Originally posted by FULCRUM

Originally posted by Lampyridae
Captured or bought Migs are usually given F- designations, can't think of any offhand right now. Say, like F-25.

I think that F-113 is actually a MiG-23 as used by USAF..

i heard that usaf tested stealth technology on the captured mig-23

Originally posted by SectorGaza

Originally posted by FULCRUM

Originally posted by Lampyridae
Captured or bought Migs are usually given F- designations, can't think of any offhand right now. Say, like F-25.

I think that F-113 is actually a MiG-23 as used by USAF..

i heard that usaf tested stealth technology on the captured mig-23

Why?? The Mig-23 is a slab-sided lump of steel and aluminium. It has no redeemng stealth properties whatsoever. Perhaps they were assessing its returns off various radar arrays.

Yeah, but the angles are the problem. The biggest giveaway are the compressor faces. Shine a torch into those intakes and you'll see those babies staring back at you. Plus the intake edges are perpendicular, and will bounce radar energy straight back.

The Mig-21 has an RCS pf about 4 square metres. How do you do superscript with UBB code?

>EDIT<

Waitaminute, the Mig-23 is single engined. So maybe you can't see the compressot faces from the intakes. Maybe you're right. The aircraft could have a lower RCS as seen from the front.

[Edited on 16-10-2003 by Lampyridae]

We have theirs....and they have ours...

Lucky for us...on this point, we seem to have a few more points than our Russian friends (captured aircraft)...as your defectors often deliver us shiny new ones...

However, comparing an older F-14 to one currently in service, is comparable to comparing an old VW beetle to the new one. There are considerably advanced avionics in modern planes (it's how we can keep these dinosaurs flying, and usable)... Most of these electronics get upgraded EXTREMELY often in US planes and choppers, etc.

It does not bother US Defense industry planners that another country such as Russia has the “most powerful radar” on one of it's interceptors (Mig-31 w/ SBI-16 Zaslon M).

Ever since the 1960’s and before, the US and Russia have had differing points of view on air combat radar methodology. Russia’s approach then and comparatively their approach now is akin to the proverbial “bull in a china shop”…

Until just recently, when a Mig pilot lit up his radar the signal was so strong that sparrows, geese & ducks fell out of the sky, smoldering like crisp thanksgiving turkeys.

This is certainly impressive power and the range on such a device is admittedly long reaching. The downside of such a powerful unit is that it has so much power and so little emission hiding features. The Mig-31 will show itself off really nicely on enemy RWR, and as long as the Mig is not among hostile fighters employing the radar units listed below it will be perfectly safe…after all, although it’s a multi-role unit, the Flashdance-M (SBI-16 Zaslon-M) was initially designed to defeat bombers.

F-22 (AGP-77 with 2000 T/R modules)
Mitsubishi F-2 (Local AESA with 800 T/R modules)
F-16 Block 60(AGP-80 with 800 T/R modules)
Eurofighter Tranche 3(AMSAR, 1000 T/R modules)
Gripen (NORA, 1000 T/R modules)
F-18E/F post 2006-2008(AGP-79, 1000 T/R Modules)
F-35 JSF (based on AGP-77)
F-15Cs fitted with AGP-63v2 (as deployed in Alaska)

Why does western air-combat philosophy embrace these units, especially the AGP-77?
A higher resolution than even the Flashdance, range that is in excess to the range of enemy ordinance, LPI, features such as pencil beam steering, and massive multiple tracking capabilities (2000 T/R modules) and of course the western stream of thought biggie… Low Observability… stealthy and bird friendly…

I'll admit, the flashdance-M is arguably the best radar for interception and in fact enables the Mig-31 to be multi-rolled as a small AWACS.

But in the event of actual air combat with hostile western air superiority fighters the Mig-31 is at best on parity and if the western fighters are stealthy and employing counter-CW phased array radar EW, the Mig may never see that little Raptor coming up on his 6.

intelgurl
[did i happen to mention that i work for raytheon?]

Originally posted by intelgurl

[did i happen to mention that i work for raytheon?]

Well,

That explains the propaganda your giving us..

And while you are working for Raytheon..

Would care to explain to us that is there any current US fighter that can FULLY use AIM-120s? (all the modes.. etc..)

As with least F-16s, they cant.. just some 'basic modes' work..

And how are exported AIM-120s downgraded?

I hear that AIM-9s have no 'ECCM'.. so they will be easily fooled by flares..

As some of these dont have dual frequency seeker.. IR/UV.. in another words..

And that their software isnt as good as in US models..

Originally posted by FULCRUM

Originally posted by intelgurl

[did i happen to mention that i work for raytheon?]

Well,

That explains the propaganda your giving us..

Heh, I was expecting a lot more of a slam than that...
you're actually being nice to me!
Spaseeba!

intelgurl

Originally posted by intelgurl

Heh, I was expecting a lot more of a slam than that...
you're actually being nice to me!
Spaseeba!

intelgurl

Well,

You having so cute avatar and all..

Makes my stone cold heart melt.. almost as fast as my girlfriend..

Besides..

That is cool..

Raytheon has some nice missiles / systems..

Now how about my queston?

Are you going to answer?

Originally posted by FULCRUM
And while you are working for Raytheon..

Would care to explain .....

And that their software isnt as good as in US models..

