dark light

Lonevolk

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 541 through 555 (of 635 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Lonevolk
    Participant

    Instead producing more of its own arms and purchasing more and more from the West. 😀

    That’s the whole point of the exercise…..what western aircraft does India produce at home??…what is the most successful IAF aircraft in service?

    Russia only has itself to blame for the current ex-Gorshokov Deal and its impact on Indo/Russian Relations.:eek:

    Like I wrote previously, I doubt the carrier project will be canceled….IF that happens we can talk about it.

    Would you like to provide a source on the 85 %??? Maybe on the Eastern Front

    It’s common knowledge that 75% of the Wehrmacht was on the Eastern Front….where do you think most casualties would occur?

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    The VVS claimed over 3 times as many F-86 as total F-86 losses to all causes in the Korean war. That includes F-86s that crashed taking off, that collided with other US aircraft, that reported technical failures before getting into combat, that were shot down by ground fire within sight of UN troops & with no MiGs within a few hundred km

    I’m sure there are many cases where a single downing might be attributed to 2 pilots (counted as 2) or where another type of aircraft was reported as a Sabre kill or where VVS and PLAAF / NKAF figures overlap, but there is no way the claimed number is 3 x times bigger than the actual one.

    What you fail to recognise are the HUGELY exagerated USAF figures who had the political/propaganda need to inflate enemy losses and explain a LARGE number of it’s own losses as “non-combat” losses.

    It was the US who initially claimed a 20 : 1 ratio then went down to 13 : 1 then revised to 10 : 1, now you’re saying 4 : 1 while I’ve seen some recent US sources going down to less than 2 : 1 (350 (migs) vs 270 (sabres) )

    As you know, the Soviet participation in the war was a secret and they had no reason to inflate their numbers for propaganda purposes since their participation wasn’t acknowledged until the 1990’s….40 years after the event.

    Look at KORWALD. It’s an almost complete list of US aircraft losses in Korea, & it’s online, free. It includes damaged, & some aircraft appear several times, having been damaged, repaired, flown again, damaged – etc.

    ……

    The way to eliminate that overcounting is to go through the cross-checking process I’ve described, but you insist that the claims before checking are the accurate ones, not the checked figures.

    KORWALD is NOT the bible and has been proven wrong on many occassions.

    Here’s just a few examples (who knows how many more like this there are)

    October 6 1951: the famous F-86A 49-1319, the one captured and taken to the USSR, is wrongly credited in KORWALD database to ´AAA fire´, despite all the evidence showing that it was actually shot down by the MiG-15 Ace Yevgeni Pepelyayev (there are guncamera pics + the personal account of his co-pilot, Capt. Gill Garrett, asserting he was riddled by a red-nosed MiG). – blatant lie!

    October 8 1951: according to USAF records, the F-84E of Earl Harbour was hit by AAA when strafing a target, and during the return flight, suddenly exploded in mid-air.
    The Soviet records show that 2 MiG-15s of 196 IAP, Col. Yevgeni Pepelyayev and his wingmen Aleksandr Ryzhkov intercepted a group of F-84s that day, and Pepelyayev attacked the trailing Thunderjet, which blew up in mid-air after a few hits of 37 mm. Pepelyayev said that the remaining F-84s kept on flying as if nothing had happened, but due to the proximity of the Yellow Sea and the Soviet prohibition of flying over the sea, Pepelyayev and Ryzhkov disengaged. The rest of Harbour’s flight simply did not notice the Migs and thought that Harbour’s plane was shot down by flak and credited the loss to the AAA.

    May 15 1952: the F-86E of Col. Walker Mahurin was hit by flak after strafing some trucks. Mahurin asserted that he was hit two more times by flak later and forced to bail out and he became a POW. But he also asserted that his cockpit filled with smoke and fire after the first hit. In that same area and time the MiG-15 pilot Major A.R.Prudnikov (821 IAP, 190 IAD) reported that he saw one F-86 leaving a trail of smoke, he attacked it and shot it down. It’s clear that the unfortunate Mahurin, with his cockpit full of smoke, did not notice Prudnikov’s MiG coming in, and when he was hit for the last time, he took for granted that it was flak again.

