Did Iran shoot down their own F-14?

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


It did, but Iran was preparing for war with Iraq, which in all probability was going to include close in dog fighting, so they were looking for the best WVR fighter on the market, with a secondary role as an interceptor with long range armaments.




posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


They have a history of this, actually...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.nytimes.com...


They get a bit trigger happy when things get tense.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   

nwtrucker
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I've seen you post that before, re "cheating".

Doesn't the AIM-54, at that time, best of what was available, a factor in the decision as well?


The small number of MiG-25's downed by Israeli F-15's compared to the success of the F-14's flown by comparitively poorly trained Irainians suggests that perhaps the right choice was made if the prevailing mission requirement was stopping Foxbat reconnaissance penetrations.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

TDawgRex
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


On a tactical note, I would say that it is a good thing that they are trigger happy. If the US/NATO or Israel were to strike them they could send in some drones first just so the AAA lights up their radar and other systems which would pinpoint their guidance systems for the follow on (actual) attack.


What's with the hypothetical subjunctive? The F-14 was scrambled to follow a "UFO".

I presume the F-14 was not thinking about countermeasures.

But really this shows the division in Iran between the Revolutionary Guards and the normal government; supposedly the RG was running the defense of the nuclear plant and the air force was running the plane---no integrated air defense.

To the normal government, they're not making nuclear weapons---but it's the Revolutionary Guards---who don't report to the president, who probably are.

I wonder if the RG is paranoid enough to assume that the air force is infiltrated by Israeli agents or something?

But this shows that there's an easy way to make an attack: send lots of obvious low-value "scary" drones. RG uses up all their good quality ordnance.
edit on 5-11-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
It's worth noting the timing of the shoot down:
www.bbc.co.uk...

Two months after the explosions at the plant and two weeks after a head nuclear-scientist was assassinated.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   
Well in retrospect if American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses were this 'antsy' i suspect that that two rather tall buildings would still have been standing and many thousands( even two hours later and the death tool could have much much higher) of people would have still been alive; a compromised nuclear reactor is no laughing matter given just the potential contamination. Since this IS a conspiracy forum perhaps the 'UFO' changed the F-14's sensor data and led it into restricted airspace without it being aware of it? Perhaps not as plausible as 'trigger happy' air defense commanders but in a country that can not forgive breaches of security, they do have a death penalty, i am not sure if i would have risked my life in failing to act as my ROE specifies.

Remember that the Germans too laughed at the ineptitude of the Russians ( and others) while they were raping and killing their ways across Poland, the Ukraine and white Russia and look how that worked out for them. I thought that it was well understood that you should never let a people/nation believe that you hold them in contempt, even if you won every battle and occupy them completely, unless you mean to kill them all? As long as it's understood i guess you can continue to mock as perhaps the suicidal resistance fighters in so many countries have already figured out that they are meant to be killed off in the long term?

Given that we do not have the full story for 9-11 i think we should never expect one about these events either with mirth not being an appropriate sentiment in either case. Even if that wasn't the case no one appreciates foreigners making jokes about their

Stellar
edit on 6-11-2013 by StellarX because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


It did, but Iran was preparing for war with Iraq, which in all probability was going to include close in dog fighting, so they were looking for the best WVR fighter on the market, with a secondary role as an interceptor with long range armaments.


There are plenty of fighters with short range capabilities that could be bought from others nations which were equally interested in Iranian oil; the F-14's may not have been entirely unmatched but they were certainly premier tactical assets. The fact that the US national security apparatus could at that time have thought it sensible to allow a foreign power, which were only maintaining internal control by brutally suppressing it's citizens, to gain access to them in my mind speaks volumes as to how much they really cared/care about US national security when it goes against the general aim for guaranteeing a corporate/monopoly based capitalist world order; the US serves as a global policeman but serving a different interest than is imagined by American citizens.

But we knew that, right?

