An air-to-air missile would do that. R-27s are no joke.

Yes a R-27 could indeed have brought the Boeing down, though even then its likely the missile would only have fatally damaged the aircraft, still giving time for a radio call. However it’s all a bit irrelevant, considering that the air-to-air claim is based on an interception by a Ukrainian Su25, and no where have I seen the R-27 as being part of the weaponry used a Su25.

Regards,

Steve

PS: You beat me to it Levsha.

‘Many refugees enter UK not via planes – which is very difficult, because there are very high fees for airlines transporting refugees (which is true also for shipping lines) – but come by boat to Italy or Spain, then travel to France, where are big camps near Calais, where they wait for an opportunity to travel to UK.’

So they travel through Spain/Italy/France, before choosing the UK… kind of picky where they want asylum…

[QUOTE=mack8;2083591]Been here before i think. All i’ll say is that if you think the american (and even their british “ally”- considering the “special” relationship) government will undoubtedly tell the truth and only the truth about incidents like above, not hide anything unpleasant, not distort anything, and that the iraqis (f.e.) will obviously lie and only lie in claiming such and such shoot-down that is not recognized by the americans (especially), is so ridiculous and biased it’s not even funny. May i remind you the americans lie and deceive far and wide (iraqi WMD’s anyone? afghan terrorists anyone?), and aviation wise, as you all know they have scores of all kinds of secret craft that they’ve hidden for decades (allegedly including testing them in UK, how did they managed to hide that huh, if not for the complicity of the obedient UK government?), and even hide crashes of such craft. Not so “open” now, is it? Particularly when also considering the propaganda and racist factor (iraqis are only incompetent useless cowards who ran to Iran from the mighty free and democratic flag waving american heroes blah blah blah), and also the corporate factor, it ain’t looking good at all to admit that this or that uber- super invincible fighter that they try to sell for $100 mil a pop is not exactly THAT good and it actually got the short straw a few times.

Me, i’m willing to bet the iraqis shot down more that one “coalition” aircraft, maybe even the 4 or so alleged by more recent research. Anyone else is free to believe what they wish.

mack,

Yes we’ve been here before….

The problem is that the RAF didn’t hide their losses, I was growing up during the war and remember in the early days of the air war the RAF reporting their losses on a daily basis and the British papers getting excited about their ‘unsafe aircraft’. So if they’re not hiding the loss, then what merit do they have for hiding the cause? Don’t forget this a ground attack aircraft we’re talking about, it would hardly effect ‘sales’ to report that it could be shot down by a air defence fighter, infact the reverse is almost true, and the fact that the RAF’s premier low level strike aircraft was very vulnerable to ground defences would probably do more to hamper sales, but this information was out there from the start… But if we follow your theory, on the second day of the war the RAF, who at this time probably would not even have known the true cause, decide to commence a plan to hide the cause of loss, by changing the identities of lost aircraft and even changing the dates of death of serving air crew just so that in the future the Iraqi Air Force couldn’t confirm an air to air claim. What would be the point?

So you have one hand an air force which reported its losses at the time (and over the next 20 years the number of losses has remained constant), and on the other we have people trying to support a claim, by initially claiming one aircraft and then shifting it to a second one (lost three days later), when the ‘facts’ didn’t support the first claim. I know which one sounds more credible and I know which one I believe in this case…

That makes no sense, as the RAF would have to know how ZA467 was lost and that the crew was killed. If the crew could still be alive, the whole lie could be killed by the Iraqis instantly. So it makes no sense at all.

Post war the Iraqis claimed that one of their MiG29’s shot down on the 19th January killing the crew. Looking through Allied losses this matched up with ZA396, but the fact that the crew survived contradicted the claim. The claim has since shifted to ZA467 because the aircrew were lost and the fact that this loss was on the 22nd as been put down as Allied misreporting of the date of loss, rather than admit that the claim turned out to false.

The Iraqi Air Force are not the first (and assuming the continuation of air combat won’t be the last), to make claims which turn out be incorrect. Its just part of the nature of combat and especially air combat that claims are made with the best of intentions, which turn out later to not be correct (interestingly the MiG29 which claimed the Tornado was reported as subsequently being shot down by a USAF F.15C, in a clash in which the USAF claimed two MiG’s, but the Iraqis report only one loss, overclaiming by the other side…). So it’s natural that the ex Iraqi air force personnel would like to find evidence to support their claims, but shifting the date of a reported loss to match it is not going to be one them.

he mentioned the story of ZA-467 which was initially written as being lost on the 19th January and later amended to 22nd January? (did this really happen?)

Nobody claims a “coverup”… but surely there’s a mistake somewhere in a record (I would agree that its probably the Iraqi record that is at error on the date in this instance…).