    September 9 1952: USAF admitts the loss of 3 F-84s downed by MiGs of 726 IAP (Jimmy Alkire, William Suffern and Warren O’Brien). But besides that the Soviets provided the serial numbers of 9 more F-84s (BuNos 51-766, 52-798, 51-113, 51-464, 51-451, 47-551, 51-318 and 52-191).

    September 14 1952: Besides the admitted loss of the F-86E of Paul Turner by the MiG pilot M. Chumachenko (878 IAP), the Soviets reported 3 more shootdowns, all of them with tail codes found in the wreckages: FU-727, FU-725 and FU-555.

    October 6 1952: One MiG-15 pilot of the 726 IAP, V. Smirnov, claimed to shot down 2 F-86s. According to Seidov/German book ´Red Devils over the 38th Parallel´, the guncamera check shows that such victories were scored at point blank range – 30 meters or less. Addittionally, the Soviets provided 2 tail codes of the wreckages: ´FU-202´ and ´FU-170´. No comment of such losses in KORWALD or other records. For this single combat action, Smirnov was awarded with the Red Banner medal

    November 18 1952: According to USAF records, the F-86E of Jack Turberville (25 FIS) was lost due to a ´malfunction in the oxygen mask´. However, about at that same time and place the Soviets reported that a MiG-15 pilot of the 535 IAP, B. Siskov, fired against a Sabre at point black blasting it out of the sky, and returned to his airbase with debris of the Sabre imbedded into his MiG.

    February 21 1952: the book ´Red Devils ove the 38th Parallel shows that the MiG-15 Ace Semen A. Fedorets (913 IAP) scored his third kill when he shot down one F-86 which had shot down the MiG of S.I.Babich. The Sabre pilot bailed out and was captured, his name was Vincent Stacy. The US records shows that Stacy scored a MiG kill that day (shared with R. Carter) but neither KORWALD database nor other American source mention his Sabre as a loss or him as a POW. Apparently USAF ´forgot´ this particular loss.

    June 5 1953: USAF records mention the loss of the F-86F of Flt. Lt. James Ryan (16 FIS) over the ´MiG Alley´ due to the engine suddenly ´exploding in mid-air´ and Ryan bailed out. But Seidov/German book shows that at the same time a flight of MiG-15s of the 224 IAP took by surprise a CAP of Sabres, and Sr.Lt. Grigorii Berelidze forced the pilot to eject. So either Ryan probably didn’t notice the MiGs until it was too late due to the ´uppercut´ tactic used by Russians at that time and thought it was an engine failure or it was an intentional miss-atribution of a loss by the USAF.

    You fail to recognise that the battle over “Mig Alley” went through various stages. In some periods, the VVS was dominant achieving ratios of 2-3 : 1 while at other times the USAF had similar kill ratios. From late 1950 till 1952, the only times the USAF had such kill ratios was when veteran units were being rotated back to the USSR leaving only inexperienced units to hold the line.

    From late 1952 onwards, VVS participation was reduced significantly and the PLAAF was the main force. With some exceptions, the PLAAF were mainly novices and the USAF had a favourable kill ratio in 1953 but nothing like the 15 : 1 or 10 : 1 non-sense.

    I can only assume that you are blinded by your national pride.

    I’m not Russian

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Next time there’s a vacancy for India’s defence minister you should put your hand up…..I’m sure that you’ll quickly turn India into the Raj once again

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    On the subject of the Indian carrier…..

    It’s getting tiring reading the constant whining of the pro US Indian supporters. This latest episode about a price hike is most likely misreporting by an Indian paper about the ongoing negotiations. I haven’t come across any other source mentioning a new price hike on top of the already mentioned one.

    Yes this whole deal is a mess and it’s the Russians fault for underestimating the cost and various project management issues. On the other side of the coin, the Indians are trying to get (rhetorically speaking) “something for nothing”. There were delays of payments from the Indian side which also contributed to further delays.

    If the deal is so bad, simply cancel it and go shopping somewhere else.

    I’m sure the Russian Navy wouldn’t mind getting a second carrier much sooner than planned…..I suspect the Indians know well they are getting overall a pretty good deal relatively cheaply and won’t cancel the order.