Stellar



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   

StellarX
Well in retrospect if American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses were this 'antsy' i suspect that that two rather tall buildings would still have been standing and many thousands( even two hours later and the death tool could have much much higher) of people would have still been alive;


Comparing fighter jets moving at high speeds over highly protected airspace, to commercial airliners flying over high traffic airspace restricted at certain altitudes is a bit unfair isn't it?

Tell you what, how about you take a plane and fly over Groom Lake and test the 'American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses' I think that's a fairer comparison.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   

majesticgent
Comparing fighter jets moving at high speeds over highly protected airspace, to commercial airliners flying over high traffic airspace restricted at certain altitudes is a bit unfair isn't it?

Tell you what, how about you take a plane and fly over Groom Lake and test the 'American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses' I think that's a fairer comparison.


You raise a good point and i agree; the US national security state would probably have reacted much more efficiently had it's national security infrastructure been under actual threat that day; as it turns out it was civilian infrastructure destroyed and lives lost so perhaps that best explains what happened and what didn't.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


I track with out up to the Brutally oppressing it's citizens. There was freedoms and flourishing, as well, under the Shah.

The current regime's oppression if it's citizens, far worse, unless I'm mistaken, makes your views of it largely academic, IMO.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


Good point. As Zaph has posted before, the F-15 and F-14 were actually pretty close to each other, WVR. The AIM-54 actually may have made the F-14 a pretty decent interceptor as well. The AIM-54's outrageous range offsetting the F-14's lower altitude capability?

As with the F-22, it's BVR ability to thin down the opposition outweighs any area of WVR advantage an SU or EF might enjoy. That general concept might apply, at that time with the F-14 as well.

Just a guess, I'm just a fan.

What say you Zaph??
edit on 6-11-2013 by nwtrucker because: grammar



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   

StellarX

majesticgent
Comparing fighter jets moving at high speeds over highly protected airspace, to commercial airliners flying over high traffic airspace restricted at certain altitudes is a bit unfair isn't it?

Tell you what, how about you take a plane and fly over Groom Lake and test the 'American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses' I think that's a fairer comparison.


You raise a good point and i agree; the US national security state would probably have reacted much more efficiently had it's national security infrastructure been under actual threat that day; as it turns out it was civilian infrastructure destroyed and lives lost so perhaps that best explains what happened and what didn't.

Stellar


GMAFB.

If Osama bin Laden's group had been flying military aircraft in an attack against exactly the same targets there would have been a huge response, obviously.

And attacking the Pentagon, and potentially the Capitol certainly counts as "national security infrastructure under actual threat".

There wasn't a huge military response because the terrorists infiltrated some of the thousands of civilian flights every day, and historically hijackers had not previously engaged in suicidal military attacks with the aircraft but were interested in media-attention to political messages.

There's too much juvenile anti-USA hate to parallel juvenile pro-USA jingoism.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   

nwtrucker
reply to post by _Del_
 


Good point. As Zaph has posted before, the F-15 and F-14 were actually pretty close to each other, WVR. The AIM-54 actually may have made the F-14 a pretty decent interceptor as well. The AIM-54's outrageous range offsetting the F-14's lower altitude capability?


For the early models of the -14 and -15, the -15 definitely had/has the edge WVR. The TF30 engines in the Tomcat were brutal (the early F100's in the F-15 and -16 weren't terribly reliable either, but the problems of the TF30's were completely unacceptable. With the F110 engines, the Tomcat really shone. It still probably cedes something to the F-15 WVR, but the difference was night and day).

The AWG-9 and Phoenix combo was hard to beat. Even now, it'd be fairly formidable -- in the early 70's it was earth-shattering. Being able to see (and shoot) the bad guy before he can see you, is a boon. They could see large targets 100 miles out. That's about twice as far as the contemporary F-15A's APG-63. You could also use a single Tomcat as a primitive AWACS of sorts because of it's large wattage and processing power -- not possible with the F-15 at that time. Lighting up a formation of Tu-22's from a 100 miles out and making them turn tail without having to fire a missile is something you couldn't do with an F-15 at the time either.

