Sea Sparrow was not alone. There were Standard Missile, Terrier and Tartar. Talos was gone in the 80ies. Ships operated in cooperation with other ships and Sea Sparrow was the choice for smaller ships.

AND that was the problem, xena , no navies in the seventies/eighties could just go with a single air to air missile sistem.
Standard and Sea Sparrow were two different categories of systems, before the introduction of vertical launchers (or the greatly enhanced Mk26 of Ticonderoga) medium range missiles had just too low rate of fire to be used for any meaningful antimissile use also.
They were instead thought to engage planes carring them and to provide cover to an entire group of ships, instead of just the one on which they are mounted on.
Nasty thing of sea skimming missiles (when compared to P-15 first series) was that they could be seen and targeted only when they are so close to the target that there was practically no differences between one of such area defence system and the Sea Sparrow/ Aspide/Crotale/Sea Wolf ones.
One would have engaged them at a greater distance but would have not been able to repeat engagement a second time before they would have reached minimum operative distance while the others would had this opportunity, almost in the case of a single missile attacking, hank to their greater rate of fire.
Of all those just the Sea Wolf was intended to have a specific antimissile use but in the Falkland war, although proving itself lethal against low flying argentinian Mirages, had not the occasion to engage Exocet so we can not have a precise idea of its own efficacy.
IMHO however, anything short of the Tor system of Udaloy’s (whose development was a royal pain) would had been not enough to this role in the eighties but they carried an hell of a Ciws also.

Shah Mat.
Umayyiad Mosque liberated by Loyalist.

Thanks for correcting me
So the sea sparrow mk 29 launcher can target and guide how many missiles at a given time ?

You are making confusion between radars and launch system. Launch system can fire a missile every 3 second but radars can illuminate just a target.
So it’s depend from the number of radars on the different type of ships involved.
You cold obviously also fire more than a missile against a given target.

Let’s say that a lot of interesting arguments was just started when he passed to new ones.
The direct comparison (speed, payload, range) between the F-35 and the PAK-FA, despite the title was not made.
He was extremely sincere in highlighting the deficences of certain planes, russian also but it seems me that he was above all reassuring wiewers about the choices made by the developers and the political elites and to counter some criticism as well as excessive espectations made by not specialist.

The USAF, USN, USMC have been doing CAS using F-16s, F-18s, and Harriers for years and years. Given that the F-35 offers at least as good low/slow performance (better than the F-16) and a great deal more range/endurance there is no reason to think it would struggle to perform any CAS mission.

The only area it can’t measure up to the A-10 is the huge gun, and even that is basically a red herring as even the A-10 wouldn’t expect to use it anywhere but a counter insurgency type environment.

Afaik, the marines have already done CSAR with the F-35B and it went well.

I’m not talking about the generical CAs mission almost in the quite respective significance that is sometimes given to it i.e. performing a single bombing run under the instruction of a ground controller team but a mission in support of as CSAR mission i.e. something thsat require a continuative presence in supporting on an operation that could last hour.
Amazingchichens affirm that Marines has done a CSAR, I suppose he means a simulation of the rescue of a fallen pilot not an operative action.
Because you know, my country air force has had to perform a real rescue mission in Afganistan in August 2011 and not of a single men but of a whole company of US soldiers that got struck in a gorge due to a Buffalo getting struck, the operation lasted five days and led to the loss of a spanish chinook, american send some F/A-18 and we sendour AMX and Mangusta.
It turned out that while the Hornets and Mangusta weren’t able to assure a continuative presence, our own small, atypical (no armor and just a M61 peashooter) but nevertheless truly CAS plane bwas the only one able to stay there until a new wave of the other planes came back, loitering over the zone and making a pass , even with depleted ammo to make the assailant squat down.
It seems that it was this characteristic that ultimely saved the (five ) day.
I’ve searched internet for more precise report but for the moment I have just found this one (official silence about our country overseas mission is usually deafening so no surprise about it), take it just as a proof to make sure I’m not inventing stories. http://espresso.repubblica.it/googlenews/2012/08/20/news/la-guerra-segreta-di-monti-1.45809
Now, I’m not trying to convince you, just pointing out about a suspect I have that the congress is trying to make up a taylored made evaluation centered on the actual strongpoints of a specialized CAS just to keep the A-10…
Nothing more, nothing less. Not leaning to a solution instead of the other, almost not at the holy crusade level someone has when it talks in favor or against the F-35.

Let me say, it just seems that A-10 is performing extremely well in current engagement in Syria/Iraq so I’ll still give it more than some chances to get a few more years of service.
In the same time, I expect the F-35 to operate in the low and slow department much better than the rest of current Usaf fast jets fleet so it would in the end be the best candidate for its successor as times goes by. In ther meantime, it can take the place of F-16.
P.S. AMX and A-10 operated together over Serbia just in the way Tomcat described, with outstanding results, one was heavily armed and armored, the other had updated better “data sharing” reconnoissance ecquipments.

Maybe MILF-31? But at 31 it is not a MILF. :angel:

😀

For apparent mental age of some poster it would be.

I don’t think to be to be an excellent knowdgeable poster for what it come to aereonautical matters but i’m following Syrian conflict everyday now from the beginning, so I don’t securely need someone like Tony to tell me about all the wrongdoings, the false news, the covering for genocide, the killing of any residuate honesty, humanity and simple decency or sense of riducule that main stream media have done in covering the support Usa, Israel,France,Turkey, Quatar and above all Saudi Arabia, actually massacring Yemeni people in a deafening silence have done in the last years in favor of the same Jihadi groups that have committed 9/11.
Said so, I was the first one to tell everyone that this one is an aviation discussion thread and to leave a certain kind of sensationalistic posting in the proper forums.
So please MiG-31, if you are one of the sorry illuded people that think the USA or generally Western world have still an half of an hinch of morality ground to tell other people what to do, be welcome to do it in another place and above all STFU!

Right! The company that actually knows (besides USAF) what the true capability and performance of the F-35.

Ah, and the poor me that though instead that it was the one that will take all the money.