BIGVERN1966There do seem to be these trends in going for names. In between the wars there was a tendancy for fighters to be named after bird species (some native, some migrant) seen in Britain: Grebe, Gamecock, Tomtit, Osprey , Flycatcher, Snipe, etc. and also carried on throughout the war and immdiately after: Gannet and Fulmar spring to mind.
Perhaps, in keeping with the rather more aggressive names being employed for front line aircraft at the time for the TSR2, they should have chosen Shrike. Let’s see the BAC Shrike (?)……Had someone else not had the name for a missile of course! (actually, was the Shrike a more ‘recent’ weapon?) Firecrest might have been good too.
There were rules laid down by the air ministry and the admiralty. The general rules can be found here.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/brdes.html
The Cat names of the 1960’s were all Anglo-French projects (Jaguar was suggested by the French as it went with SEPECAT and was spelt and pronounced the same in both English and French (BAC had to get the OK from the Car Company first). The case for the Helicopters was the same. Tornado was a similar case in that the spelling was the same in all three languages. The current Typhoon was a follow on from Tornado (and there was a fight to get the aircraft called that name thanks to the PC brigade).
BIGVERN1966Got some profiles you can use (Mostly early Coltishall aircraft , I’m still doing the big finned aircraft from the F3 at the minute (patchwork masters attached)). PM if you want any specific aircraft.
BIGVERN1966Not exactly so, per example, LANTIRN system, F-15E, F-16C Block 40, F/A-18C/D…we can count on…not to talk about J-STAR…
Check per example some interesting critical areas in NATO. ARM capable aircraft in the NATO in Central Europe were just a few aicraft of the big total were equipped for the task. In the USAFE, only the F-4G at Spanghdalem (24 aircraft, 81st TFS of the 52th TFW) used them. Even if the SEAD equipment of the F-4G was the most absolutely capable equipment of its kind, 24 aircraft wich how many would be any time in service (80-85%?) and how much atrittion they would endure by all means (from accidents on take-off and landings, to destruction on the ground by air attack, to shot-downs in sorties, to commando attacks to the airfield and so)…limited numbers of spectacular quality aircraft just show you how much vulnerable they’re…
I’m pretty aware, they were other F-4G units on CONUS (3 more in fact with different contingencies plans) how much would they be deployed to Central Front (to Central Europe, or Norway, or Turkey/Greece/Italy, having to save contingences for possible Mid East and Korea deployments)….the situation isn’t that good…
Aside of those aircraft, only the F-16C Block 30 were rated for Shrike use, but AFAIK were never deployed nor trained to do that…it was just a capability never exploded in the operational sense. Only Block 50 F-16s used to use that…post Desert Storm.
What about NATO?, it looks worst for NATO’s air forces in the SEAD area. EPAF air forces (Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark) used F-16A Block 10-15 as their core…those aircrafts lacks any kind of SEAD capabilities…much of them even didn’t have any kind of PGM at all (I have heard RNAF’s F-16A used to carry Paveway with British Bucanner lasing them…did you know about this?)…Bunderluftwaffe lacked anything of the kind…French AdlA deployment is doubt and not very clear for me…they used the ARMAT, a good derivative of the old Martel…it was a sound weapon for offensive deployment, some 100km, M 0.9…I don’t have any information on numbers or deployable aicraft but I would suppose, some Jaguar would handle them.
RAF is a sort of mistery, because I know that only shortly after the begining of desert storm did ALARM entered in service, in pretty few numbers…what did they have earlier, I don’t know, I know RAF used Shrike on limited numbers in the Falkland/Malvinas war in 1982 with the Vulcan, I don’t know if by 1987/1989 they have the on inventory, nor I think that the remaining Martel for ARM duties would be there at that time…
So if you look carefully, only a pretty pretty limited number of airframes were allowed for SEAD active ARM use, yes, in Spanghdalem there was some 2 adittional F-16C squadrons that would support the F-4G in team tactics…I guess they would have too much damn things to do…they have to fight against the most comprehensive air defense network ever deployed by any ground forces (GSVG’s SV-PVO), plus three different air defense networks (LSK/LV in East Germany, and Czechoslovakian and Polish Air Defense Networks) if they want to “strike in the depth”, be it deep penetration or interdiction sorties…if they want to attack the “front” a much more powerful even Air Defense Network (that of the Soviet, East German, Czech and Polish Armies advancing), that would not be retreating nor acting without air support, nor politically constrained, nor taken off initiative, nor overwhelmed by numbers…central front is not Iraq, nor Yom Kippur, nor anything previoulsy fought…
Just for some numbers, in the GSVG they were 19 ground divisions, each with an Air Defense Regiment and 4 air defense batallions.
