FLIR Video showing shoot down of F-15S over Yemen

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Has there been actual confirmation it was shot down, or just that it was hit? Because all I've found so far is that it was hit.

The video does seem to show the plane still traveling at a good clip after the impact that causes the debris to fly. Didn't look like a direct to my untrained eye.

It almost looks like the missile hits the rear of the wing and fuselage causing it to break up and ricochet away from the F-15 before detonating effectively. I also think if the flares where released just a second or two earlier, they would have been enough to divert it away.

Thinking into this further (and I really shouldn't because I'm no expert whatsoever) that missile may have already picked up the flare as a target but the F-15 was already in the way being the original target...... hence the failure to detonate/explode efficiently .... just thinking out loud mostly.

I still say it landed..... from what we see.

Is this not that F15 that lost a wing and landed 20 years ago for Israel?

Edit To ADD:

NM
That was a collision not a missile. Still, this one could have flown for a while after it was hit based off that incident.

a reply to: mightmight

Looks like the F-15 went to full afterburner and dropped flares when it detected the missile. Shockingly flares didnt help.

Warhead didn't even blink, probably because the afterburners were 'hotter', Pilot panicked.

originally posted by: Catch_a_Fire
It almost looks like the missile hits the rear of the wing and fuselage causing it to break up and ricochet away from the F-15 before detonating effectively. I also think if the flares where released just a second or two earlier, they would have been enough to divert it away.

Thinking into this further (and I really shouldn't because I'm no expert whatsoever) that missile may have already picked up the flare as a target but the F-15 was already in the way being the original target...... hence the failure to detonate/efficiently .... just thinking out loud mostly.

I still say it landed..... from what we see.

The collision alone is enough, shower of hot sparks (debris) from the impact is visible, too. Warheads are small charges, not readily visible in all cases.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Zaphod58

Like isn't the gist to have the flares be the hotter signature?

To answer your question, not with full afterburners lit. Bad move on pilots part.
By naked eye, the engines appeared on FLIR footage as hot a heat source as the flares. Pilot is supposed to reduce his heat signature, not increase it.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: Barnalby

The second most important part is removing yourself from the seeker field of view and then getting out of dodge.

Wouldn't getting out of its field of view require some sharp maneuvers which are generally easier to make if you don't speed up? Legit question, I'm not a pilot.

It depends on too many factors to say absolutely, but generally speaking there's a nice sweet spot in the middle of your EM diagram. Too fast and Mach conditions may restrict your ability to turn. Too slow, you can't turn and fly at the same time.

Pulling G's bleeds energy very, very quickly, and you want to keep energy/speed up. More g=more drag=less speed=less lift and it starts becoming a bad time. So the more thrust you're pouring on in a turn, the better you are able to manage that. Best turn rate for the F-15 is probably between .7-.8 at sea level. But you need a lot of thrust to stay as close to there as possible once you get into the turn because the drag increases exponentially compared to level flight.

Sometimes you hear people talk about sustained turn rate or g. It is just the rate or g you can turn at a given weight, altitude, Mach number where your available lift and thrust let you turn maintaining that rate indefinitely (ie without losing airspeed).

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: Barnalby

The second most important part is removing yourself from the seeker field of view and then getting out of dodge.

Wouldn't getting out of its field of view require some sharp maneuvers which are generally easier to make if you don't speed up? Legit question, I'm not a pilot.

It depends on too many factors to say absolutely, but generally speaking there's a nice sweet spot in the middle of your EM diagram. Too fast and Mach conditions may restrict your ability to turn. Too slow, you can't turn and fly at the same time.

Pulling G's bleeds energy very, very quickly, and you want to keep energy/speed up. More g=more drag=less speed=less lift and it starts becoming a bad time. So the more thrust you're pouring on in a turn, the better you are able to manage that. Best turn rate for the F-15 is probably between .7-.8 at sea level. But you need a lot of thrust to stay as close to there as possible once you get into the turn because the drag increases exponentially compared to level flight.

Sometimes you hear people talk about sustained turn rate or g. It is just the rate or g you can turn at a given weight, altitude, Mach number where your available lift and thrust let you turn maintaining that rate indefinitely (ie without losing airspeed).

