TJOriginally posted by Vympel
So what does that have to do with a UR-100 then?
The reason why it was an SS-19 STILLETO that launched the hypersonic vehicle is due to the specific conditions of the START I protocol. The Russians announced to the west that ICBM/SLBM would be launched and that one of those would be carrying a hypersonic research vehicle. The first missile to be launched under the protocol was the SS-19 STILLETO from Tyuratum. The Russians provided no impact areas on the Kamchatka peninsula for this test because the purpose of the missile was to boost the hypersonic research vehicle. The missile only flew a partial ballistic trajectory and then the scramjet powered hypersonic vehicle detached to conduct its mission. The second missile to launch was the SS-N-23 SKIFF from the DELTA-IV which impacted on the Kamchatka peninsula. The third missile to launch was the SS-25 SICKLE from Plesetsk which also impacted on the Kamchatka peninsula as per treaty conditions. As to the type of hypersonic vehicle the SS-19 was carrying it was more than likely an IGLA or derivative:
http://www.global-defence.com/1999/missiles/missile3.htm
“Igla
RSA also is pursuing the Igla vehicle, an integrated engine/airframe concept similar to the US Hyper-X that employs a hydrogen scramjet. The vehicle is 5m/16.4ft in length and designed for mach 5-14 speeds. It is to be boosted to speed by launch aboard an SS-18 or SS-19 ICBM. A date has not yet been set for an Igla test flight”
http://www.milparade.ru/market/paid/014/06_02.htm
“FIRST FLIGHT OF IGLA HYPERSONIC AIRCRAFT SCHEDULED FOR 2004
According to the representatives of the Central Institute of Aircraft Engine Building (TsIAM), the first flight of the Igla hypersonic aircraft, currently under development in Russia is scheduled for the year 2004.
The Igla is designed to carry out research and testing of a scramjet. This engine runs on liquid hydrogen and is planned to power the future advanced space passenger-carrying and military aircraft. These aircraft will offer several times lower specific cost of putting payloads into orbit. Presently, this cost makes up US$ 8-30,000.
The Voronezh Khimavtomatika Design Bureau has already produced a single scramjet which is planned to be used for flight tests at M=6.5.
TsIAM plans to demonstrate a full-scale mockup of the Igla at the MAKS-99 Air Show in Zhukovsky (Moscow region).
In the words of the representative of the institute, all the previous works on the scramjet have been carried out both with domestic (the Russian Space Agency) and foreign customers: France, USA. In the framework of this programme, a US$ 2 million contract has been signed with “a number of the US governmental organisations”.
However, the Igla programme may be implemented only in case adequate financing is provided, the representative stressed. The project cost is about 1 billion roubles (US$ 40 million). As far as there is no such money in the Russian budget, the scramjet developers are planning to attract additional, possibly foreign investments. The US plans to spend US$ over 100 million on similar programme.”
http://www.fas.org/news/russia/1995/fbust044_95021.htm
“The Mashinostroenie NPO showed, in addition to its Almaz program, its Strela mini-launcher project and Igla experimental hypersonic vehicle. Like the Rockot, the Strela rocket is a derivative of the UR-100N (alias SS-19) missile. It is the subject of an agreement with Khrunichev. Launched from a Baykonur or Plessetsk silo, it can place payloads of 1.2 mt to 1.8 mt in circular orbits at 300 to 1,100 km, inclined at 63[DEG]. The Igla demonstrator is part of the Oriol national program devoted to the study of hypersonic flight. Weighing 2 mt, it is to be launched by the SS-19 missile over a suborbital trajectory. TsIAM’s [Central Institute of Aviation Engine Building] liquid hydrogen scramjet is designed to operate from Mach 6 to Mach 14 at an altitude of 45 km “
A paper on the IGLA:
http://hypersonic2002.aaaf.asso.fr/papers/17_5250.pdf
TJ
TJOriginally posted by SOC
Clearly a MiG-25. Anyone know where it is? I’ll be in Baghdad in a few months 😀
More than likely Al Asad. A number of FOXBATs were plinked at this location. The Iraqi’s used to forward deploy FOXBATs to Al Asad when they wanted to challenge the SNFZ and conduct ICFs.
TJ
TJThink about it? Baluyevsky in interview revealed that the craft could be launched from an aircraft. ‘Powered craft with the ability of wide manoeuvre and theoretically releasable from an aircraft’ – this is not any description of a MIRV.
TJ
TJNo, this was a test of a Hypersonic Glide Vehicle that was launched from an RS-18.
“Colonel General Yuri Baluyevsky, the first deputy chief of the General Staff of the Russian armed forces, said that the prototype of a new hypersonic vehicle had proved its ability to manoeuvre in orbit – a quality he said would allow a weapon based on such a craft to dodge an enemy’s missile shield.
“The flying vehicle changed both the altitude and direction of its flight,” Baluyevsky said in Moscow
…..
Baluyevsky refused to comment on what kind of engine the vehicle had, how long its flight lasted and how exactly it manoeuvered”
TJ
TJRe: Its the Falklands again
Originally posted by ForkTailedDevil
Apparently trouble is brewing around the Falklands again. The Argentines want to restrict all flights into the Falklands to Argentinian carriers. I know its probably just the Argies being beligerant. Britain is already sending a diplomat to negotiate but it just made me curious as to what the RAF and the other services currently field in that area of the world. I know there are some Tornadoes and a VC10, I think, amongst others. Just what does the Argentine military have left that could be put up against the defenses on the islands or is any threat from them just pointless posturing. If they did manage to put forces ashore does Britain still have the ability to storm of down to the South Atlantic and take the islands back or would do we have to ask our colonial friends for help.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,1148092,00.html
The threat from Argentine forces is regarded as low. This is a small niggling dispute over airline carriers and nothing to do with any Argentine military aggression. The threat for many years is low and boils down to lone maverick style action and political/military activists who might want to plant a flag for propaganda purposes. Argentine and UK forces are very cordial and have involved exchange ground posts and visits. Argentine and UK forces operated together in SAR exercises and also patrol/work together on the Green Line in Cyprus. Unless there was a military style coup in Argentina then there isn’t a chance in hell of military movements against the islands.
TJ
TJI converted onto the L85A1 back in 1987, when I was stationed in Cyprus. Having fired the L85A2 the weapon, as it stands today after all the mods, is what is should have been back when it entered service. Today the A2 is a solid weapon that has been re-manufactured to alleviate the problems of the A1. I was mightily impressed by the workmanship of the re-manufactured parts and the feel and performance when firing. All the RAF Regiment / Royal Signals instructors I have met absolutely love the A2 and agree that it is the weapon that it should have been when the design entered service.
Nermal, SF does use the weapon. For example when they have to blend in:
SAS operated in Bosnia under the cover of UKLO (United Kingdom Liaison Officers), which was under the direct command of General Mike Rose. As Cameron Spence stated “It didn’t take a rocket scientist, of course, to conclude that the UKLO was not a regular unit.” To help them blend in they were kitted out with SA-80 (L85A1), rather than their more obvious Gucci type weapons. Cameron Spence recounts in his book “All Necessary Measures”
that one of his SAS mates used his L85A1, fitted with a KITE site, to scare the life out of a Croat sniper who regularly took pot shots at UN vehicles. Using their UN Land Rover as bait the sniper couldn’t resist and loosed a round off which hit the road in front of the vehicle. Spence’s mate, who had earlier worked himself into a piece of dead ground, put a round into the brickwork immediately behind the sniper. Spence wrote “The sniper got to his feet in a mad panic and started to leg it to safety. As he ran past the next shell hole, Keith, still concealed in his dead ground, sent another round thumping into the brickwork behind him. The sniper reacted as if he’d been stung by a Hornet; stumbling, falling, picking himself up and running to the next shelter. As he headed blindly past on last piece of exposed wall, Keith
anticipated his trajectory and sent a final round crashing into the ceiling, bringing a cascade of plaster on our man as he barreled past.”
Photographs of SAS (UKLO) in Bosnia with L85A1s are also in Nick
Richardson’s book “No Escape Zone”. Nick Richardson was the Royal Navy Sea Harrier FRS.1 pilot who was shot down on the 16 April 1994 by a Bosnian-Serb man portable SAM while attempting to bomb two T-55s. Richardson fell into Bosnian-Muslim hands and was linked up with the SAS team in Gorazde. Richardson was issued with an L85A1 and together they escaped and evaded through Bosnian-Serb lines and were picked up by a French Special Forces Puma. Photographs in the book show them with their L85A1s about to be evacuated from the landing site and after reaching safety in Sarajevo.
TJ
TJI converted onto the L85A1 back in 1987, when I was stationed in Cyprus. Having fired the L85A2 the weapon, as it stands today after all the mods, is what is should have been back when it entered service. Today the A2 is a solid weapon that has been re-manufactured to alleviate the problems of the A1. I was mightily impressed by the workmanship of the re-manufactured parts and the feel and performance when firing. All the RAF Regiment / Royal Signals instructors I have met absolutely love the A2 and agree that it is the weapon that it should have been when the design entered service.
Nermal, SF does use the weapon. For example when they have to blend in:
SAS operated in Bosnia under the cover of UKLO (United Kingdom Liaison Officers), which was under the direct command of General Mike Rose. As Cameron Spence stated “It didn’t take a rocket scientist, of course, to conclude that the UKLO was not a regular unit.” To help them blend in they were kitted out with SA-80 (L85A1), rather than their more obvious Gucci type weapons. Cameron Spence recounts in his book “All Necessary Measures”
that one of his SAS mates used his L85A1, fitted with a KITE site, to scare the life out of a Croat sniper who regularly took pot shots at UN vehicles. Using their UN Land Rover as bait the sniper couldn’t resist and loosed a round off which hit the road in front of the vehicle. Spence’s mate, who had earlier worked himself into a piece of dead ground, put a round into the brickwork immediately behind the sniper. Spence wrote “The sniper got to his feet in a mad panic and started to leg it to safety. As he ran past the next shell hole, Keith, still concealed in his dead ground, sent another round thumping into the brickwork behind him. The sniper reacted as if he’d been stung by a Hornet; stumbling, falling, picking himself up and running to the next shelter. As he headed blindly past on last piece of exposed wall, Keith
anticipated his trajectory and sent a final round crashing into the ceiling, bringing a cascade of plaster on our man as he barreled past.”
Photographs of SAS (UKLO) in Bosnia with L85A1s are also in Nick
Richardson’s book “No Escape Zone”. Nick Richardson was the Royal Navy Sea Harrier FRS.1 pilot who was shot down on the 16 April 1994 by a Bosnian-Serb man portable SAM while attempting to bomb two T-55s. Richardson fell into Bosnian-Muslim hands and was linked up with the SAS team in Gorazde. Richardson was issued with an L85A1 and together they escaped and evaded through Bosnian-Serb lines and were picked up by a French Special Forces Puma. Photographs in the book show them with their L85A1s about to be evacuated from the landing site and after reaching safety in Sarajevo.
TJ
TJOriginally posted by SOC
Some idiot leaves the door open and we aim for the roof? Maybe I need to go into targeting…
The doors were not fully closed at a similar facility at Podgorica airport during an attack. Reportedly the officer in charge was relieved of his duties following the destruction of the airframes within. This resulted in the destruction of a number of the Vienna Document declared combat airframes.
TJ
TJ“Originally posted by djnik
Here is a nice text about Slatina airport:
Russians ‘raced to Pristina secrets’
FROM TOM WALKER AT SLATINA AIRFIELD, PRISTINA”
…..
Sorry, but Tom Walker should not be reporting on such matters.
In a 2002 effort he wrote the following:
“Yugoslav army proved such an elusive target for Nato in the Kosovo war, and also much speculation over how its ageing MiG fighter jets managed to down an American B-2 stealth bomber west of Belgrade.”
The article you published is sheer sensationalism. There wasn’t a single radar sweep detected of any SA-10 associated system even before Allied Force within the borders of Serbia and Montenegro let alone during the conflict.