From those 19 Divisions, 8 Divisions used OSA-AKM (SA-8B Gecko) and 11 used advanced Kub-M3 (SA-6 Gainful of last model, don’t know the ASCC code). Each SA-6 regiment have 4 batteries with 8 fire-channels, each batery with 6 launchers plus reloads and so. Each Kub-M3 regiment could attack at the same time 4 targets with 8 missiles. The OSA-AKM regiments have 5 batteries of 4 TELAR, each TELAR could attack at the same time one target, so a Regiment could handle at short range, 20 different targets with 40 missiles in the air…
Each Air Defense Batallion working at Regimental level (they were 4 regiments in each of the 19 division so you can figure it up), have 2 bateries of 4 ZSU-23/4 Shilka SPAAG and 4 Strela-10M2 (SA-13 Gopher) SHORAD SAM systems, plus some MANPADs. They were also lots of AD batallions that from 1985 replaced the Shilka by the Tunguska system (4 SPAAG plus the 4 Strela-10M2)…
MANPADs at Divisional levels were at Batallion level, I forgot the TO&E, but you could believe me…they were a lot of them…
At Army level, they were 5 Air Defense Rocket Brigades, equipped with the Buk-M1. Each Brigade deployes up to 48 fire chanels for engaging up to 48 targets with 2 missiles a piece.
Army level SAM defenses were interconected to Division level and Front level Air Defense assets (both SAMs and Interceptor assets)…
At Front level, they were 2 S-200VD Air Defense Brigades, 1 S-300V Brigade and 2 S-125M Brigades…
The single S-300V Brigade based at Magdeburg had anti-SRBM and SRAM task, plus off course Air Defense against air-breathing targets. The Brigade could handle up to 72 targets at the same time, with up to 144 fire channels for 144 missiles.
This complex ADGE was interconnected to LSK/LV and TLA NVA’s Air Defense Networks and via then to Warsaw Pac ADGE command center in Minsk…
This is not Iraq.
British MARTEL phased out in 1990.
Have you ever operated a Russain SAM System?
BIGVERN1966IC well any way by 1987 fifty F-117 would create some damage but i doubt the F-117 were going to be a decisive weapon, undoutedly the hardest strike aircraft to shot down, but by no means unvulnerable and considering the Soviet Union was much more powerful than Serbia it does not seem that the F-117 would be a weapons system so efficient because according to recent statemenst by Russia’s air force commander-in-chief, General of the Army Vladimir Mikhaylov, which state that the F-117 is detectable:
-“The attempts to equip the F-117 with air-to-air missiles soon was stopped in view of the total impracticality of the airplane for aerial combat. Moreover, it became clear rather soon that the aircraft, hard to detect for radars of the K- and X-bands, is detected in some flight modes by some old Soviet radars (for example, the P-40), which allowed the Yugoslav anti-aircraft gunner to shoot down one such airplane with S-125 “Kub” complex missiles and to damage two more at the minimum. “-
Taken fromRussian aviation news
So in 1987 very likely the F-117 if war would to break does not seem, it would had had an impact as to neutralize the Warsaw Pact
VHF/Low UHF radar can detect the F-117. However you can not put that type of radar in a missile or a fighter. You can see the target on the ground with your big radar, but your missile or fighter can not make the kill, as their tracker radar can not see it and the low frequnecy radar does not have the resolution in azimuth or height finding to make up for it. ONE F117 was shot down in Serbia by a visually aimed SA3 (and only because somebody in NATO HQ told the Serbs the aircraft’s timing and route which the USAF did not change). The other two claims on F117’s have been rubbished so many times that they are not even worth talking about.
No F117s were shot down in Iraq on 17/01/1991 and they where operating against a fully operational air defence system, explain that?
The biggest problem that the Soviets would had would have been the rest of the Warsaw Pact armies turning against them which I don’t think is the fantasy that the anti US brigade make it out to be. The party people may have remained loyal, but I don’t think the conscripts would have (check out what happened in 1989).
BIGVERN1966The Su-35 radar puts out more power than the Typhoon so it’s more difficult to remain stealthy against it. The Su-35 would detect the F-22 at a greater range than the Typhoon could.
There’s more to radar performance that just more power. PRF, Pulse length, aerial gain and receiver sensitively all count as well.
BIGVERN1966Don’t I rember reading that Po-2s were used by N. Vietnam at night over bases in the south (or was it Korea???)
Roger Smith.
Korea (one killed a Lockhead Starfire as well, or to be more correct the Starfire killed the Po-2 , but in the process it had to drop its speed to make the intercept and when the pilot fired his guns, the recoil caused the aircraft to stall and crash).
BIGVERN1966That it`s true however by 1990 Germany was reunified and in 1991 the Soviet Union disintegrated giving way to the CIS, so in fact since 1990 the Warsaw Pact was no more.
That gives only three years to the F-117 as a cold war weapon, considering the F-117 is a really expensive fighter and not a very highly produced well it`s impact was minimal during the Warsaw Pact and NATO face off
The point of the thread is a WHAT IF in 1987!!! A wing of 30 odd invisible (to radar) attack aircraft fitted with PGM’s that were operational at the time (The 31st production aircraft crashed in Oct 1987). All of those aircraft on the first night attack 30 odd targets successfully which a pair of 2000lb LGB’s and drop most of the major rail and road bridges in East Germany and Poland. That I would call that a major effect on any Warsaw pact operations. Or an attack on known air defence C3I installations or a number of other important targets. Four years later the Iraqi’s integrated Air defence system was ripped to bits in one night using similar tactics. The whole point of the F-117 is that it was going to be able to do damage out of proportion to the numbers of aircraft available
BIGVERN1966A simple fact here. Most of what was in service in Iraq in 1991 was in service with NATO in 1987. The operational effectiveness is well known and the NATO’s boys were very well trained at the time due to the number of exercises that were held (I was involved in 26 in my first two years in the RAF operational service). The Warsaw Pact already had big problems at the time (Poland being under marshal law if I remember correctly) Would have the East Germans, Poles and Czechs turned on the Soviets had the crossed the IGB. If their best hope of freedom from Soviet occupation was on the line, You can bet your ass they would have (no danger of 1956, 1968 or 1981 happening in this case). The Soviets rear areas would have been a mess, without the additional effects of air attack on the Elbe river bridges and other communication targets. How on earth could have they resuppiled. The simple answer is that they could not have.
BIGVERN1966uncorrected – e.g. the helicopter.
Moggy
Germany did have Helicopters in 1944, abet not operational. what they did have did not look like a Bell 47 however.
BIGVERN1966Seen both types together. B-52 the bigger aircraft with more bombload. B-52 the better by far in my book.
BIGVERN1966I remember Tiger Moths being used for RAF training in 1952, so they continued at least until then!
141 Sqn at Coltishall had one in July 1952 along with a number of Meteor NF 11’s
BIGVERN1966the F-117 is another aircraft that had no counter part but basicly it was more a post cold war weapon.
F-117 fully operational in 1987.
BIGVERN1966hey just a question about the dolittle raid at the end of the film.
Did B25s actully take off from a carrier again?
Real Footage of the launch from the USS Hornet in ‘Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo’, the footage on Pearl Harour looked like a 2 Group raid on Holland with Smart bombs (what a load of rubbish).
BIGVERN1966Why may a typhoon stand a chance and not the Su-35?
dont mind me i dont think a Su-35 OR Typhoon would stand a chance but i am intrigued by your comment.
Missile attack warning radar and towed radar decoys, I believe fitted to SU-35 NOT!!!, A Typhoon may not see the Raptor, but I think it will see the AIM-120 coming towards it and be able to avoid at least a couple of missiles. Raptor moves into visual range. Typhoon’s IRST and AIM 132 ASRAAM (which I do believe is an Imaging IR weapon) gives the aircraft a bit of a chance. I’d still put my money on the Raptor winning in the end, however.
BIGVERN1966Flanker does not see F-22 in BVR fight and dies!!! Any other remark is pure fantasy in my view. A Typhoon may stand a chance, but a SU-35 no way.
Sign In
