![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael P. Reed" wrote in message om... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... Maybe it was felt they had better odds against bombers. It probably would have. The Falcon was originally designed for shooting down bombers and not fighters. Only the AIM-4D was considered as a "dogfight" missile. The Falcon did go through upgrades throughout its career. The final ones in service (AIM-4F/G limited to use on the F-106) were undoubtedly better and more capable than the early sixties variants, with greater range, larger warheads, and better maneuverability than the original AIM-4A and later AIM-4D. This is a bit wrong. And then you go on to acknowledge that the Falcon did indeed go through a development program that left the later variants decidedly more capable than the first version...? Note I said "the final ones in service", not the "final version fielded". Brooks The Falcon came originally in two versions and entered service with the F-89J with the -A and -C versions (three each to every F-89) either late in 1956 or early 1957. The -A being radar guided, and the -C infrared. The -E was a larger variant with radar guidance and this entered production shortly after the -A's and -C's. The -F was an improved -E and was the standard radar version. About the same time the -G was introduced as an infrared variant of the -E/-F. IIRC, the -D was not introduced until about '60, and was the last variant procured. It was basically the smaller -A/-C airframe with the -G guidance and motor. Some were purpose built, but most were reconstructed -A/-C's. It is confusing that the last Falcon would be given an "earlier" designation, but remember that all were manufactured prior to the tri-service (re)designations in 1962. The AIM-26s were even larger than the -E/-F/-G's and so were given a different designations. AIM-26A was the nuke version of the Falcon. The AIM-26B had a conventional warhead, and was produced under licence in Sweden as the Rb-27 (as you say). The AIM-47 was to have armed the F-108, and later the YF-12. The Falcon, FWIW, was, like BOMARC, given a "fighter" designation; F-98 Falcon (BOMARC was F-99). The designation changes was as follows: USAF Tri-Service GAR-1 AIM-4 GAR-1D AIM-4A GAR-2 AIM-4B GAR-2A AIM-4C GAR-2B AIM-4D GAR-3 AIM-4E GAR-3A AIM-4F GAR-4A AIM-4G GAR-11 AIM-26A GAR-11A AIM-26B GAR-9 AIM-47A -- Regards, Michael P. Reed |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ...
"Michael P. Reed" wrote in message om... The Falcon did go through upgrades throughout its career. The final ones in service (AIM-4F/G limited to use on the F-106) were undoubtedly better and more capable than the early sixties variants, with greater range, larger warheads, and better maneuverability than the original AIM-4A and later AIM-4D. This is a bit wrong. And then you go on to acknowledge that the Falcon did indeed go through a development program that left the later variants decidedly more capable than the first version...? Note I said "the final ones in service", not the "final version fielded". Er, ok, I missed the "later" prior to "AIM-4D," but IIRC the AIM-4D was the most maneuverable of the lot and it had the same seeker as the G. The "Super Falcon" Fs and Gs did have a somewhat bigger warhead though. -- Regards, Michael P. Reed |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Michael P. Reed" wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Michael P. Reed" wrote in message om... The Falcon did go through upgrades throughout its career. The final ones in service (AIM-4F/G limited to use on the F-106) were undoubtedly better and more capable than the early sixties variants, with greater range, larger warheads, and better maneuverability than the original AIM-4A and later AIM-4D. This is a bit wrong. And then you go on to acknowledge that the Falcon did indeed go through a development program that left the later variants decidedly more capable than the first version...? Note I said "the final ones in service", not the "final version fielded". Er, ok, I missed the "later" prior to "AIM-4D," but IIRC the AIM-4D was the most maneuverable of the lot and it had the same seeker as the G. The "Super Falcon" Fs and Gs did have a somewhat bigger warhead though. The AIM-4D was a joke; even the test equipment displayed a huge question mark in green lights - on the rare occasion when the system worked properly. (Seriously; it did!) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dweezil Dwarftosser wrote in message ...
The AIM-4D was a joke; even the test equipment displayed a huge question mark in green lights - on the rare occasion when the system worked properly. (Seriously; it did!) Ah, but we were discussing the issue of relativity. How was it as compared to the G? -- Regards, Michael P. Reed |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk | Jehad Internet | Military Aviation | 0 | February 7th 04 04:24 AM |
D.C. Air Guard Unit Flies New 737s | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 14th 04 11:12 PM |