Tom Walkers reporting of the MiG shooting down a B-2 appears in this effort of his:
“October 06, 2002
Saddam gets air defence advice from Yugoslavs
Stephen Grey and Tom Walker
RADAR and weapons system experts from the Yugoslav army are helping Saddam Hussein to organise his air defences against British and American jets ahead of the anticipated allied bombing campaign on Iraq.
An investigation by The Sunday Times has revealed that highly skilled officers have been seconded
to help Saddam. They performed impressively during the 1999 Kosovo war, when their adroit use of
supposedly outdated technology helped much of the army’s hardware to escape destruction by American airstrikes.
It is thought the Yugoslav army, many of whose senior officers are still hostile towards the West
after the Nato bombardment, has sanctioned co-operation with Baghdad.
The revelation coincides with reports that the army is being asked to give American and British
military liaison officers in Belgrade details of assistance it has given the Iraq military in the
past.
The current Belgrade government and Yugoslav army headquarters have denied any co-operation with
Saddam, but the information corroborates reports from dissident sources in Iraq. There appear to be divided loyalties within the army, whose senior ranks have been torn by infighting since the fall of Slobodan Milosevic, the former president, two years ago.
Friends and relatives of at least two officers confirmed to The Sunday Times that they are in Iraq. One was based with an air defence unit in Montenegro and another with a battery near Belgrade.
“In the army there are still many senior commanders with personal links to the Iraqi
establishment,” said one former Yugoslav officer. “They are basically pro-Saddam.”
There have been various theories put forward as to why the Yugoslav army proved such an elusive
target for Nato in the Kosovo war, and also much speculation over how its ageing MiG fighter jets
managed to down an American B-2 stealth bomber west of Belgrade.
Some military analysts believe the Yugoslav army has adapted a Czech-made radar system known as
“Tamara”, which rather than attempting to detect stealth aircraft, instead reveals the “holes” they leave in radar patterns.
Others claim the Yugoslav methods are rather more low-tech, and point to the army’s use of decoy
wooden missile batteries during the Kosovo campaign, which were repeatedly hit by American strikes.
Britain’s armed forces have stockpiled an extra 1.2m chemical warfare suits in preparation for an
assault on Iraq. The army now has enough nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) suits to equip a
military force of 20,000 men for 60 days in a biological or chemical environment, where the suits
have to be changed every day.
Some Royal Marine and Parachute Regiment soldiers are due to undergo additional “top-up” NBC
training at Porton Down, the government’s chemical warfare research laboratory in Wiltshire.”
TJ
TJOriginally posted by Srbin
What I meant with SFOR covering up the Mig-29 wreckages is that when they crashed in Bosnia they were the first to get to the crash scene and take control of it, I dont think there was much media around it either.You’d be very naive to think anything cant be covered up because anything can.
NATO never revealed their full losses therefore you cannot really know what was destroyed.
Who did you expect was going to take control of the wreckage and the immediate area? There was the possibility of armed Yugoslav aircrew to be accounted for and the possibility that the wrecks contained live ordnance. There was also the possibility of Yugoslav rescue teams coming across the border in helos seeking the crash site for rescue of downed aircrew. Imagine the scenario if civilians and the mad media were allowed to trample over such a wreck. The more intact MiG-29 came down inside the bounds of a minefield. Imagine the scenario of a civilian focused on getting near the wreck and putting both himself in jeopardy and those who would have to extract him from his predicament. The media in Bosnia were always on the look out for such a scoop. It was the media who discovered the F-15C combat-jettisoned fuel tanks from the aerial-engagement incident that resulted in the two MiG-29s being shot down. I have a three minute video of this discovery by Reuters journalists. The following day (in daylight) the same team filmed the MiG-29 wreckage.
There was NO combat losses, in regards to manned aircraft, other than the F-16CG and F-117A. No NATO personnel died as a result of combat and no aircrew made any crash landings/ejection – nor were any aircraft written off from the inventory as a result of combat. Please explain to a serving airman how exactly they are covering up the losses of manpower and equipment? Have we been hypnotised by David Blaine? Am I and others receiving vast sums of money to keep quiet? Have the ejection seat manufacturers been visited by the men in black? Have the aircraft production lines been secretly re-opened?
Captain O’Grady’s F-16 wreckage was not found until 5 years after his shoot down. Imagine all those undiscovered NATO wrecks that you believe must be lying in the surrounding countries undiscovered? Will they be found this year? Who will finally break the conspiracy theory? Will it be the Spanish Hornet pilots? Will it be the Canadian Hornet pilots? What about RAF Tornado aircrew or even their ground crews. I must dash as there is a black helo hovering above my house. It may be from the Defence Helicopter Flying School, but you never know! Trust no-one Srbin, and listen out for the tell-tale clicks on the phone! You know too much!!
TJ
TJOriginally posted by GrM
TJ, although we are not on same frequency (I think you are multi faced provocateur which is prepared to falsify {And not all that well as a matter of fact because that radio message, once analysed had different background noise levels} information to get something out of other poor souls out there in order to ridicule them latter on – not exactly behaviour of the knight {If you where part of some official intelligence effort I would not complain but I am convinced you are one man band although you might be employed by RAF} but I have to agree that SiCG managed to down many UAV and only two manned aircrafts because of obsolete equipment .
The radio message of ‘CAJUN FEAR’ was simply a cut and paste job that my Granny could have done. The snippets were real mil audio from the internet while the Mayday was my voice. It was designed to see how gullible these individuals really were. They practically took over a military newsgroup forum with their claims of all those ‘NATO losses’. They claimed to have videos/images and positive proof of which all was about to be revealed. Before completing the scam I ran it by a B-52H pilot, who was a contributor on the forum, who provided me with the date of when B-52s were ‘down’ and not flying missions. Believe me these guys were ridiculed already arguing with individuals who were involved with ALLIED FORCE. I just gave them an extra piece of rope to hang themselves properly.
They even began taunting the B-52H pilot in question who continued to play ‘dumb’ as to what they were talking about of having audio proof. Knowing the facts that there was no hidden losses I simply let them go as far as possible before I informed them the true identity of “Pete Peterson”. Venik was even putting out feelers on his website asking for help to improve the audio quality!. Only one of the group tore his website down in utter disgust after he visited Yugoslavia during the Summer of 2000. The other two Venik and Pavicevic still continue to believe and think that they were ‘officially targeted’ in order to cover up and discredit those who seek the ‘truth’. These gullible idiots even claimed that genuine Allied Force comms of aerial engagements and even the comms of the loss of the F-16CG were actually a non-disclosed F-16 loss! According to some of them even the downed MiG-29 pictures in Bosnia were faked by NATO and Venik actually believed initially that they were NATO flown MiGs on a secret mission! Believe me these guys needed no input from me to make fools of themselves. If individuals were daft enough to believe the Yugoslav Information Ministry then they deserved all they got.
Even over a year after the conflict there was some Yugoslav ministers who still clung to the official party line even though others had spilled the beans on the disinformation campaign at the end of 1999:
Cedomir Mirkovic, Yugoslav Minister for International Scientific and
Cultural Cooperation, stated the following in the interview:
‘ “It is truly amazing how many aircraft and drones were downed with the relatively modest and primitive equipment” of the Yugoslav army, Minister for Science and Development Cedomir Mirkovic said Friday. …. Mirkovic refuted Western claims that Yugoslav air defense downed only the two planes.
“We shall prove we have more,” he said, without elaborating. During the bombing, the then-chief of the Yugoslav army, Gen. Dragoljub Ojdanic, claimed 61 NATO aircraft had been downed. “
TJ
TJOriginally posted by Srbin
I am sorry but what are you talking about?Billy Bishop you’ve summed it up pretty much.
We(Serbs) did reveal our losses but NATO didn’t reveal their full losses.
You cannot possibly argue and say this and that was shot down/destroyed because you CANNOT possibly know, only NATO knows that. Wreckages are also another thing, anything that fell outside Serbia, Vojvodina and Montenegro can be covered up, ie anything in other countries and Kosovo.
