Team-BHP - MiG-29 Fulcrum : The balance rests on us

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeroen (Post 3785581)

Thanks for that addition. I'm pretty sure the German airforce retired the F4 Phantom several years ago, 2013 or so. Big 'retirement' party with lots of publicity.

Jeroen

You're right, the F-4 was retired in 2013. The replacement Typhoons were delayed with some deliveries still to happen, so I was still under impression the F-4s were kept around a bit longer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by virtualdanger (Post 3785843)

Ricci - Read this one as well. In fact prior to the F-14 Tomcat one. Enjoying your informative posts on these jets.

The information on those that were in actual combat and were shot down is interesting. Do you have similar nos. for the others aircraft's, or is it only available/published for the Mig-29's?

There are online resources, usually aviation fan forums. The F-15 is fabled as having a 103:0 kill ratio. Most of it against 3rd generation fighters, but also claimed (and verified by western sources) 5 MiG-29s in the air. The US claims the F-15 is the greatest fighter ever , citing this 103:0 kill ration, but most of it was done by the IAF ( Israeli AF, not Indian) and they are considered to have the best pilots in the world. US doctrine also hands all air-air fights to F-15s via AWACS, thus reducing the opportunities for other jets, especially the US Navy ones who despite being closer, might not be handed the intercept. The F-15A-D models have only one role - so, the USAF will not let any other jet to intercept enemy fighters if there are F-15s available, which usually are. I don't know if friendly kills are part of the 103 tally. As for the zero losses, they cite only the F-15A-D variants, excluding the F-15E which has been shot down ; again the USAF disputes those as SAM kills rather than fighter kills.

At least 1 F-16 has a MiG-29 kill, during Kosovo operations.

http://www.wearethemighty.com/the-18...l-time-2015-05
This ranks the F-14 above the F-15, citing Iranian F-14 kills being higher than F-15 kills by USAF+Israel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricci (Post 3787117)

The F-15 is fabled as having a 103:0 kill ratio.

I think this is just western propaganda. The Syrians and Russians have claimed to have shot down a few Israeli F-15s and even the IAF acknowledges they have been hit by missiles but they claim that they still managed to return to base or blame the crash on something else.

Some info I found on a forum, most military websites are blocked at office lol:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showt...94-F-15-losses

After watching Israel repeatedly bomb schools and hospitals in Palestine and then later say it was by accident I inclined to believe they hiding the truth.

Another example of an over hyped weapon is the US Patriot missile defence system. In the first Gulf war it was proclaimed to be an overwhelming success with a 97% hit rate stated by President Bush against Iraqi Scud missiles. Many years later it was acknowledged that the weapon was a failure with an actual success rate of 10-20%.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxbat (Post 3787689)

Indeed, it is sometimes the case. I've read IRIAF flew 25 F-14s in a single flyby just to address the claims of single digit flyable Tomcats in service, sometime in 1980s-90s. As for Tomcat kills, there are counter claims by Iraq that they had only x number of aircraft, how does IRIAF claim hundreds of shoot downs exceeding the count of purchased planes.

Then the US tends to attribute kills to SAMs or crashes than fighter kills, as was with the 1991 F/A-18. There have been a few F-15E models acknowledged as "lost", which Iraq/Serbia forces list as shootdowns by fighters. The US claims no F-15Cs lost - kind of hints that Israel's F-15A models might be shot down.

All in all, one needs to meticulously track bureau numbers of built US jets, to determine losses, which are regarded as reliable enough as GAO (government accounting office) audits are considered stringent and trustworthy, so new aircraft are not slyly renumbered as attrition losses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxbat (Post 3787689)

Another example of an over hyped weapon is the US Patriot missile defence system. In the first Gulf war it was proclaimed to be an overwhelming success with a 97% hit rate stated by President Bush against Iraqi Scud missiles. Many years later it was acknowledged that the weapon was a failure with an actual success rate of 10-20%.

Absolutely, even with SAMs, it usually takes a salvo to shoot down a plane at a range. Iraqi fighters have been recorded to have evaded multiple missiles including AMRAAMs. Such misses are explained as 'being launched outside allowed parameters', a luxury they don't easily accord on to Russian weapons.

During exercises in Europe, USAF F-15s routinely locked on to low flying helicopters, and this was done with regularity. Then when the tallies were drawn up, they realized there weren't many/any helicopters in the claimed area. Then it was realized that the F-15 radars were picking up fast moving cars on the autobahns.

Sometimes the chinks in western armour do show glaringly, sometimes with disastrous results - a few friendly kills have been recorded.

Here's a planes vs cars drag event, including a Formula 3? vs MiG-29.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5snv6ZcfpI

The MiG-29 is lapping the car!

