SOCOh come on SOC, the Russians know that wasn’t going to fly far – no pun intended 😉
I don’t know, did anyone else know that there is an unoccupied S-200 site south of Tbilisi?
I have a question: Are Su-24MPs still in service within the RuAF?
Some are yes, but most of them got allocated to the Ukrainian AF after the breakup of the USSR if I remember right.
SOCHas there been any reports of USor Israeli techs working with the Georgian AD systems?
Not that I know of.
I find it strange that soviet made SAMs was able to bring down Russian planes at all. You would have thought that the Russians would have put in back doors to their sytsems or could have tailored their ECMs to counter soviet stuff at the very least.
Tailoring their ECM systems would have been far more likely, but even that is not a guarantee with home-on-jam systems and other ECCM features available to modern SAM systems.
Loosing frogfoots (frogfeet?) to MANPADS and AAA could have been unavoidable, but the radar guided stuff should never have had a prayer.
Well, either the ECM suite on the Tu-22MR is not that effective, or the missile system’s ECCM features are very effective. Either way I don’t know why anyone should be suprised at the success of the SA-11 unit(s), other than to wonder why they didn’t target the TELARs directly early on. They have to have been keeping an eye on where they were operating.
Some claimed it was an S-200
Yeah, the Russians did, to bring the Ukraine into all of this mess.
If the Ukrainians-Israeli package offered to Georgia was similar to the M1-2 standarts
Might be similar but can’t be as capable; the M1-2 adds the 9M317 missile and the new CHAIR BACK phased array acquisition and guidance radar system.
SOCPersonally I find this all a bit fascinating from one specific aspect: this is the first time in recent air warfare (i.e. post-Vietnam) that a truly modern, capable SAM system has been employed in combat. From the way it sounds, the Buk would appear to be proving itself as a very capable system. It sounds like they actually managed to smack a Tu-22MR with one, not an M3. If Russia is to be believed (and in this case why not, they aren’t hiding the story) then the BACKFIRE was flying a recon sortie, which implies an MR not an M3. That also makes you wonder why an MR was used instead of an Su-24MR, but that’s another issue. The point is that regardless of the variant, the BACKFIRE does have a decent ECM fit, and if they got it with an SA-11 then that speaks very highly of the missile system.
SOCit is well known and documented that the XB-70’s engines suffered from this nasty habit badly
What, like it is well known and documented that the radomes of the YF-12s melted off? :rolleyes:
It was the Blackbird’s J58 that often encountered unstarts, not the J93, but it had nothing to do with the engine and everything to do with the intake system. The unstarts were largely corrected with the addition of a computer control system to control the translating spike in the intake. Before that the spikes were controleld manually and failing to oeprate them within a very tight tolerance would lead to an unstart.
The intended BF2-300 even saw combat action with the RB version.
I don’t think so, and I think I know where the confusion stems from. There was one MiG-25P and three MiG-25Rs that were refitted with the -300 under the MiG-25M test program. One of the R models refitted was one of the jets that had been deployed to Egypt. That may be what is causing some of this confusion.
SOCIt seems to me that the kit the Russian army has at its disposal is, generally, less advanced than its Georgian counterparts (see, for e.g., the MBTs employed by the two sides). Also, the Russians can’t have been sure, going into this, that their troops would be better trained or more motivated than the Georgian troops. On top of all that, the numbers, at least initially, did not inspire confidence of a Russian victory.
So, my question is this, when the balloon went up, what made the Russians sure enough that this would be enough of a cake-walk to make it worthwhile going in without a Desert Storm style build-up?
The fact that they could volley-fire SS-21s from outside of Georgia and obliterate ground targets? Georgian units may have beent better equipped than the Russian units INSIDE OSSETIA, but that deosn’t mean more advanced help wasn’t waiting right on the other side of the border. If you ask me, Saakashvili decided to be a badass with Putin on the other side of the world, and figured that with everyone at the games nobody would care or notice if he tried to evict the Russians from Ossetia and retake the province.
OOPS.
Were they going to rely on air-power? That would be a sketchy thing to base the campaign on, especially considering the backward use of air-power applied thus far (i.e. essentially WWII style tactics, no PGMs etc.).
Be interesting to study the tactics used and their impact once this is settled.
Russian Su-25 Frogfoot strike aircraft have twice bombed the Su-25 production facility at Tbilisi airport.
That might be the most hilarious bombing raid, ever.
SOC[color=red]Thread closed due to rampant cranial flatulence. Take the political stuff and all of the “who had the right” whining to the related thread on General Discussion, and leave the military and war-related bits in a new thread on this board. If you want to get into Georgia’s entry into NATO, take it to the other thread as well. If you want to debate the accuracy of PGMs, take it ot the Munitions board.[/color]
SOCThey are more expensive than other lines, but the detail makes up for it I think. I’ve got a $300 1/200 Tu-160 that is nowhere near the quality of the F-14. Then there’s the Gaincorp line, which are notoriously inaccurate and flawed. This has to be the best line I’ve seen so far WRT detail and accuracy.