As an interceptor it was peerless for it's era. The F-15 has been developed over the past 40yrs, obviously. It has a better claim to a multi-role capability (though this was eventually offered for the F-14 as well), it would have been cheaper, been better WVR, and parts would have been easier to come by after the embargo (but that wasn't foreseeable). But as an interceptor and a complement to the IIAF F-4's, I think it was a fine choice.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


Did Iran receive those F-110s for the F-14s ?



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
To be fair they have good reasons to be paranoid.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   
It takes a genius SnF



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   

nwtrucker
reply to post by _Del_
 


Did Iran receive those F-110s for the F-14s ?


They all had the TF30's.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:46 PM
link   

StellarX
Well in retrospect if American fighters pilots or anti aircraft defenses were this 'antsy' i suspect that that two rather tall buildings would still have been standing and many thousands( even two hours later and the death tool could have much much higher) of people would have still been alive; a compromised nuclear reactor is no laughing matter given just the potential contamination. Since this IS a conspiracy forum perhaps the 'UFO' changed the F-14's sensor data and led it into restricted airspace without it being aware of it? Perhaps not as plausible as 'trigger happy' air defense commanders but in a country that can not forgive breaches of security, they do have a death penalty, i am not sure if i would have risked my life in failing to act as my ROE specifies.

Remember that the Germans too laughed at the ineptitude of the Russians ( and others) while they were raping and killing their ways across Poland, the Ukraine and white Russia and look how that worked out for them. I thought that it was well understood that you should never let a people/nation believe that you hold them in contempt, even if you won every battle and occupy them completely, unless you mean to kill them all? As long as it's understood i guess you can continue to mock as perhaps the suicidal resistance fighters in so many countries have already figured out that they are meant to be killed off in the long term?

Given that we do not have the full story for 9-11 i think we should never expect one about these events either with mirth not being an appropriate sentiment in either case. Even if that wasn't the case no one appreciates foreigners making jokes about their

Stellar
edit on 6-11-2013 by StellarX because: (no reason given)


This IS what actually happened on 9/11 Stell: www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:33 AM
link   

nwtrucker
I track with out up to the Brutally oppressing it's citizens. There was freedoms and flourishing, as well, under the Shah.


Not as far as i know and while i wont paint him as the devil himself the people did not want him; if democracy is crushed so often by the same agency in so many different places you do get the impression that they do not care about what vast majority of people in any given country wants. Freedoms were NOT flourishing under the Shah and since he crushed all democratic opposition the ONLY route left open to the common people were to express themselves trough religion thus giving their religious leaders more and more power. The US national security state has for a long time been actively creating what it purports to wish to eradicate.


The current regime's oppression if it's citizens, far worse, unless I'm mistaken, makes your views of it largely academic, IMO.


People will accept a great deal of suffering and general pains to gain and, sometimes, maintain a sense of freedom/national independence and while i do not know if the suffering is more or less than it was under the Shah what we do know is that the people only supports the current government ( backed in good part by the religious leaders) in as far as it seems to resist American dominance; like most people anywhere on the planet people prefer local tyrants to foreign one's.

If Iran was an isolated case one could argue in many different directions but the fact is that this has happened on different continents, with people of different faiths and different cultures&skin colors with the only constant seemingly being the general agenda of the US national security interventionist.

William Blum's " Killing Hope" sums up the US foreign policy strategy pretty well and if many people the world seems lost in hopeless infighting and general flailing of the arms we should understand that this is what 'success' looks like for the people behind the interventions.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 03:37 AM
link   

ATSWATCHER
This IS what actually happened on 9/11 Stell: www.youtube.com...


Anyone who claims to know what actually happened on 9-11 should in my opinion be ignored; being confused ( despite much effort to be less so) is a much more appropriate state of mind and i don't expect to be relieved of feeling that way any year soon... I will let you know what i think if i ever get to watch more 9-11 'documentaries'...

Stellar





top topics
 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join