I agree that the side which LOST the aircraft will have a more accurate knowledge to confirm the loss… which really should apply to BOTH sides 😉

will continue to keep a track of the “Iraqi story” since its only now that Iraqi veterans are starting to come out to discuss them. Certainly adds a much needed “other perspective” to the stale 1991 gulf war “story”.

On the iraqi military forum there’s also an article about the loss of the 2 Mirage F1s which were shot down whilst trying to bomb saudi oil facilities. Many interesting details and anecdotes there, including pilot names, details of several aborted attempts at flying the missions etc… it was called “mission impossible” http://iraqimilitary.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1563

Interesting website, always valuable to get information from a different point of view. Would I be right in reading via the power of ‘google translate’, that the two pilots were Capt Shahid Ali Hussein Fadel and Capt Mohammed Salim Ahmed from No89 Sqn? Brave men considering the odds against them and must have known that they were unlikely to return.

Regards,

Steve

There WAS an F-15C lost allegedly in an accident on the 13th of Feb. Few months ago i’ve been looking and reading whatever i could find regarding these claims, can’t recall exactly now the details, but f.e. regarding the F-14 kill it was credited to S-75s, however several researches found that there were most likely no S-75 units at the times and places that shoot down was supposed to have happened, and conversely evidence that there were MiGs prowling around those same areas… So if not a SAM, then what?
Oh and i wouldn’t underestimate the americans’ ability to hide and lie on such a thing, do they flew and fly all kinds of secret stuff from Groom Lake, did they kept the F-117 program under wraps for a decade with SIXTY aircraft flying, and coming closer, did they do the same with SECOND F-117 damaged in 1999? Probably the museum unveiling was a mistake, someone got in big *** for that. If that wouldn’t have happened , fanboys would have screamed far and loud that it’s just commie propaganda, no one can see their uber stealth tech, the one that fell was pure luck etc etc. Btw, i’m looking increasingly interested at that B-2 claim, what if …

Anyway point is, they could have easily hidden that F-15C lost allegedly air-to-air, who on earth could check 100% what they claim? Is it unconceivable that they lied about how that F-15C crashed and when? They lied and lie abut much more serious things , lying about a “puny” aircraft loss is surely piece of cake for them.

Btw, regarding kills, the Tornado was claimed by a MiG-29. Regrading the F-15E claim , i really have to go back and dig out the sparce info i’ve got courtesy of one of the researchers i mentioned. As you know though the F-15Es had quite a lot of meetings and mutual “spikings” with MiGs in the first days at least , isn’t it! Oh and that F-15E loss is i think at the very least attributed by american sources to the loss of the EF-111 jamming escort due to MiG-25s.

Yes the second F.15E loss was on the mission in which had the EF111 driven away by Iraqi aircraft. If the loss was due to an Iraqi aircraft (the aircrew reported a SAM, but a missile is a missile when it hits a plane), then, that would make four as the new number of Iraqi air-to-air claims, or five if you want to believe the F.15C claim. Personally I’ve never really been to hung up on whether a plane is shot down by a SAM or a AAM, it really makes little difference, its lost either way and the mission suffers accordingly, but in the case of 1991 the odds were so against the Iraqi forces it makes no difference. The Coalition forces lost 37 aircraft and 4 helicopters due to Iraqi action, even if all had been shot down by the Iraqi Air Force the end result would still have been the same.

As we’ve discussed previously the F.15C lost on the 13th February was a RSAF one, reportedly during a training mission inside Saudi Arabia. Yes this may have been given as a wrong cause, but then again lets examine the facts; by the 13th February the Iraqi Air Force had either been shot down/destroyed on the ground or been flown to Iran. Infact the last Coalition claims for an aircraft shot down (not counting random helicopters) were made on the 7th February, implying that the Iraqi Air Force had virtually ceased all fixed wing flying by this date. What remained was unlikely to be in a position the engage in Air to Air combat, so the probability of this loss being due to Iraqi action is very low.

So as you agree the second F.117 hit during the Kosovo conflict is confirmed by of all places the USAF museum. As this event occurred over eight years after the Gulf War it kind of supports what I’ve been saying about Western aircraft losses, ie that they don’t remain secret. Flying secret aircraft from a secret airbase is one thing, due to the small number of personnel involved and the selective nature of them (though I seem to remember that during the 1980’s the Stealth Fighter was one of the worst kept secrets, not least due to the fact that two had crashed during training missions), keeping secret operational losses from a normal airbase is next to impossible.

Steve49,

Yes sure , just bare in mind you won’t find them anywhere in “official” sources as those two having being shot down by another fighter, and in case of one , nothing is listed “officially” on the day the shoot-down (or at least damage) supposed to happen.