SOCFinally, revealing the superlative source of your knowledge about the aircraft MIG, a 15 year old book. How could someone have better official source from MIG than you have in the French and English book. Be it as you wish :diablo:
BTW. but who is Jacques Marmain, a MIG designer?[/URL]
Marmain is a French aviation author. He was basically the editor and translator working with Belyakov as the book was originally published in French before it was picked up in the US and translated to English by the Naval Institute Press. While the book is lacking in respect to newer variants of the MiG-29 and the MiG-31M (the latter still being relatively secretive when the book was written, although it is mentioned and a photo is included), not to mention the MFI, it is a very accurate and interesting volume. What better source could you ask for than the general designer of the OKB?
SOCI’m pretty sure they realize that if they need to shut down the radar to fool a passive homer that means they need to stop ALL transmitting. :rolleyes:
…and that is what we call a “mission kill” or “soft kill” :diablo:
On a fighter, if the Alamo is in a position to detect the fighter’s fire control radar isn’t it also going to be in a position to be SEEN coming in? Stop emitting for 10 seconds and change course and then that would be that wouldn’t it?
Not necessarily. You might be picking up RWR indications before the enemy is receiving useable returns. Fire the missile and then provide midcourse updates when available/necessary.
So a fighter can guide its BVRAAMs with its radar switched off? If you need turn your radar off to avoid a passive homing AAM as Sferrin advocates, then you effectively give up your own BVR shot since you won’t be able to give your BVR missiles course updates with your main radar switched off.
That depends on the missile. If it is capable of flying for a period without a midcourse update, then it is not necessarily defeated. Your missile might also fly the boost portion inertially without any updates, and alternatively you can fire some active radar weapons towards a point in space before they activate their seeker and obliterate the first thing they see. AMRAAM can operate in this fashion.
SOCAir forces who have shot down multiple jet types in A/A combat…I can think of Iran, Iraq, Israel, Syria, India, the USA, Vietnam, North Korea, and maybe Ethiopia and/or Eritrea.
SOCAgainst better knowledge you do claim things similar to firebar.
The warm-up time till take-off is ~ 40 minutes .
The roll till take-off run is ~ 20 minutes. Leaving the hangar and to reach the take-off position is ~ 15 minutes. There are some minutes at the last chance point alone.
Before entering the cockpit, you are in need of several people to enter the S-1030-pressure suit.
Irrelevant, according to Lockheed, who authored the SR-71I study claiming a 20 minute alert-to-launch time.
Imagine the long range radars detect Russian bombers, then this information passed to supposed F-12 squadron, and with its 2 hours reaction time, what would happen ?
That is where YF-12 failed. It was unacceptable.
The YF-12 was not a production representative aircraft, first off. Secondly, since the Russian bombers weren’t going to be moving at anything close to supersonic speeds thanks to inefficient engines at the time, an F-12B would be able to compensate for a longer alert-to-launch time over a contemporary like the F-106 as it’d approach the targets at Mach 3. Third, 2 hours? Based on what? Where have you people been finding the alert-to-launch times for the ADC F-12B? Or are you basing your theories on inaccurate knowledge taken from either a test aircraft or a SAC reconnaissance aircraft?
For example, John Barron says that the Mig-25 has 300 km radius at best and max range of 1200 km !!!!
That is a pure lie.According to manual it has action radius of 920 km with belly tank at criuse speed of 2.35 Mach, and 680 km without belly tank.
Pure lie…hilarious. Proper, accurate reference works like OKB MiG or the Red Star FOXBAT volume didn’t exist when Barron wrote his book, do you realize that?
SOCWow, amusing to see Vympel getting all worked up over the KS-172S-1 😀 The weapon was displayed at the last MAKS with the Su-35, so please, how exactly is it a dead program?
SOCI agree with him on this, an interceptor has to provide within five minutes readiness “24/7”. Thats the reason why F-12B failed in the role of interceptor, bcs it wasnt built for that purpose even if it was ahead of its time in some respects. With that in mind, the Foxbat was the Interceptor with QRA capability and few minutes dash time at M2.8, enough to attack US Mach3 bomber or reccon aircrafts. Probably, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara knew the F-12B is waste of money.
The non-optimized SR-71A was capable of launch in 20 minutes and turnaround in 15, according to one of the declassified SR-71I proposals. What makes people think that the ADC-optimized F-12B wouldn’t have been capable of better?
SOCIt’s big but not HUGE. A lot of the range probably comes from a high impulse motor and a fairly high trajectory during midcourse loft.
SOCIf it is in fact the Bush administration making these decisions, then they won’t have to wait very long for a change of heart. Why aren’t they looking to Sukhoi for aid in this regard? Are they trying to diversify or bring in different experience?
Sign In