US propaganda is usually like their Hollywood action flicks, full of 100% bovine excrement. We need to understand their extreme effort to do so, their defence industry, their jobs and their elections rest on the ability of their weapons getting sold. Any US defence forum will be full of their hyperbolic ex soldiers most of whom must have cut onions or potatoes in the mess, yet believe they are all John Rambo and have single handedy saved democracy somewhere and somehow.
If their weapons and soldiers are so good, why are they getting killed in large numbers in Afghanistan and even Iraq? And they have invaded countries which didn't exactly have top of the line defence forces, yet increasing number of body bags are turning up.
All this my gun is bigger than yours bravado will not work in the battlefield. Fighter jets are designed for a particular purpose, and there is not a single jet in the world which can claim to be an allrounder doing everything possible in every war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeeper1941 (Post 3796357)

That's because Iraq and Afghanistan are asymmetric wars. You can have all the firepower in the world, but if you don't have a clear enemy, then anything you have is completely useless.

Most of the future battlefields are going to be asymmetric ones. Gone are the days when conventional armies would slog it over trenches and battlefields. For all the hyped up superiority if US forces can't hold up well against ragtag armies or guerrillas then they are frankly a burden to the tax payers. Maybe they should participate in Kashmir to understand how to fight and win battles.

Guerrilla wars are always with hidden enemies who know the terrain more than you. One can't sit within air conditioned humvees and fire away using a big machine gun hoping that the enemy runs away :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by apachelongbow (Post 3796421)

I don't know if you've read the books by Rajiv Chandrasekaran (Little America: The War within the War for Afghanistan and Imperial Life in the Emerald City). He gives a fascinating insight into why coalition forces have failed to make any impact on these countries and what led to the rise of IS. It is far more complicated than anyone thinks and way more than just guerrilla warfare and failed US policy.
(Sorry for going OT!)

Quote:

Originally Posted by apachelongbow (Post 3795763)

Bwahahahaha, in all this thread, this is the post I loved the most. I was laughing so hard in office. Sadly, all this discussion would fly over most people's heads, so didn't try and explain.

Lovely thread btw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by naveenroy (Post 3820175)

Yes I loved it too. Such comments always say something about the respective author as well.
And now we have the IAF buying a forty year old USA helicopter. That must have put a smile on a few American faces! It s all about who has the last laugh. Easy to feel superior though, no so easy to get the last laugh
Jeroen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeeper1941 (Post 3796950)

Its not really OT, US forces (the current ones) suck at integration with people. Unlike WW2 forces (especially Japan and Korea) where in they were able to successfully integrate and transform the local populace into adapting western philosophies, the current lot in Iraq and Afghanistan are more interested in securing safe areas, not interacting with the public. Indian forces are far better in integration with the local Kashmiri population, the only way to win over territories is to win over the local people, one cant occupy and eliminate.

Reviving a very old thread but I stumbled upon this:

This is the first hand account of Capt. Jameel Sayhood - a MiG-29A - pilot Iraqi AF squadron 39 - who claims he shot down a Royal Air Force Tornado GR.1 during Desert Storm in 1991.

"I switched the radio frequency to the AD sector and the GCI notified me that an enemy aircraft is to the right and directly below you!!! I turned my head to the right and noticed an airplane and since the sun was high in the sky I noticed its shadow on the desert floor (it was a RAF Tornado no doubt), I also saw the sun bright reflection over their helmets !!

I estimated the distance 500 miles no more (1,640 feet) and apparently they didn't noticed me... I maneuvered the aircraft to be behind and above them , I selected R-60MK heat seeking missile and a HUD symbology appeared (ER) which means target acquired with high beep in my ZS-5 helmet and I fired.... Within second they turned their heads toward me... it appear they noticed the flash of the missile or their RWR warned them . That was the first and last time they seen me. A huge explosion rocked the plane and soon it was engulfed in fire and crashed to the desert floor. No parachute seen since there was no time. They were flying at only 70 meters (230 feet). My wingman who was delayed in taking off. Now he took off and was behind me notified me that he saw at least one other aircraft dropping its bombs in the desert and flee "

The Royal Air Force acknowledges this loss and lists the reason as "unknown cause". Another example of western propaganda discrediting their opponent's success and attributing aircraft losses to either mechanical failure or ground fire.

Out of 36 Tornadoes sent by the RAF to Iraq, 6 were shot down.

On the sixth day (of the war), concern at the high level of RAF losses - it had flown 4 per cent of the missions and lost 25 per cent of the aircraft
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...e-1321938.html

https://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/25/w...airfields.html

https://defenceoftherealm.wordpress....-desert-storm/