    The same applies to the fighter tender. I don’t have a crystal ball, but my bet is that the Mig-35 will be the winner simply because it’s the best in terms of value for money and will further enhance India’s domestic aviation industry….not to mention it’s similarity with existing Mig-29s and Mig-29Ks.

    I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned that MIG is opening a service centre in India which IMO is a good omen for the Mig-35.

    Here’s a link where you can see the Mig-29K simulator (about half way down the page) destined for India

    http://pilot.strizhi.info/2009/02/13/6252

    http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/img_2591_mg.jpg

    in reply to: AESA vs PESA #2448374
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    yes sir, the US DoD are spending billions dollars over AESA for years, and the dispatched europeans “parts builders” claims that old mech are still at same level!

    :D:D

    That’s the US choice. Not the smartest IMO.

    Just because they decided to go down that path doesn’t mean everybody else will go that way too.

    in reply to: AESA vs PESA #2448828
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    yes sir, the US DoD are spending billions dollars over AESA for years, and the dispatched europeans “parts builders” claims that old mech are still at same level!

    :D:D

    That’s the US choice. Not the smartest IMO.

    Just because they decided to go down that path doesn’t mean everybody else will go that way too.

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Your numbers are Soviet CLAIMS. Actual UN losses were much lower. Can’t you see the difference between what side A thinks it may have short down, & what Side B knows it’s lost? We know what total UN losses, by type, were. We know when & where most were lost. The Soviet claims of F-86s shot down are several times total F-86 losses, to all causes.

    I never said Soviet claims were accurate to the dot, but the point I’m making is there is a HUGE difference between their claim of 2 : 1 advantage and your claim of a 4 : 1 advantage in favor of the USAF (I’m talking here about VVS vs USAF. I haven’t really looked into the Chinese and N. Korean losses).

    One partial explanation for the miss-match is that the US doesn’t count aircraft that have crashed outside the combat zone on their way home as conbat losses but classified them as “technical failure” or other type of “non-combat losses”….the same applies to aircraft that were damaged beyond repair.

    Here’s a few examples of recorded Soviet victories that were not acknowledged or downgraded by the USAF.

    >> On November 1st, 1950 a MiG-15 piloted by pilot Khominyh (spelling?) shot down a F-80 Shooting Star. It was the world’s first ever jet-vs-jet kill…. The Americans never acknowledged the loss.

    >>12th April 1951. 48 x B29s escorted by fighters tried to attack a bridge over Yalutsyan river. 36 x MiG-15 shot down 9 x bombers. The Americans admitted losing 3 + 7 damaged bombers and claimed 9 x MiGs from 64 – 72 enemy fighters, plus 6 probable and 4 damaged.

    The Soviets recorded no losses

    >>30th October 1951 (Black Tuesday)

    21 x B29 escorted by about 200 x F86 and F84s, tried to attack the Namsi airfield. They were intercepted by 44 x MiG-15s, which shot down 12 x B29 and 4 x F84.

    1 x MiG-15 was shot down by Sabres. The rest of the B-29s were damaged but managed to escape. The USAF admitted losing 8 x bombers and no fighters

    Pepelyaev said he was not sure his tally was accurate: he admitted that a fair few of his claims could have been duplicates

    AFAIK, 2 or 3 of his victories could’ve been shared with his wingman

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread Part II #2042109
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Thats the Palma/Palash CIWS onboard modified Tarantull-II class missile FAC

    Thanks. I mixed up the missile for the whole system.

    I thought the Palma was strictly for export and didn’t realise it was used by the Russian Navy

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Swerve,

    no offence but while I agree with some of what you say, however I stand by my statement that the 4-5 : 1 ratio in favor of the USAF is a myth

    I’ve had a quick check of some files I saved a few years ago and here’s what I found…

    The 64th Fighter Aviation Corps was secretly sent to fight in the Korean War in Nov 1950.
    They did quite well, shooting down 1,300 UN aircraft of all types while losing only 345 of their own.

    MiG-15s piloted by Soviets outscored the F-86 pilots at around 2:1

    16 x Soviet pilots of the 64th Fighter Aviation Corps became aces.

