Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567
Results 91 to 93 of 93

Thread: comparing fighter performance of the same generations; important factor in war

  1. #91
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Arlington, VA
    and that youtube video showed footage that was what, 12 years ago?
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  2. #92
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Chogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Apr 09
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    and that youtube video showed footage that was what, 12 years ago?
    Probably. It was standard AIM-9X test shots. I knew the missile could do some "interesting" things, but that vid really stands out.

    I mentioned this before, my own dear wife has security clearances that make mine look like school-boy stuff. She was high in the manager-engineer food chain for both the F-16 and F-22 at Lockheed. Of course she never said a word beyond "You would not BELIEVE what these jets are capable of. It'd water your eyes." It was painful, not knowing, but I would expect nothing less. The people who work on these aircraft, and other high-technology projects, do a superb job keeping secrets.

  3. #93
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    16 Nov 05
    Quote Originally Posted by Chogy View Post
    My point with this long entry - This was a different era than today. AIM-7M, AIM-9M, no digital data exchange. The art of the comm+sort is no longer so essential. Good comm will always be desired, but the ability to speak volumes in a short 6-word sentence is no longer needed. And when I look at what the AIM-9X can do, it boggles the mind in the sense that it makes me think, "How could we take advantage of this insane performance? The world as we know it is now VERY different." And of course that applies to AIM-120 performance, AESA, launch & leave, all the things that have altered aerial warfare.
    I have to disagree in it being less important. There are a lot of reasons comm is superior to pure digital (datalink) work. Not all the link messages make it to all players...for example on AWACS I won't be able to break out your sort in certain situations (depends on a lot of factors). There are plenty of times where it's faster/easier/better to yell on the net than push a link message.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    To cut it short, for geeks, AF has been upgraded from 8-bit to 64-bit architecture.
    Nah, they just plugged in some kind of adapter so the 64 bit toy can talk to the Nintendo, which still runs the war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stitch View Post
    Just got done reading the Osprey Combat Aircraft, Volume 53, "F-15C Eagle Units In Combat", and it gave me a sense of what you're talking about. Yes, the comm between the Eagle drivers was very short and precise, opposed to the comm they would get from the AWACS controllers (which, incidentally, led to the infamous blue-on-blue incident in which F-15C's shot down two UH-60's carrying diplomats & reporters in 1994 over Iraq).
    That's not a very accurate assessment of the Blackhawk shootdown. The AWACS crew (had they talked to each other) had the information that could've prevented it, but they never declared that group anything but bogey (unknown).

    The Army had (and still has) a habit of ignoring IFF requirements or publishing their flight information. That flight was initially identified accurately in one controller's area of responsibility. Since they weren't monitoring the AWACS control frequency and weren't really a factor for anything else going on, the controller wasn't paying much attention to them. When the flight ducked behind terrain and AWACS lost radar contact, what SHOULD have happened (and what is now the standard) is the Surveillance Section will make a note in the system where the track was lost and extrapolate where it should reappear. That didn't happen. While they were out sight, the helos passed into another controller's AOR. When contact was reestablished, it was treated as a new track and the ID process started over...except this time they didn't originate from a friendly airfield so it remained an unknown and was pointed out to the Eagles to ID (this is why we have IFF!). The Eagle's VID'd the Blackhawks as Hinds. Under that ID matrix, a VID enemy aircraft was hostile with clearance to fire. That was that.

    Edit: Crap, didn't realize this was 2 months old already.
    Last edited by Jimmy; 20 Aug 12, at 19:22.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Comparing Montana's bomb deck armor to Yamato's Question?
    By petsan in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03 Mar 12,, 05:55
  2. Fighter performance; actual plane analysis
    By adriann in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 134
    Last Post: 24 Dec 10,, 05:39
  3. Bush comparing Obama to Nazi appeasers?
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 177
    Last Post: 13 Jun 08,, 05:23
  4. Congressional memo to future generations: You're screwed
    By nickshepAK in forum International Economy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 14 Dec 04,, 02:34

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts