|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,724
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,724 |
Most of the Sparrows were fired in volley fire of at least two missiles sometimes up to four. So that skews things a bit.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,748
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,748 |
When I was a kid I always wanted to become an F-15 pilot. Of course, growing up in Canada that was pretty much impossible as the go to air force jet up here was the CF-18. I know it's an interceptor, not a fighter, but I'll throw the Avro Arrow into the mix simply for patriotic reasons. Of course, they never saw active service. SS We hosted a Canadian CF-18 squadron to Miramar, and in my experience the Canadian CF-18 pilots are excellent! They get the absolute most out of their aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,896
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,896 |
No I believe it was internal... A mod installed a M-61 internally in the "bomb bay". It had a blister for the barrels to shoot under the plane. The F-106 (or some of them) had a M-61 installed where the center missile rail was and extended down to shoot. Dave the 37th TAC fighter wing was at Phucat while I was there, you could hardly walk in the weapons shack as there were more assorted gun pods 7.62 & 20mm than aircraft to fly em because of ammo shortages... but damn if we didn't have more beer than you could drink in a lifetime or give away ! Good ole supply, you could always count on them coming through with exactly what you DON'T need !! Edit to add: The F-100's were just leaving when I arrived and replaced by F-4's. The 100 was a decent airplane but used almost all of the 10K runway when loaded with napalm or MK 82's.
Last edited by FlyboyFlem; 04/01/15.
You better be afraid of a ghost!!
"Woody you were baptized in prop wash"..crossfireoops
Woody
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,482
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,482 |
Some good info here on the Snake kills. : Winderkills Total numbers are really not that a valid measure of effectiveness when you consider how many were fired outside parameters. The USN had a better overall kill ratio over the AF for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the Navy learned to fight earlier (Top Gun), the AF was relegated to flying those almost suicidal "Route Packs", AIM-7s were radar beam riders, tough to keep locked if you were jumped (and really designed for the interceptor role to hit slower, less agile bombers) and also the AF had initially ONE dedicated squadron as a "Dogfighter" which was the 555th and they were good, REAL GOOD. Finally when real warriors like Robin Olds were given a freer rain, combined with training at Top Gun/Red Flag, by war's end the US/Gook ratio was completely one sided. Also,I'm betting if one divides the ratio of missiles fired v kills between the two services the numbers will differ.
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005 |
Good points, Jorge.
Just as an FYI for anyone looking for a good read in the fighter jock area, Robin Olds' autobiography, "Fighter Pilot" is worth a look.
"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,482
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 42,482 |
One of my personal heroes, Doc and we lost him just last year.
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005 |
I saw that recently, missed it at the time. A truly great American.
"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,166
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,166 |
Some good info here on the Snake kills. : Winderkills Total numbers are really not that a valid measure of effectiveness when you consider how many were fired outside parameters. The USN had a better overall kill ratio over the AF for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the Navy learned to fight earlier (Top Gun), the AF was relegated to flying those almost suicidal "Route Packs", AIM-7s were radar beam riders, tough to keep locked if you were jumped (and really designed for the interceptor role to hit slower, less agile bombers) and also the AF had initially ONE dedicated squadron as a "Dogfighter" which was the 555th and they were good, REAL GOOD. Finally when real warriors like Robin Olds were given a freer rain, combined with training at Top Gun/Red Flag, by war's end the US/Gook ratio was completely one sided. Also,I'm betting if one divides the ratio of missiles fired v kills between the two services the numbers will differ. Excellent points. I think it's interesting that the USN shot down 46 MiG's with the AIM-9, vs 34 for the AF (or 48/38, depending on which source you use), but the Air Force shot down far more MiGs with the Sparrow (50) than did the Navy (8).
Last edited by PrimeBeef; 04/01/15.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,451
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,451 |
A lot of training shortfalls were brought to the forefront when the F-4 started going up against the early Migs in 'Nam.
Very little training was being devoted to ACM, "knife fighting", if you will. It was focused more on BVR (beyond visual range) missile engagements. The biggest problem with that was the ROE (rules of engagement) generally required a VID (visual identification) before you could shoot, therefore defeating the purpose of the Sparrow.
There was also a lot of ignorance and/or misunderstanding about missile envelopes and employment. The F-4 radar could only "track" out to 40 degrees off the nose and in order to keep the CW guidance illuminator on the target, the radar had to stay locked on all the way to impact. If you fired a Sparrow and let the bogey get more than 40 degrees off, the radar broke track and the missile would go stupid. That would also happen if YOU performed any maneuver that moved the bogey more than 40 degrees off. (This happened a LOT) It was simple ignorance of how the radar and the missile worked together.
For the early Navy Sparrows, they took a beating flying off of and landing on the boat. They weren't solid state so were more susceptible to internal failures. If I remember correctly the Air Force had better results with the AIM 7 because they got a little more TLC flying off the beach. There were also times when they got clearance to fire BVR because a target had been declared "hostile" and they were able to shoot them in the face before the merge. Later in the war, the Air Force also had a system to ID Migs at range and use the Sparrow for what it was designed.
There were similar problems with lack of understanding of firing envelopes for the Sidewinder, especially with the earliest versions that were deployed to SE Asia. With a small seeker head field of view and the little wings of the early "Winders", they weren't that maneuverable so they were pretty easy to defeat if the bad guy saw it coming.
When we got hold of some of the Migs (17's and 21's) exploited them, learned their weaknesses, and strong points, etc. both the Air Force and the Navy came up with their fighter weapons schools, i.e., Top Gun. The basic idea was that by teaching a couple of guys from each squadron the most effective tactics and effective use of the weapons systems, those guys could then go back to their squadrons and teach the rest of the guys.
It worked like a champ and the American kill ratio took off. It was just a matter of training to the proper threat and the learning the capabilities, strong points, weak points and your own weapons systems as well as that of your enemy.
It still works that way.
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,836
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,836 |
A little sidebar... During one of the early Red Flag exercises in the mid '70s the aggressor squadron was suppose go up in their F-5s and fly a route blind so that the Aces could jump them and shoot em down. Well the aggressor pilots weren't about to play someone's b!tch. They came up with a plan, had avionics maintenance install car radar detectors on the F-5's glare shields. They took off on their given flight plan, turned on the radar detectors and waited. Their radar detectors alarms went off indicating they were being painted by the hunters, they waited until the time was right and the hunters became the hunted! The F-5s won the dogfights that day.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,595
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,595 |
I read a book written about John Boyd. He was an Air Force officer to developed a mathematical method to evaluate a fighter airplane. He found that the F-111 and Phantom were terrible fighters. His methodology was used to design the F-15 and F-16 which were the best fighters in the world during their day.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169 |
While not a jet fighter, my Dad preferred the stick of the Bronco. Low and slow, marking targets for the fast movers. Shot down and MIA almost 45 years ago, but recovered safe and mostly sound. I still love sitting down and listening to his stories while all starry-eyed. He did not care for 105's. Too many of his friends died in those "Thuds".
Last edited by T Bone; 04/01/15.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169 |
Here is a pic of my Dad after being recovered.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,169 |
An example of why he love the Bronco. They keep flying even when shot to pieces. The OV10 was never sexy, but it was pure utility.
Last edited by T Bone; 04/01/15.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,871
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,871 |
[quote=Marty_B]The above fighter is the F-14. My favorite has to be the F-15 Eagle. Although not a fighter, the A-10 Warthog is an awesome airplane.
Yes it is a fighter it takes on tanks and the like. I was back seat on the CF-100 MK-4 and it had 56 2.75 FF rockets and 8-50Cal. does that make it a fighter?? Also a few rides in the F-4. Cheers NC
don't judge until you have walked a mile in other persons' moccasins' SUM QUOD SUM........HOMINEM TE ESSE MEMENTO
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,821
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,821 |
I worked the flight deck at night in 1968. We tanked and did ECM with our old EA3B's. In my day, it was the F4. There is nothing like the violence and beauty of flight op's at night. I salute all the brave young men that served with me and especially the men with the balls and brains to fly those aircraft. I'd do it again in a minute.
�Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." -- Milton Friedman
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,821
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,821 |
Here is a pic of my Dad after being recovered. This post needs a "LIKE"
�Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." -- Milton Friedman
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 80
Campfire Greenhorn
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 80 |
If the question is "best looking," my vote goes for the F-11F Grumman Tiger in Blue Angels livery...
My father was in Naval Aviation during the brief period when the F-11F was being used. He recalls it being something of an underpowered dud, not altogether willing to get airborne on a hot day on the South China Sea.
The Blue Angels were still flying them when I was old enough to remember them doing so.
I've got a soft spot for "Heinemann's Hot Rod," too but they don't count in this discussion. The ol' "Scooter" to me is the second best looking military jet flown the U.S. forces.
Kind of off the subject, but I knew a fellow who had seat time in both the F-8 Crusader, which I think is a rather unstylish thing to look at, and the F-4. He described the F-8 as a "sports car with wings" and favored it over the F-4. The F-4 Phantom was an intimidating looking bird, for sure.
If I could have stick time in any U.S. military aircraft, the one I'd want the stick time in is the A-4 Skyhawk.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,537
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,537 |
"If I could have stick time in any U.S. military aircraft, the one I'd want the stick time in is the A-4 Skyhawk."
And what a sensitive stick it is, in both roll and pitch. The max roll rate was 720 degrees per second. That is right, one complete aileron roll in half a second. You could make your own head spin.
Nifty-250
"If you don't know where you're going, you may wind up somewhere else". Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,633
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,633 |
My vote goes to The Grumman F9F Panther or Cougar. --- Mel
The only thing I'm an expert at is my own opinion, and I have plenty of those!
|
|
|
489 members (17CalFan, 10gaugeman, 1Longbow, 160user, 10ring1, 1lesfox, 45 invisible),
2,180
guests, and
1,011
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,187,596
Posts18,398,160
Members73,815
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|