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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Paul F Austin"
wrote: Kinda gives you an appreciation of the AIM-47. A long ranged missile fired at Mach 3+ and 80,000ft+ I still think that the YF-12 was one of the best "might have beens". Interesting aircraft and great at it's design purpose, but too operationally limited as a fighter or interceptor. I'm not sure I understand. At the time the USAF was procuring the replacement for the F106 in the late seventies, I saw the results of cost and effectiveness evaluations of several alternatives: F12/AIM-47, BF-1/AIM-54(lots of them), F14, F15/Sparrow and....F16/Sparrow. Against the cannonical Backfire threat in the North Atlantic basin, the F12 performed hugely well. On a cost/benefits trade, the results for most threats was pretty much in the order shown above. Of course, the USAF selected the F16/Sparrow which showed up worst in every scenario I saw. That spoke volumes on how seriously the USAF took the late seventies bomber threat. The BF-1A was interesting: huge aperature for the AWG-9 set and IRRC, 24 AIM-54s. The increased antenna gain raised the various RADAR ranges by about 50%. First of all, I have no axe to grind, just so you know. My company had the radar and weapons system for all but the F-16/Sparrow, and the weapons for first 3 too. I was focusing on some of the same issues that Pete pointed out, about basing, launch, re-fueling, etc. all practical matters that (IIRC) were pretty much ignored in the initial study. People sometimes think the Blackbird was a super-aircraft because it flew so fast, but try to do a 3 minute scramble in one. And that was the mission they were being considered for. Also, what about re-engagements, or alternate targeting? What was it's turning radius again? It takes how long to get back on target? Once you point this thing at a target, it's awfully tough to re-direct. BTW, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of the F-16 in the ADF role. It was nonsense of the first order. It's probably still nonsense today even if the F-16 is carrying AMRAAM. Aircraft range too short, engagement time too limited, weapons envelope (IIRC) non-existent. If your GCI is not perfect, you miss. -- Harry Andreas Engineering raconteur |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Poland: French Missile Report Was Wrong | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 8 | October 7th 03 10:54 PM |
How did the Iranians get the Phoenix to work? | Ragnar | Military Aviation | 22 | October 2nd 03 02:49 AM |
IPC in a Simulator? Phoenix area.. | Anonymous | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | August 28th 03 11:31 PM |
Surface to Air Missile threat | PlanetJ | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | August 14th 03 02:13 PM |
Rafael's AIM-AIR IR Missile Countermeasure | JT | Military Aviation | 8 | July 13th 03 03:41 AM |