Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
If my buddies who are under Tricare are any indication, you might not get very wise (or very much) council, but I reckon you could score some pretty potent Drugz basically just for showing up.
Iran AF F-4/F-5/F-14
- Thread starter MikeD
- Start date
If my buddies who are under Tricare are any indication, you might not get very wise (or very much) council, but I reckon you could score some pretty potent Drugz basically just for showing up.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
In what crazy land will a obsolete airliner maneuver to score a kill with a heat seeking missile? I can see the possibility of an A-10 using a missiles as a last ditch self defense weapon, but transport aircraft?
Mavericks for targeting ground targets over a minimal threat environment like Afghanistan, sure. But an AIM-9?
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Idle and beta, Mav, they fly right by!
*growl* *squirt* *star in "Iron Turkey 1"*. Do I have to think of everything myself?
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
There is a chance that a VPU P-3 might actually have a MiG kill.
Here's the background. In the 60's and 70's, VPU P-3's were tasked with gathering intelligence, flying over and proximate to Vietnam, China, and Korea. At this time, MiG interceptions were ground-controlled. I could be wrong, but I don't think that Vietnamese, Chinese, and Korean MiG-15's and 17's even had radar. Ground controllers would have known that the slow-mover was a P-2, P-3, or EC-121. It was thought that an armed P-3 could catch an interceptor off-guard with a quick 180.
Beyond this period, I don't think there was any big penalty to maintain the Sidewinder capability.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
Learn something new every day.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
It would be interesting to figure out where they put it if they did. While we're on the subject, one of the nicer touches of mid-century warplane design was putting the MiG-21 radar up in the shock cone. Elegant, Ivan. Very elegant. Now, about Khrushchev's table manners...
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Hmm. Difficult to spot. Maybe it's in the drop tank?
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
I knew some 17's had radar, but I expected it to be on the wing, like a Corsair. Thank you, Interwebs.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Or a PC-12! Everything that was old is new again! BTW, The PC-12 radar is about as useful as an Air Force pilot without an air conditioner.
There, that should do it...
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
Nah, the shutter speed of the camera was just fast, it needs to be slower to make the prop look "in motion".
If we end up on much better terms with Iran in the coming years, I'd make a trip out there for an airshow if I could. Must be awesome.
H46Bubba
Well-Known Member
Just as much of a joke as putting them on AH-1 Cobras!
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
Could have gone for the missing man formation with only one USN Tomcat and have that be the one breaks off for the formation.
Not sure I'd like the idea of them the remaining F-14's. Sure the cash wold be nice and we know the limits. But i'd wager the F-14 with a competent crew is still a formidable opponent. Especially, since the AWG-9 could see us before we could see them. Doesn't the AWG 9 out range the F-18's radar significantly? Can our AWACs see farther than that and link targeting data to the F-18's?
I wonder IRAN will turn them into BOMBCATS too?
Oh definiely an F-14 wit a competent crew can be formidable, as can nearly any fighter. My contention is that 1. We get the cash. 2. We know their capability becaue we sold it to them, and we can even degrade it some if we wanted. 3. I honestly don't believe that the AF cadre truly buy into all the Islamic crap; I believe they are more westernized inside and more independant thinkers and actors than they let on, simply due to being fighter crew or even military aircrew and the resultant heavy USAF influence.
Yes, AWG-9 has great range, and the F-14 is even used as an adhoc "mini-AWACS" at times.
And the Bombcats are already shown in the original video I linked, with the Mk-82s attached to the AIM-54 fuselage stations in a 4-abreast configuration. They've certainly adapted the plane to their needs.
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
You are most like right on them not buying into hardline Islamic crap.
Never new they used them in am AWACS role. I must have missed bobcat in the video.
Loved seeing the F4's too
Never new they used them in am AWACS role. I must have missed bobcat in the video.
Loved seeing the F4's too
When the F-14s come taxiing out of the shelter, and when they show the camera anning underneath, you see the bombs attached to the racks there.
And the sharkmouth-adorned F-4Es near the end, is total 1970s/early 1980s USAF.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
As far as personal politics go, I believe fish324 (sp?) is a bedwetting communist by the standards of the Chickenhawk Brigade, but he's still operating aviation appliances for Uncle Sam. I'd imagine that Iranian pilots are largely the same. That is to say, a bunch of dudes who range from one political poll to the other, and mostly like to go really fast and pick up chicks.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Let's not allow the Tomcat mythology spin the AWG-9 into something that it never was.