So in addition to the F-18 shot down by Dawood on the 17th, apparently there is that F-14 supposedly lost to an “optical guidance” SA-2 ( i’ve never found one of those yet ), but reputable researchers point that the nearest SA-2 was either outside the kill zone or just at the very edge of it, AND there were at least a MiG-29 and a MiG-25 close by which apparently fired against that F-14.

Also there is apparently an USAF F-15C shot down or at least damaged in an ambush on the 30th of january ( or 1st of february…maybe the different dates have to do with the timezones). You will definitely find no mention of such things in “official” records , although at the same date the famous engagement against 2 MiG-25s occurred where the americans fired 10 missiles without hitting any MiG, apparently following them all the way to landing! They were really pissed off that night to take such risks, wonder why.

I can’t recall the date now, but there is an USAF F-15C who supposedly lost a portion of the wing during a MiG chase, and of course there is that saudi F-15C lost in an accident (they say ) on the 13th of february, some rumor being that the saudi pilot did not wanted to refuel from a female US tanker crew, so he ran out of fuel! This as far as damaged or lost F-15Cs during that war.

So, you never know what might be eventually confirmed in the future.:)

Mack8,

I’ve spent the past few years looking at all reports and with the fall of Saddam more information from Iraqi sources has become available to cross-reference Coalition ones. However don’t be so quick to dismiss official reports, modern militaries run on paper and everything is always written down, because somebody, somewhere, is always accountable for it. So with that in mind is it nigh impossible to hide the loss of an aircraft, they might disguise or not know the cause, but the loss will have a paper trail and after all this time most of the reports from Desert Storm are out there. For example it is a little known fact that one F.117 was damaged during the war; nothing too exciting, but on the 9th February one aircraft (‘790’; probably 80-0790) burst it nose wheel whilst landing. This resulted in damage to the front of the aircraft. This incident isn’t mentioned in the book on Stealth Fighter operations ‘Bandits over Baghdad’, but is there to be seen in the 37th TFW After Action Report. It had to be in the report, because the damage needed to be accounted for and somebody had to pay for the repair!

So in that light I can say with 99% confidence (nothing is ever 100%) that no USAF F.15C’s were lost during the war, if one was then there would be a trail and evidence of the loss. The damaged Kosovo F.117 you mention got buried for a number of years namely because the aircraft wasn’t lost, it may have been badly damaged, but it still returned to base. Even then rumours about the incident were still out pretty quickly, though as you say it took a number of years before it was confirmed (by a note at the USAF museum if I remember correctly!) So the claims for a F.15C loss on the 30th January/1st February seem very doubtful. The reason they spent so much effort trying to shot down the MiG25’s is undoubtably the same reason fighter pilots have been flying since the first plane took off with a gun, it’s what they’re there for and every pilot wants to be an ace. As mentioned in a different thread, F.15C ’79-0022′ was damaged on the 28th January (losing 3′ of its port wing tip), though these seems to have been caused through structural failure during air manoeuvering rather than actual combat damage. The Saudi F.15C lost on the 13th February crashed south of Khamis Mushayt during a ‘training flight’. I don’t have much more details (I’d not heard the ‘refused to take fuel’ claim) and yes the Saudi’s could be lying about the location, but on the same day they reported the combat loss of a No17 Sqn F.5E over Kuwait, so why lie about one, but accurately report the other?

Regarding the F.14A+ lost on the 21st January, since the war it has always been reported as being downed by the ‘optically guided’ SA-2 SAM, though this has always been seen by me as being given as a excuse by the high flying crew for failing to detect a missile launch. Yes it’s possible that it was hit by an AAM during the early morning mission, but in this case the Iraqi Air Force does not seem to have made a associated claim, which reduces the possibilty of them being responsible. And though it may have been at the limit of the SA-2 site range, that doesn’t mean that the site couldn’t have brought it down.

Thanks for the additional comments though, I’m always ready to read with an open mind to update my records where required.

Regards,

Steve

[QUOTE=sheytanelkebir;2006222]The Su25s came from Al Bakr AB (balad AB in western parlance). One of the planes shot down resulted in the death of the pilot who was an acquaintance of one of my cousins (that’s how I know about it).

Your cousins acquaintance was a brave man to take off in a relatively slow ground attack aircraft with virtually no means of defending himself, at a time when the air was dominated by Coalition fighter aircraft.

I do note that the translated Iraqi report that lists the Gulf war losses and the aircraft that were flown to Iran does not mention the loss of these two Su25’s or the two MiG21’s that were flying with them, but does list other aircraft that were lost on the way to the Iran. It always made me wonder if these four aircraft were only changing bases rather than attempting to reach Iran when shot down??

Steve