No, I probably wouldn't explain even if I knew all the answers - however, it's certainly public knowledge that the software for international export is different from that used on US service applications...

intelgurl

Originally posted by intelgurl

No, I probably wouldn't explain even if I knew all the answers - however, it's certainly public knowledge that the software for international export is different from that used on US service applications...

intelgurl

Damn,



But i also know that you downgrade AIM-9Ms seekers an software and make it so that these export missiles really cant stand anykind of counter measures.. or at least so that certain kind of a flare will have great success rate in fooling these..

also, although I don't necessarily agree with your opinions I must admit that you certainly have a diverse knowledge of these varied systems...
impressive~

intelgurl

[Edited on 15-11-2003 by intelgurl]

Well,

Hopefully things that i let out of my mouth are facts..

At the moment i think that they are..

And if they arent, i will sooner than later learn the real truht anyways..

But now tell me about AIM-54..

Why cant i find any info about AWG-9 on Raytheon products lits?

..

Wait..

The AN/AWG-9 has been replaced by AN/APG-71..

After Soviets / Russians got their hands on AWG-9s..



This is what im talking about..

Enemy getting hold of ones hardware..



Forces changes..

This has happened to Soviets also when they have lost first line non-downgraded machines..

Like that MiG-25P and pilot who defected to Japan..

Soviets had rebuild all MiG-25s after that to PD and PDS standarts..

Originally posted by FULCRUM
But now tell me about AIM-54..

Why cant i find any info about AWG-9 on Raytheon products lits?
Wait..
The AN/AWG-9 has been replaced by AN/APG-71..

Regarding the AIM-54 Phoenix... what do you need to know?

It's mainstream public knowledge...
Long range air to air, reliable kill range exceeds 184 km (c version) speed exceeds mach 5, proximity fuse, jam defeating software, fire as many as 6 almost simultaneously, forget about them and move on to next strike package...

The Phoenix is antiquated compared to the various demos being tested and it will be retired in the not too distant future.
An upgraded version of the AIM-120C AMRAAM with an increased range will likely be the Navy's pick.

The Navy is looking to develop a so-called Dual Range Missile that will replace not only AMRAAM but also the short-range AIM-9 Sidewinder. I understand the goal is to replace all existing Navy air-to-air missiles with a single weapon.

This new missile would have double the range of AMRAAM and twice the short-range performance of AIM-9X. However, developing a single missile that can achieve both long range and short-range maneuverability simultaneously will be quite a challenge - but I think R&D is up to the task.

Regarding the AWG-9 & APG-71:

The AWG-9 radar was on the first F-14's & the upgraded APG-71 built especially for the F-14D, both have the ability to detect, track, and attack targets at ranges exceeding 100 nm (205 km).

Although designed in the 1960s, the AWG-9 has been progressively upgraded with new software and remains a highly effective system albeit no longer used by the US.

The AWG-9 gave the Tomcat the ability to track up to 24 targets and attack any six of them simultaneously regardless of weather condition. The AWG-9 was also able to detect smaller craft operating at low altitudes, specifically cruise missiles.

The APG-71 has similar capabilities to the AWG-9; the APG-71's upgrades included improved microprocessing speed, expanded signal processor capacity, and enhanced mission flexibility.

I'm not in R&D or Marketing so I don't know about all Raytheon products - just the ones that go through our particular facility and the ones I can find catalogued specs on.

intelgurl


[Edited on 16-10-2003 by intelgurl]

intelgurl,

Thanks for making your post 'little' more informative..

I will study it later..

But now the fact for which i 'came' here..

USAF designations for 'captured' foreign aircrafts:

YF-110 -> MiG-21
YF-113 -> MiG-23

Originally posted by intelgurl

Regarding the AWG-9 & APG-71:

1) The AWG-9 gave the Tomcat the ability to track up to 24 targets and attack any six of them simultaneously regardless of weather condition. The AWG-9 was also able to detect smaller craft operating at low altitudes, specifically cruise missiles.

2) The APG-71 has similar capabilities to the AWG-9; the APG-71's upgrades included improved microprocessing speed, expanded signal processor capacity, and enhanced mission flexibility.

1) This is called as look down - shoot down.. basic feature in any modern fighter radar.
(F-14s primary mission is fleet air defence against USSR / Russian ALCM carrier aircrafts and missiles launched..)

2) APG-71 is a 'upgraded AWG-9, but actually it has inly one module from the AWG-9.. all the rest is totally new..

Originally posted by FULCRUM

1) This is called as look down - shoot down.. basic feature in any modern fighter radar.
(F-14s primary mission is fleet air defence against USSR / Russian ALCM carrier aircrafts and missiles launched..)

2) APG-71 is a 'upgraded AWG-9, but actually it has only one module from the AWG-9.. all the rest is totally new..

Correct on both... as usual, you did your homework....

intelgurl

Originally posted by FULCRUM
intelgurl,

Thanks for making your post 'little' more informative..

I will study it later..

But now the fact for which i 'came' here..

USAF designations for 'captured' foreign aircrafts:

YF-110 -> MiG-21
YF-113 -> MiG-23

But im wondering..

MiG-15
MiG-17
MiG-19?
MiG-25
MiG-29

SU-7/17/20/22
SU-25
SU-27

AN-12

Mi-8/17
Mi-24/25/35?

These airrcrafts USAF also has.. at least..

Some of these in quite large numbers.. like about or more than 30 MiG-29 FULCRUMs..

And also CIA maintains and operates number of AN-12s.. these were used in Afganistan as were also Mi-17s..

By the CIA..

What are theirs YF / YA / YH / YC numbers?



Btw,

Seekerof if you see this..

We had that argument that does or does not USAF have any SU-27s..

You claimed that they got some captured from Iraq..

To which i said that it is untrue.. which it is..

But now i have learned that USAF may well have bought some SU-27s from Belarus..

Damn you Alexander Lukashenko..