|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Good argument  , probably the AN/TLQ-32 was not operated... Hmm, my 2004 Jane's radars and electronic warfare systems says following: "The AN/TLQ-32 ARM-D was selected by the US Air Force (USAF) in March 1989, with a then year US$11.6 million contract for two `first article' examples being awarded during the following September. Testing of these began in May 1992 and full-scale production of 14 systems to protect USAF AN/TPS-75 radars began in December 1992. During 1996, additional TLQ-32 systems were delivered to the US Air National Guard" Neither USAF nor Air National Guard operates the Patriots, Army does... Just look at what Janes's says about SA-2/3/4/5... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 636 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 636 Likes: 1 |
Just look at what Janes's says about SA-2/3/4/5... What does it say? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 636 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 636 Likes: 1 |
I see Guidance is by course correction command signals from the associated `Square Pair' radar with the missile's own active radar terminal homing seeker being activated near to the projected intercept point. Link
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
I see Guidance is by course correction command signals from the associated `Square Pair' radar with the missile's own active radar terminal homing seeker being activated near to the projected intercept point. Link This is from Jane's of 1994... By the way, that's what Jane's said about an S-125:"The first recorded combat use of the S-125 was in 1970 when PVO-Strany units, including several `Goa' missile regiments, were deployed to Egypt with twin launchers to form a joint Egyptian-Soviet air defence network to cover the Suez Canal Zone during the last phase of the 1968 to 1970 Egyptian-Israeli War of Attrition. Although a large number of men and much equipment was lost to Israeli air attacks, the PVO-Strany units shot down a total of five McDonnell Douglas F-4E Phantoms with the S-125 and were instrumental in forcing on the Israelis the 7 August 1970 UN ceasefire. The next combat use came in late 1972 when the North Vietnamese used small numbers of S-125s against American aircraft during the Linebacker raids. Their first and only recorded kill was also against an F-4 Phantom of the US Marine Corps." Is this true? Did they actually downed five Phantoms over Egypt and one - in Vietnam?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
At that point decoys may not have been very effective. HARM is constantly upgraded - but maybe you are right, who knows ... And yes you are correct - the main dangers to USAF and IAF have been SAMs. But that doesn't stop them from being speed bumps for those air-forces. I think it says more about the opposing air forces than the SAMs. Any time that the airborne opposition was not competitive, air power did a lot of damage despite SAMs being around - and this is exactly what I mean by 'speed bumps'. I don't mean you can ignore them. Good argument  , probably the AN/TLQ-32 was not operated... SAM's always performed better than MiGs. SAM's were able to shot down U2's, B-52's, F-16's, F-117, while these plane types were never shot down by a MiG.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
At that point decoys may not have been very effective. HARM is constantly upgraded - but maybe you are right, who knows ... And yes you are correct - the main dangers to USAF and IAF have been SAMs. But that doesn't stop them from being speed bumps for those air-forces. I think it says more about the opposing air forces than the SAMs. Any time that the airborne opposition was not competitive, air power did a lot of damage despite SAMs being around - and this is exactly what I mean by 'speed bumps'. I don't mean you can ignore them. Good argument  , probably the AN/TLQ-32 was not operated... SAM's always performed better than MiGs. SAM's were able to shot down U2's, B-52's, F-16's, F-117, while these plane types were never shot down by a MiG. Also to consider the other side of the coin... ...no (fighter jock) in any F-16/15 was ever able to engage any incoming SCUD missile.
Last edited by Hpasp; 06/08/12 05:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Maybe not this day, but an F-15 fighter jock HAS shot a sattelite out of orbit  There was some idea proposed by Ratheon to arm F-15's with PAC-3's, but it was a silly idea. I don't think you could reasonably expect a fighter to counter SRBMs or MRBMs anyway, for sure. Also to consider the other side of the coin... ...no (fighter jock) in any F-16/15 was ever able to engage any incoming SCUD missile. 
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Maybe not this day, but an F-15 fighter jock HAS shot a sattelite out of orbit  There was some idea proposed by Ratheon to arm F-15's with PAC-3's, but it was a silly idea. I don't think you could reasonably expect a fighter to counter SRBMs or MRBMs anyway, for sure. Also to consider the other side of the coin... ...no (fighter jock) in any F-16/15 was ever able to engage any incoming SCUD missile.  Big problem is that hostile nations towards the west are more and more investing into SRBM technology, instead of MiG-29's. (After the expert Serbian MiG-29 drivers suffered severe punishing, while Serbian SAM crews mostly survived during OAF.) In my opinion, West needs to invest more into ATBM-SAM technology, than into TOP GUN...
Last edited by Hpasp; 06/08/12 06:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
In my opinion, West needs to invest more into ATBM-SAM technology, than into TOP GUN...
And they do! Patriot PAC3, Standard SM3, THAAD, GBI, Israeli Arrow - all are dedicated anti-BM weapons! Even Franco-Italian PAAMS/SAMP-T has a substantial anti-TBM capability: http://www.eurosam.com/ground.html I wouldn't say that they do not invest enough, in fact I'd say quite the opposite!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
^^^^
Yep, exactly. Also, THAAD aside they have minuteman missiles converted into ABM, IIRC.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Big problem is that hostile nations towards the west are more and more investing into SRBM technology, instead of MiG-29's. (After the expert Serbian MiG-29 drivers suffered severe punishing, while Serbian SAM crews mostly survived during OAF.) They survived because they hid for the most part. They were waiting to inflict more damage if there was a ground invasion, and thus still be functional to support their soldiers - a smart move. But they were still just a speed bump. They only shot down a couple of planes in the end and the country capitulated due to airpower alone. In my opinion, West needs to invest more into ATBM-SAM technology, than into TOP GUN... What Loneworlf said, but I don't think anyone has adequate SAMs to deal with a serious BM attack.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Big problem is that hostile nations towards the west are more and more investing into SRBM technology, instead of MiG-29's. (After the expert Serbian MiG-29 drivers suffered severe punishing, while Serbian SAM crews mostly survived during OAF.) They survived because they hid for the most part. They were waiting to inflict more damage if there was a ground invasion, and thus still be functional to support their soldiers - a smart move. But they were still just a speed bump. They only shot down a couple of planes in the end and the country capitulated due to airpower alone. Best quote about this situation, I've ever read, is from a book of a guy called Gen. Wesley K. Clark. He said... "Toughest defense of bombing any Serbian target of my choice, was in fact the employees of the French Embassy... ... not the Serbian IADS."
Last edited by Hpasp; 06/08/12 07:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Can you put that in context please?
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
^^^^
Yep, exactly. Also, THAAD aside they have minuteman missiles converted into ABM, IIRC. That's called GBI 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203 |
In my opinion, West needs to invest more into ATBM-SAM technology, than into TOP GUN...
I'd also say that "top gun" is a way to deal with those who fires those missiles, not with missiles themselves...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Just observing the difficulties of SAM crews... The SA-75M Dvina (SA-2F) was designed against medium altitude bombers (like Linebacker-II B-52 kills), and high altitude spy planes (several U-2 kills)... ... but even in Vietnam it was mostly used against medium altitude nimble fighters (F-4, F-105), and Weasels. In Egypt, it had to fight against low altitude/high speed fighters, like the A-4, and Mirage-III. Non of these targets were designed this system against. The S-125M Neva (SA-3B) was designed against low altitude/high speed fighters (like F-4, F-105)... ... but in Serbia it was mostly used against medium altitude Stealth Bombers (F-117A, B-2A), and Weasels (F-16CJ). Non of these targets were designed this system against. The S-200VE Vega (SA-5B) was designed against Standoff Jammers (EA-6B, EF-111B), AWACS and high altitude/high speed spy planes (SR-71)... ... but in Libya it was mostly used against medium altitude Weasels (A-7), or nimble fighters (F-14). Non of these targets were designed this system against. ... And as I analyze the possibility of introducing the Patriot into the SAMsim, what I find... The Patriot PAC-2 was designed to easily kill all of the target types described above... ... but in Iraq it was mostly used against tactical ballistic missiles, the system was not designed against.
Last edited by Hpasp; 06/10/12 03:03 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
Patriot is a newer system and so it is more versatile, but it is a HIRAD system. According to RL operators, there is still a gap without the HAWK (the Stinger systems take care of SHORAD).
Last edited by GrayGhost; 06/10/12 03:15 PM.
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
Patriot is a newer system and so it is more versatile, but it is a HIRAD system. According to RL operators, there is still a gap without the HAWK (the Stinger systems take care of SHORAD). I consider myself as an educated one in Russian Air Defense abbreviations, but my knowledge has some holes in the Wester ones... ... could you please describe what "HIRAD system" means? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893
Hotshot
|
|
Hotshot
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,893 |
High altitude radar air defense. There's also MERAD (Medium Altitude), LORAD (Low altitude) and SHORAD (short range, and LORAD is usually part of SHORAD). These are generic terms used to describe an air defense system - for for example a BUK would be MERAD, and Tor would be SHORAD. I consider myself as an educated one in Russian Air Defense abbreviations, but my knowledge has some holes in the Wester ones... ... could you please describe what "HIRAD system" means?
-- 44th VFW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Senior Member
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665 |
High altitude radar air defense. There's also MERAD (Medium Altitude), LORAD (Low altitude) and SHORAD (short range, and LORAD is usually part of SHORAD). These are generic terms used to describe an air defense system - for for example a BUK would be MERAD, and Tor would be SHORAD. I consider myself as an educated one in Russian Air Defense abbreviations, but my knowledge has some holes in the Wester ones... ... could you please describe what "HIRAD system" means?  Russian designation is based on quite a different system... Long Range SAM systems are the... ... S-200VE Vega-E (SA-5B), S-300PMU1 Volhov-M6M (SA-20A), S-300PMU2 Favorit (SA-20B) and the S-400 Triumph (SA-21) Medium Range SAM systems are the... ... S-25 Berkut (SA-1), SA-75M Dvina (SA-2F), S-75M Volhov (SA-2E), 2K11 KRUG (SA-4B), S-300PT Biryusa (SA-10A), and the S-300PS/PMU Volhov-M6 (SA-10B). Short Range SAM systems are the... ... S-125M Neva (SA-3B), 2K12 KUB (SA-6), ... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HOA's
by Terl9999 - 09/18/26 04:12 AM
|
Football
by Terl9999 - 09/18/26 02:42 AM
|
Flags
by Terl9999 - 09/15/26 10:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|