Russian military resorts to dropping massive Soviet-era bombs Are F-16s the only answer

a reply to: firerescue

Learning to fly it is one thing. Learning to use it effectively and well in combat is another. They can learn to fly it in about four months, but they're not going to be able to use it nearly as effective as a US or allied pilot could for awhile. The big thing with Russian and US design is that Russian designs, until recently, were heads down as opposed to heads up for US designs. That was one thing found when the US got to evaluate German MiG-29s. With certain loadouts the MiG-29 could beat just about everything we flew against it, but it required a lot of looking down to navigate, operate the weapons, and just do basic flight tasks. An F-16 is very heads up, with everything you need to fight it displayed on the HUD, and other than the Master Arm, at your fingertips on the throttle.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Related video? thoughts?

a reply to: putnam6

It’s rarely one thing, so at a guess it’s a combination of jamming, not having the proper interface with the weapons, and low altitude. A JDAM released at high altitude has a range of 15 miles. An ER is 45 miles. But they aren’t going to release them at high altitude obviously.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: putnam6

It’s rarely one thing, so at a guess it’s a combination of jamming, not having the proper interface with the weapons, and low altitude. A JDAM released at high altitude has a range of 15 miles. An ER is 45 miles. But they aren’t going to release them at high altitudes obviously.

So using Western munitions on MIGs has its limitations? but isn't this the same thing we were discussing the Russians doing and it was more effective for them? Are their radar jamming capabilities better than the West?

Which would pose the question, how do we knock out the radar jamming? One would think with limited munitions it would be a high priority. What are the options beyond carpet bombing and/or special ops

a reply to: putnam6

The Russian weapons were designed to interface with the MiGs and Sukhois, so they’re more effective. Western weapons use a totally different interface, so they’re having to rig up whatever works. The HARM is attached to the normal pylon, which has a battery to power the missile, which is attached to the Russian pulling that the MiG uses, and a tablet in the cockpit to display targeting information. It’s fired in seek after launch mode, so the missile basically does all the work. An F-16 with proper interface has the HARM Targeting System, a single pylon, and much better targeting capability.

Russia has had years to perfect their GPS jamming. They’ve concentrated on it hard, because they know that we use it for pretty much everything. We’re countering with GPS III, which has better jam resistant capabilities, and better precision. We’re also training hard to fight in GPS denied regions. Short term that isn’t going to help the Ukrainian situation, but if they do get Vipers, THAT will help.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: putnam6

but you are then discounting Ukraine saying they are indeed effective.

Any leathel weapon can be effective.

Didn't Rambo use a Bow and Arrow

The Joker shot down the Bat Jet with a cheesy revolver?