    The highest scoring was Evgeni Pepelyaev, with 23 confirmed kills (12
    F-86s, 6 F-80s, 4 F-84s + 1 F-94).

    Most of the Soviet pilots that were sent to Korea were veterans or aces of World War II.
    Ivan Kozhedub, a 3-time Hero of the Soviet Union with 62 German kills to his credit, was the commander of the 64th but did not himself fly in combat.

    The sources for the figures are: Aviatsiya i Kosmonautika + Krasnaya Zvezda (they cite official sources)

    The F-86 had a favourable kill ratio, but was still not able to protect the bombers, for reasons which are quite easy to understand. There weren’t enough Sabres, & they didn’t have enough time in the air, to provide adequate escorts for all the bombing raids. Whatever kill ratio they achieved when they engaged MiG-15s doesn’t affect that.

    What, there weren’t other fighters around in Korea ?….what about the Thunderjets, Panthers, Meteors??

    The job of the Migs was to stop the bombers and that is exactly what they achieved….the Mig-15s heavy armament (23mm and 37mm cannons) was originally put there with bombers in mind

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread Part II #2042218
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Is this a Sosna-U on some Russian corvette?

    http://tuku.military.china.com/military/html/2009-02-17/119199.htm#t

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Please, how many Mig-15’s were lost vs F-86’s………….:rolleyes: If, memory serves the overall kill to loss ratio for Sabre’s was something like 11 to 1. With under 200 US Jets lost……..in return. Unless the Russian accounted for the “vast” majority of US Losses. (doubtful) Those numbers aren’t even close.:cool:

    Your memory has failed you….11:1 :rolleyes:

    I gave you the Rand ratio (US source)

    So how many Migs did the USAF shoot down 1000 maybe :rolleyes:….and you didn’t explain to me why the bombing raids were halted?

    Lonevolk
    Participant

    the US did have a high kill ratio in air-air combat, though nowhere near the 14:1 ratio sometimes published. Maybe 4 or 5:1.

    What fantasy reports are you guys peddling :confused:

    This is what you’re own RAND has to say about it

    A recent RAND report made reference to “recent scholarship” of F-86 vs. MiG-15 combat over Korea and concluded that the actual kill:loss ratio for the F-86 was 1.8:1 overall, and likely 1.3:1 against MiGs flown by Soviet pilots; however, the report has been under fire for various misrepresentations

    The Russians say they had a 4 : 1 kill ratio in their favor overall (taking into account all types). If the US had a 4 or 5 : 1 kill ratio how come the day light bombing missions were canceled…..surely the skies would’ve been swept clean after such a massacre.

    in reply to: AESA vs PESA #2449180
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    The way I understand it, it’s more or less the same thing….the antenna is moved mechanically while the scaning is done electronically….but I’m not a technician so any insight would be appreciated.

    in reply to: AESA vs PESA #2449634
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    The way I understand it, it’s more or less the same thing….the antenna is moved mechanically while the scaning is done electronically….but I’m not a technician so any insight would be appreciated.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1820135
    Lonevolk
    Participant

    Let’s see: “The military forces of the Urals’ Steppes Military District will receive [the tactical rocket/missile system]’Iskander‘ (later) this year.
    This was communicated at a meeting of journalists (in Yekaterinburg) by the commander of the military district Arkady Bahin…”

    A native Russian speaker may feel free to correct any errors.

    I think you’re right.

    there was a report about increased production of engines for the Iskander (Rodolfo posted it above) which is why it seemed possible although a bit earlier than suggested

    OMSK (Siberia), February 6 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s Omsk engine design and production bureau has started large-scale production of engines for missiles deployed on the Iskander-M tactical missile systems, a senior company official said on Friday.

    “The company has received a large defense ministry order to manufacture engines for Iskander-M systems. The first batch must be supplied by the end of February,” said Valery Kovalchuk, the bureau’s deputy general director.

    Russia boosts production of engines for Iskander-M missiles
    http://en.rian.ru/russia/20090206/120017916.html

Viewing 15 posts - 541 through 555 (of 635 total)