Dude most of us can’t read klingon or whatever that writing is.

Oh, I’d think you’d be surprised just how many people on this forum board can actually read po-klingonski!!:diablo::diablo:

Hi

In 1984 there is iranian Cobra helicopter down by Iraqi Mi-25 helicopter .

In fact, they say that more than 1 Cobra was shot down by a HIND in that war, while the Cobra itself was also able to take out a few Mi-25s as well.

I posted something that I had read. here’s the link

link

Well, I don’t see the point in comparing the safety record of the USAF F-16 and IAF Mirage 2000 – these are 2 different aircraft operated by 2 different air arms operating in different conditions.
In fact, it would be very difficult to even compare the safety records of 2 different combat aircraft operating in the same air arm – Indian air force Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 are used in a different role each and consequently train and operate in different environments and flight profiles. The same could be said for USAF F-16s and F-15s.

Mind you, the Egyptian, Greek and Taiwanese militaries operate both the F-16 and M2000 in their air arms, it would be interesting to find out what they have to say about the comparative safety record (and combat capabilty) of both these aircraft in operational service.

…and here it is.
i think its more that americans GIVE UP on valkirie ,we never needed to continue on SOTKA….

The Americans “gave up” on the B-70 when they understood that The Soviet Union would easily develop a missile system to counter it. The S-200 was alredy entering service by the end of the 1960s.

we could have fielded it in much greater numbers then tu-160 was ever going to be built!!!

You probably couldn’t… you didn’t.

however that wasnt the case for b-1,for whitch we had to and did respond with bigger tu-160.

I thought the response to the B-1B was the MiG-31 and S-300??:confused:

The most unlikely shootdown I head about was IRIAF Phantom II downed by Iraqi Mi-25 Hind.

It’s not clear to me, but are you agreeing that this shoot down is very unlikely, acig.org after all, explained very well why this particular shootdown probably never happened?

My choice? Probably that Air America UH-1 that’s alleged to have shot down the North Vietnamese Antonov An-2 sometime in the Sixties. One of the crew members used a AK-47 if I recall.

Or perhaps the Iraqi MiG-25 that was shot down by an IRIAF F-5.

1.19 T 40min 500-600KM/h first 6 flight were in this speed

I recall that the T-4 never raised its undercarriage during the first 5 test flights. 600 km/h is pretty fast for an extended undercarriage…:eek:

Here are the figures:

1965: 194 SAM launches. 11 US aircraft lost, a launch/hit ratio of 5.7%. In other words for every 1 downed aircraft it took over 17 missiles to register a hit.

1966: 1,966 SAM launches. 31 US aircraft lost, a launch/hit ratio of 1.2%. 63 missiles for every one hit.

1967: 3,202 SAM launches. 96 US aircraft lost, a launch/hit ratio of 3.0%. 33 missiles for every one hit.

1968: 322 SAM launches. 3 US aircraft lost, a launch/hit ratio of 0.9%. 107 missiles for every one hit.

Linebacker Operations
1972: 4,244 SAM launches. 49 US aircraft lost, a launch/hit ratio of 1.15%. 87 missiles for every one hit.

As you can see, the success ratio is not going down exactly linearly. A bit more like up and down.

Well, for the last year you quote, 1972, you’re stating that almost 70% of all S-75s fired in the whole war were launched in that year, for a 1.15% success rate which more or less squares with what I said about the effectiveness of the S-75 being reduced later in the war.

In 1965 the US pilots did not have much experience with SAMs. By 1972 the SA-2 was already obsolete. The SA-3, SA-4, SA-5, SA-6 and even SA-8 were in service.

In 1972 the S-75 was still the most important SAM in the the Arsenal of the USSR and its allies, the only other missiles you mention that could catch an SR-71 are the SA-5 and perhaps the SA-4, and how many of those had been exported outside of the USSR in 1972?

The US attributes the majority of their aircraft losses to AAA. Only 190 to SAMs and about 100 or so to Migs. I sincerely doubt the figures. AAA performance has been dismal in all other modern conflicts, how come they are so successful in Vietnamese hands?

THe North Vietnamese had quite a lot of 37mm, 57mm, and 85mm calibre which are still capable of taking down a fast jet. The Mujahadeen shot down a few Su-17s in the Soviet-Afghan war with nothing heavier than the 12.62mm DShK machinegun. Although in all cases you do need to expend a lot of ammunition if you ever hope to hit a fast jet.

You are forgetting that the B-52 never operated alone over Vietnam. They and their supporting aircraft (including dedicated ECM aircraft) were doing a group ECM effort.

Although not in all cases, there must have been instances when the B-52s had to rely on its own ECM only for protection against missiles. It would be interesting to know how often.

Yes. That’s why I mentioned in my earlier post that the window of opportunity for the SA-2 crew is very small and response time is crucial. The SA-5 would be the weapon of choice against the SR-71.

Well then, we’re both in agreement. The SA-5 certainly has the energy and speed to catch an SR-71 – the question is, is it any more immune to the SR-71’s ECM than the SA-2?:confused: