OK back to Top Gun the film of a thousand mistakes but fun no less!

Lets talk about the Exocet in the film, most will remember the line “The enemy Migs can carry the Exocet anti ship missile that can be launched at 100 miles” (sic)

Now it has already been discussed about the whole “It is a French missile so hardly going to be carried on a Soviet jet” but I have been pondering some other things if you will humour me:

The current Block 3 MM40 Exocet has a range of just under 100 miles, but that is the ship launched variant. The current air launched variant the AM39 Block 2 Mod 2 has an optimal range of a shade under 45 miles. During the era of Top Gun the movie range of earlier model AM39 firing at an optimal medium altitude at a high subsonic speed was a shade over 30 miles. Launched at low altitude it was barely 15 miles. So I am not entirely clear why they say the Exocet has a range superior to 100 miles in the film.

On another note US navy carriers hardly go for a cruise near hostile nations on their own. They have a huge fleet of support ships and protective destroyers. If Maverick and Ice had been shot down the attacking Migs would of been engaged by the escort ships.

Also the 10,000ft hard deck. The hard deck is a simulated ground altitude, you treat the altitude as the ground so when Maverick says he went below the hard deck for three seconds and took out Jester he was in effect saying: I crashed for three seconds then shot Jester down…

People can be really strange.. What drives those guys to stick on their blind and useless beliefs is beyond me.. :confused:

If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.

Never eaten a guppie 😉

Care to elaborate on your two day observation…

I wait with “Bated breath”…

What is that about pedants?

The real issue is that us contractors and us advisors simply work to a one size fits all formula. And that may work for USA it doesn’t work for the small developing country needing immediate military capability in the field. Somehow Russia understands the needs of their client and works appropriately to get them up and running and effective in record time. There is no discussion as to the relative effectiveness of the different “doctrines “… No wonder so.many countries are now switching to Russia for their defence supplies.

The Gulf war analogy was a factoid too. A massive one. Had iraq been a completely USA equipped military it would not have lasted one week and the entire country would have collapsed. The Soviet French equipment allowed them to sustain for 5-6 weeks and shoot down dozens of Allied aircraft. Had they been operating F16s their planes would all be grounded without a single bombing raid by allies!

Frankly rubbish!

Iraq sustaining some modicum of resistance for 5-6 weeks during the Gulf War was nothing to do with having Soviet/Russian equipment vs American.

It was a decision by the Coalition planners to spend several weeks destroying Iraq’s command and control facilities, Iraqi resistance had little effect on the Coalition air forces and the small number of aircraft lost to enemy fire was more down to bad luck than any concerted Iraqi defence.

Once Iraqi defences were softened up the ground forces rolled into Iraq and knocked out the Iraqi army in short order.

PZL Świdnik launches legal fight over Polish helicopter deal

I was wandering when that was going to happen! I can’t imagine PZL Mielec and PZL Świdnik both taking it on the chin!

Regd. the F-35… the bird itself is not that bad, in some ways a true technological marvel… but the talks, PR, BS and people around it are terrible… Don’t know about you, but for me, the more someone forces me to like something, worship it or to feel it’s the most important thing since sliced bread, the more I dislike it and ignore it.. but maybe it’s just me… :angel:

If the folks finally relaxed, stripped down flags and simply accepted both pros and cons of each particular design, the debate would become less heated and much more objective… My 0.02

I agree with that sentiment, it would be indeed a more objective debate.

Me personally I have always been glass half full on the matter of F-35, I have criticisms of the program but on the whole I am supportive. Problem is there are people on both sides of the debate who only seem to able to deal with the extreme view either way without any nuance.

For the UK a tier 1 partner who plan to operate the F-35 off a Ski Jump configured carrier it is a major milestone. It has been barely talked about in an F-35 thread which people seem to be more interested in having arguments with LO, I felt it was worth mentioning…

Why would I whine about the Mig-29KUB ski-jump launch? I found it interesting and I vaguely remember commenting about the practicalities a bit but nothing more. What I didn’t do was derail the thread with an argument about the load out of another type.

Well, to start off, its not a dog. Former ACMs Fali Major and PV Naik have both gone on record stating that its a top notch aircraft as per all IAF personnel associated with the program, including test pilots (who know best) and, much much better than the MiG-21.

I’ve even quoted their exact words on the Tejas thread to dispel the myths being propagated by a media that sometimes serves as a mouthpiece for vested interests. Believe me, the Radia tapes blew the lid on an already well known fact- how the media served corporate interests, both Indian and Western. And we all know how much is at stake if the LCA program to be canned- its worth tens of billions of $ for foreign OEMs.

Understood that there are loads of vested interests briefing against Tejas. I have to say, though, that India had a window of several years in which to make provision for a higher production capacity than that that was implemented. Steps were not taken in the large window that was there. That has simply exacerbated the problems.

Well that is all very interesting guys but this is the wrong thread for it, Tejas discussions have no place in the Gripen thread.