seahawkOriginally posted by google
Well, Vympel/Vortex claimed there were, and seeing as how they’re pretty senior members, I would believe them. Perhaps leaked inadvertently.
AFAIK a newspaper or magazine quoted a never specified source in the IDF/AF. That was all.
seahawkOriginally posted by Indian1973
it was doing the rounds of .mil newsgroups at that time. no official
numbers were put out.
Would you expect any ??
seahawkOriginally posted by SOC
Regardless, if the USN only used their cannon and swore off AAMs for the engagements, I highly doubt the IsAF would still not lose a single mock engagement. This issue was gone over a while back, I can’t remember if it was here or on ACIG, and I seem to remember allegations being made that the ROEs were adhered to much stricter by one side than by the other…
You mean things like engaging before the US entered the briefed fighting area ? Ah who would do such things ? š
seahawkOriginally posted by SOC
Eh, that’s easy to explain, I just thought of something else: the F-15 in one of the pictures above is carrying what seems to be an AIM-7, not AIM-120, acquisition round. AIM-7 vs R-27ER/R-77. No wonder the IAF is claiming 4-1 š
Which is typical for the USAF, when training with opponents that are not considered as 100% trustworthy. (like Israel)
And I bet they did use the AIM-9X only in AIM-9L/M compatibility mode.
seahawkI do agree, but I have spoken to US training opponents and US pilots about such exercises and some times the US simply fights with their hands tied behind their backs, when some one up in the chain of command decided that some capabilities are better not exposed to the training partner.
IĀ“m certain that with Cope India being the first of such exercises and being done over India the US will have restricted many parts of their avionics and missile systems. DonĀ“t you think that every ESM unit in the area was listening to the US emissions ?
For example what if they did the use the AIM-120 only without midcourse internal guidance, as simulating this would might have meant the possibilty to monitor the datalink between the radar andd the missile. It would make no noticeable difference to the casual observer, but would have made an enormous impact on the outcome of the exercise.
For example the US Navy rarely simulated the AIM-54 when performing simulated air combat with other air forces.
And eve nthe USAF ist still very carefull with the way they use the AMRAAM. They often only use it to the maximum, if the opponent has got AMRAAMs too.
-> IĀ“m not saying the USAF is unbeatable, I know better, it can be beaten even when they fight to the max and when fighting in there favorite US based exercise.
seahawkOriginally posted by Indian1973
iirc the israeli claim vs USN was 40:0 !!
Which is not surprising if they operate over their terrain and use there full weapons arsenal, while the US Navy only simulated AIM-9 and AIM-7 mssiles.
seahawkOriginally posted by google
One more thing- when did they get around to naming missiles, let alone SAMs? Any other SAMs named like the ‘patriot’?
Stinger, blowpipe (my favorite name), Roland, Bloodhound, Crotale, Aspide, …
seahawkSimply plain wrong. The US approach to such exercises is different. They learn nothing from smacking a Sea Harrier from 20km away with an AIM-7. They would have learnt nothing from smashing the Germany MiG-29 from miles aways with their slammers.
They want to learn how they must react and how they will do when at the disadvantage. So they fight the Sea Harriers with AIM-9L and the MiG-29 in WVR.
Most opponents on the other hand are at a disadvantage when fighting the USAf and so they give what they have.
Btw that is not US propaganda. That was confirmed to me by one of their regular and prefered opponents during the last years.
And you must remember that most opponents are equally well trained, so any small mistake of the USAF side will likely lead to a victory by the other.
seahawkOriginally posted by ForkTailedDevil
I though the Aussie Tigers didn’t have the undernose cannon, or was that someone elses Tigers.
The german Tigers have no gun. š
At least at the moment, but perhaps they will get the recoilless Mauser Canon later.
seahawkAs Indian1973 said, that was an exercise to get to know each other. During such exercises you donĀ“t fight to the limit.
V S, you seem to have a quite strange perception of fighter pilots. First of all they are highly trained professionals. If there commander gives them orders on how to fight and how far to push the plane, they will exactly do this.
Sometimes they have to be diplomats and I doubt the US would sent over any personal that is not up to the task.