Srbin,
I know very well as I served in a unique position during and after the conflict. There was no NATO aircraft lost to any enemy action outside the borders of Serbia and Montenegro. There were no combat deaths of any NATO personnel during the entire conflict. So, what are you suggesting that they opened up the production lines to replace all those losses that you believe in? There was no ejections, nor aircraft written off or struck off charge due to any enemy action other than the F-117A and F-16CG. So after all these years why hasn’t there been one leak of any of these combat losses that you believe in? Not one family member/relative, politician, aircrew/squadron member or maintenance chief come forward. How many of those service personnel have retired since then and still no leak. Such a cover-up story would generate a subsantial sum from the media and a great coup for an aircraft magazine and yet not one squeak. Are you saying that ejection seat manufacturers are also in on the cover-up? Are you suggesting that companies like Martin Baker have altered their 1999 records? Are you suggesting that NATO aircrew died and their deaths covered up at a national level? Sorry, but such losses covered-up or attempted wouldn’t last five minutes. Think how many individuals are in the loop on such matters. Yes aircraft took combat nicks. The most serious was the A-10 that made a safe landing in Macedonia. All the helos that took part in the rescue of the US F-117 pilot suffered small arms damage, but none were written-off nor struck off charge.
Are you aware of the serial systems of the various nations who employed combat aircraft over Yugoslavia? Please explain how the loss of aircraft “A” can be covered up with aircraft “B” and no-one notices. Do you understand how open and receptive the majority of NATO airfields are to aircraft spotters and that a cover-up involving serials wouldn’t have lasted all this time? Does Batajnica have an aircraft viewing area and car park for example? Can you go and stand outside the perimiter with binos, notebook and radio scanner? Sorry, but what you are suggesting in regards to combat losses simply did not happen. I fully realise that you guys love a good story, but where are all the covered up losses of OEF and OIF, and what about the losses the took place during Deny Flight over Bosnia – why weren’t all those covered up? You mentioned that KFOR (you meant SFOR) had covered-up the two MiG-29s (18113 and 18114) that were shot down over Bosnia. Please explain how SFOR / NATO covered them up?
TJ
TJOriginally posted by SerbPVO
Don’t forget the one that crashed in Italy..its a little ironic…NATO(US and its satelites, really) lost more choppers than Serbia did tanks.
The figures revealed by the Yugoslavs to the Vienna Document / OSCE and Dayton Accord was the loss of 18 MBT and 136 AFVs.
So, inform us how many choppers “NATO (US and its satelites” lost?
TJ
TJOriginally posted by Arthur
Source please :rolleyes:
Preferably with serial numbers and the lot.
Arthur,
I think the “hard facts” came from a Serb 2000 documentary:
The French “loss” was first revealed on a Serbian documentary aired on March 24th 2003. The documentary claimed that on a visit to Mont-de-Marsan air base Chirac admitted that 2 French pilots were killed over Yugoslavia. Of course no such loss occurred and no admission was made by Chirac:
http://www.elysee.fr/cgi-bin/auracom/aurweb/search/file?aur_file=discours/2000/MM000317.html
As to the German revalation the Luftwaffe are still trying to cover up the loss of four F-4 Phantoms let alone the loss of a Tornado!
Ekspres politika wrote during the conflict:
“NATO knows very well that four F-4 aircraft of the German Airforce did not come back from this monstrous mission over Yugoslavia. According to the information of the Russian Ministry of Defence, one two-men crew died when the aircraft
exploded in the air, while other three crews were found and captured by the Yugoslav Army.”
TJ
TJOriginally posted by djnik
Number were of aircraft was not servicable before the attack and 6 have been lost in the air,2 pilotes died.
Yes, but you are missing the point here. Out of 16 airframes still on the books at the start of the conflict 11 of these were lost during 1999 to ALL causes which left the current inventory of 4 FULCRUM A and 1 FULCRUM B. Those losses also included the combat-damaged mount of Illic who managed to make an emergency landing at Nis. It never flew again and was pushed out as a target. 127th LAE squadron numbers are made up with MiG-21bis due to the fact that only 4 FULCRUM As survive.
TJ
Sign In