It was designed specifically to be a long range, continuous-wave radar to illuminate big Soviet bomber formations so the AIM-54 could go get 'em at long range. It had the necessary capabilities to do that well: it had the power to see large non-maneuvering targets at long range, it had the capability to track several of them and illuminate them with enough energy to send multiple Phoenixes in their direction with enough accuracy such that the radar on board the missile could see the target when it got to the point in the intercept that it turned its own radar on. It could also see and intercept the big, low-flying anti-ship missiles of the 1970s which were fast movers but essentially non-maneuvering.
Some of those capabilities adapt themselves to closer, smaller, maneuvering targets (like fighters) and some of them don't. Dealing with maneuvering targets and having the precision to guide a different active missile (like the AMRAAM) to those targets is a different discipline.
If the AWG-9 were such a superb air intercept radar, then we wouldn't have seen it replaced by/modified into the APG-71 (by basically replacing all of the internal "brain" with the APG-70 system out of the F-15E) when they performed the F-14D upgrades in the early 90s. Just like the Tomcat airframe itself, it was great for its time in the 70s and 80s, but has long since been surpassed by the capabilities of newer 4th gen fighters.
So...with respect to range. Yes, the AWG-9 could see big targets at long range -- longer than most other air intercept radars, even to this day. If you are going to yardstick it against the APG-65 in the Hornet, you have to simply look at the size of the dish on the front of the jet to know which aircraft can see further; bigger is better. The Hornet has a smaller nose in diameter than the Tomcat, meaning the Tomcat can have a bigger dish. This is the same comparison between the F-15 and F-16, where the F-15's larger nose allows the APG-63 and 70 to have a larger dish than the APG-68 in the Fighting Falcon -- the result is that Eagles can see further than Vipers in practice. The AWG-9 also had a truckload of power that it could put out in continuous-wave illumination on its own frequency. Let's recall that when it comes to RF energy, you can either put a lot of energy on a narrow beam or a little energy on a wider beam. There can be benefits to that under specific circumstances, but that capability can also be very limiting in other applications. I think the fact that current AI radars don't (need need to) put out a truckload of energy out on one specific beam (thanks to digital processing) is validation that the AWG-9's techniques are pretty obsolete.
That long range, though, isn't in and of itself such a valuable asset that it makes or breaks an AI radar. Other capabilities -- such as the ability to maintain locks on maneuvering aircraft, or resistance to electronic attack, or the ability to see low observable "stealth" stuff -- are far more important than just being able to see a long way.
So...bottom line...AWG-9 was great in its day at what it was designed for, but don't fall into the fanboy trap of thinking that means that it is the greatest thing evar and will remain so into eternity.
Last edited:
Bandit_Driver
Gold Member
Hacker as always good info. Not being in the military I can only go by what I read and hear from the occasional fighter pilot I run into on the road. So I am sure I don't exactly get straight scoop but some myth and spin thrown in with it.
So do you think Iran still has the AWG 9 in it or have they upgraded to something else as well?
Any truth at all they they wanted to the F-14D's radar in the hornet? or is that more Mythology?
Still wish they would have supported a Demo team for air shows or let the Collins Foundation get 1 or 2. That plane was still impressive at air airshows up until the very end. I remember parking my E110 next to in KBUF one night. Made me feel real little. It like the A-10 was deceptively BIG when you get up close to in person.
So do you think Iran still has the AWG 9 in it or have they upgraded to something else as well?
Any truth at all they they wanted to the F-14D's radar in the hornet? or is that more Mythology?
Still wish they would have supported a Demo team for air shows or let the Collins Foundation get 1 or 2. That plane was still impressive at air airshows up until the very end. I remember parking my E110 next to in KBUF one night. Made me feel real little. It like the A-10 was deceptively BIG when you get up close to in person.
D
Deleted member 27505
Guest
I knew some 17's had radar, but I expected it to be on the wing, like a Corsair. Thank you, Interwebs.
I like the senator in the tie just outboard and aft the starboard wing. Who the heck is that guy, GB's grandad? On a fact finding mission no doubt. Also, the guy in the cool sunglasses aft on the rail aft the port wing. He knows something, too. He's scoping the camera.