The french on the other hand, might have had other orders. I mean looking at a possible M2k5 purchase by India it was in the best interest of France to perform superior to current IAF assets.
Honestly speaking the US was also much impressed with the capabilities of the unmodified MiG-21bis of the croatian airforce. They showed much respect for the professionalism of the force and it was said that the MiG-21 actually did win some dogfights against the US Navy F-14s.
Interestingly many of the much reported exercise results are to be taken with a grain of salt, when you look a little bit closer at the set up and/or what the exercise was to achieve.
DonĀ“t get me wrong, IĀ“m not bashing the IAF.IĀ“m sure that the IAF would put a good fight against any opponent in the world.
IĀ“m also sure that the IAF would put a good fight against any opponent in the world and it is one of the top airforces.
IĀ“m not even doubting the reported results, but I would be very cautious to draw any conclusions from that results.
seahawkWas it something different ??
seahawkOriginally posted by google
That’s not true- they were modified in the 80s to have a limited ATBM capability. The DoD should not have trumpeted them as great successes in the first Gulf War when in fact they weren’t. The ones rushed and deployed to the Gulf in 1990-91 were of the PAC-2 type, with more significant (or so they thought) atbm abilities.Of course I read your post; your blanket statement ‘The press and media are just retarded and always bring up stupid things that are false.’ was rather ignorant.
That is not true eiterh. During and before the IIPGW the ATBM missile programm for the Patriot system was in very early stages. The US Army did not even have enough modified missiles to equip the units in the area with 1 launcher full of PAC1+.
Most missiles were coming directly from the german manufacturing line and german stocks. Patriot systems were field modified to accept those missiles. So it did not do bad during the IIPGW.
If todays partiots are more succesfull when engaging an BM is open to question though.
seahawkDoes anyone expect any US officer to stand up and say that the IAF was not a very good airforce. (which it is imo)
I would also believe that this exercise is an important idea to pressure for more F/A-22 or the safeguard that programm from cuts.
The IAF on the other hand can rpoove how succesfull there last programs were.
So this result is the most fitting to show to the public for both sides.
what makes you think IAF showed its full potential to USAF? no side revleas anymore than needs to be shown. even at excersices like Red Flag
Well sometimes airforces are just very eager to beat the USAF. But IĀ“m certain that the IAF did also not go to the limit.
And at Red Flag the full potential is shown. Guess why the results are always kept secret. š
seahawkOriginally posted by Wolverine
and why? why is it so impossible?
i dont think te parameters of the excersices will ever be released. how do we know at what ranges were the two teams allowed to engage each other. wheathr the USAF was carrying HMS or not. hoew much emphasis was given to BVR etc.
you get the idea.given the kill ratios that the germans and isrealis have achived against USAF it is not unlikely at all. but then this was a comment made by a random pilot. it could have been a kill ratio for one type of exercise or on particular day.
does not have to be the overall ratio. i would expect the USAF to score better in BVR.
No I would not expect that. I doubt the US did show the full potential of the F-15C and the missiles.
It is standard practice for the USAF.
seahawkOriginally posted by SOC
The Eagles in the photo with the FLOGGERs are definitely packing AIM-9Xs šAs for the 4-1 kill ratio, who knows? I wouldn’t say it’s impossible. I’d venture to say it’s unlikely, but given the weapon systems in use by the IAF, I won’t say it’s impossible.
Honestly speaking it is even possbile, if not likely.
But that depends on the set-up of the exercise. First in such get to know exercises it is usual that the home air force gets to shoot down some US air planes. I mean even the old Croation MiG-21 did score “kills” against the F-14s and I think it was 1:1 in the end.
Take 6 F-15C and the lot of IAF planes involved. Say every IAF squadron involved got a chance to lock on and kill an F-15, then you would easily get a ratio better then 4:1.
Furthermore the USAF rarely uses the ECM systems on their planes in such exercises. And I bet they did not use them against the IAF.
German MiG-29s have learned, that there is huge difference between an US squadron coming for a friendly exchange and eager to learn about your plane and the same unit flying in exercises like Red Flag.
IĀ“m not dissing the IAF, which is surely a well trained and mighty force, but I would not rate the rumored outcome of this exercises as a way to rate the USAF vs. the IAF.
Sign In
