dad in Gardena in the VFW with the guys from the 442nd, chests or hats full of ribbons, and trying to get them to tell actual combat stories- unless they were funny- was hard.
They also didnt spout technical aspects of the guns. Sure, they would say things like the “Grease gun was crap” or “The MI Garand was the best rifle ever” or"I like the M1 carbine, it was light and easy to carry", but that’s about it. And some of them were armorers.
No worries. Until the been there/done that guys like LSLGuy show up, I can direct you to this webpage detailing public info on various versions of the AIM-9.
My very limited understanding is that current AAMs can pull multiples more G’s than even very high-performance fighters like the F-16 and F-22, provided the missile’s motor is still burning or the missile has sufficient kinetic energy to perform the required set of maneuvers. Accordingly, if the geometry of the shot is set up right, within a given range, the missile can account for any evasive maneuver the target airplane tries. I’ve no idea how true this guy’s musings are, but it’s an interesting attempt to model how effective engagement ranges for AAMs change, depending on shot geometry.
That’s been my experience too - the exception being fighter pilots, of whom a number I’ve met would talk about their experiences; probably because from their perspective they were shooting down an aeroplane as opposed to killing a person.
This also has been my experience - they’ll get into “The SLR was great and the Steyr is crap”, though. I do know a couple of armourers though, and they’re into the technical aspects of the hardware as much as I am.
Largely as the other folks have already answered.
The various generations of AIM-9 have almost nothing in common with each other except overall size and being IR/non-radar guided.
The Viet Nam era missiles were as good as we knew how to make at the time. They sucked. Their limited engagement envelope overlapped only a little bit with where an F-4 could expect to place itself versus a MiG-15 / 17 / 21. End to end reliability was poor.
The cooled-seeker era (-L & -M) models were vastly more capable and vastly more reliable from end to end. They rarely failed to lock, rarely failed to launch, rarely failed to track, and rarely failed to detonate in lethal radius. The head-on engagement capability worked well, as did the much larger off-boresight launch capability. Range and terminal G available beat the pants off the Viet Nam era versions.
The better aircraft and radars of this era greatly improved the utility of the weapon and also improved the percentage of valid shots taken. As with any other weapon, firing it outside its known capabilities is pretty much guaranteed to be a wasted shot. That happened a lot in Viet Nam. Not so much since.
The AIM-9X is after my era. I understand in general that it’s pretty darn successful at doing all the magic stuff it’s supposed to do. The “brains” of an AIM-9D was a dozen miniature analog vacuum tubes. The “brains” of an AIM-9X is a supercomputer.
Those are both pretty good sources. Nice find.
The specifics are, of course, fuzzy. But comparing the given info on motor power, G-available, seeker off-boresight specs, etc. between the -E, -P, and -M shows the tremendous progress.
In general dogfight missiles are able to out-G dogfight aircraft. The issue is that what really matters is turn radius & rate. Consider a tail-chase scenario: If the missile is going 3x the speed of the aircraft maneuvering to try to escape, it needs to pull 3x the Gs just to fly the same curve.
Most dogfight missiles’ motors will burn out before the endgame unless fired at nearly minimum range. The good news (from the missile’s POV) is the motor burning out makes it vastly harder to see. And it’s very hard for a fighter pilot to fly effective defense against a missile he can’t locate. The bad news (again from the missile’s POV) is that it only has the oomph to make one aggressive last-ditch turn to offset the target’s maneuvers. That one big turn will scrub off almost all its energy and then it falls harmlessly to the ground.
The optimal defensive move is to observe the missile inbound from whatever direction then make one hard out-of-plane turn at what you calculate is the last moment (plus your and your aircraft’s reaction times) to, if all goes well, present the missile with a forced overshoot. IOW, its best countermove doesn’t quite keep up and it passes just outside fuze-funtioning range. Whew.
+1
Yes. It’s not personal and dirty up there.