For sure I get that you can't try to make sharp turns if you're going so slowly that if you make such a turn you're gonna stall. If you were in a hot combat zone, wouldn't you generally want to keep your speed up around your optimal maneuvering speed at all times?

originally posted by: intrptr
... the engines appeared on FLIR footage as hot a heat source as the flares. Pilot is supposed to reduce his heat signature, not increase it.

Means little without knowing what part of the spectrum the seeker head is optimized for and/or what the flares are optimized for.

a reply to: face23785

Yes, but it's not something that can be done without a lot of training until it becomes second nature.

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: intrptr
... the engines appeared on FLIR footage as hot a heat source as the flares. Pilot is supposed to reduce his heat signature, not increase it.

Means little without knowing what part of the spectrum the seeker head is optimized for and/or what the flares are optimized for.

Seeker ignored flares entirely, thats how I know.

a reply to: face23785

Yes, but the point here is if the pilot is going to pull 7g's in a break, that isn't sustainable. So he needs more thrust to overcome the higher drag while in the break so he can maintain that high turn rate long enough to get out of the seeker's field of view. The load factor goes up when you pull g's, too, so you have a much higher stall speed than in level flight. So you need more speed to maintain controlled flight. So you have exponentially increasing drag and need more speed to maintain controlled flight all at the same time.
So your question about is it easier to make a sharp maneuver without speeding up, is sort of "no". You need the higher thrust and speed to turn tighter.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: intrptr
... the engines appeared on FLIR footage as hot a heat source as the flares. Pilot is supposed to reduce his heat signature, not increase it.

Means little without knowing what part of the spectrum the seeker head is optimized for and/or what the flares are optimized for.

Seeker ignored flares entirely, thats how I know.

We know that from a few frames of video at the terminal phase of flight?

a reply to: mightmight
Jesus Christ op, please for the love of God learn how to embed a video!!! even if you do not see the button or are unable to access it, just type the code in brackets, or ask a mod if you are incapable of doing it for whatever technical reason.

I found the original source and have translated it here.

Al-Massira Al- Harbi
Follow Up January 9 Al-Masri Net: The military media distributed pictures and scenes for a moment the injury of an F-15 aircraft belonging to the Saudi-American aggression at dawn today in the atmosphere of the capital Sana'a.

The scenes and pictures appear at the moment when the air defenses of the aircraft are targeted and hit by a surface-to-air missile.

The same site also has the images and video of the wreckage of the Tornado that was shot down over the weekend.
Scenes of the wreckage of the plane that was shot down in Saada "Photos + video"

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: intrptr
... the engines appeared on FLIR footage as hot a heat source as the flares. Pilot is supposed to reduce his heat signature, not increase it.

Means little without knowing what part of the spectrum the seeker head is optimized for and/or what the flares are optimized for.

Seeker ignored flares entirely, thats how I know.

We know that from a few frames of video at the terminal phase of flight?

You're not asking how, either. Besides, I know if I went all into time stamps, screen captures and analysis, people like you would still go but, how do you know?

Unusually, in this case, we have good video of the entire sequence.

a reply to: worldstarcountry


There is more to this video then just that. They even film the parts from the downed F-15. In the original one.

I'm impressed how quickly you bring us this stuff.

Thank you.


We had a stab blow off once, but they wouldn't tell maintenance exactly what happened.

The 15 is a very robust jet, but it's still a jet. On average any single missile can take it out.

No idea how fast it was going but the FLIR pod knows. Pilot might have been going to fast to eject, and obiously made up his mind to get the plane home because he went full burn.

I wonder if he hit the _____ switch?

a reply to: intrptr

That was my thought...he looks to have realized the missile was incoming late panicked and went full blast on the throttle while trying to get flares out...doing all the right things but too late...if it had been earlier the afterburner effects wouldn't be as bad and he also could have eased up after having gotten away from the flares.

a reply to: spy66

They show wreckage. The video I watched showed nothing which is easily identifiable as being from an F-15. They could easily have filmed the wreckage of the Tornado that crashed and claimed it was the F-15. Still not conclusive proof that they shot it down.

a reply to: spy66
I believe you are getting two different incidents mixed up. The one of the wreckage was from a British manufactured jet earlier in the weekend. Also, note that the translation from the original source referred to the F-15 being injured and not shot down. This could very well indicate the Eagle did in fact make it home without hitting the ground. Man, those things are beast! No wonder the world prefers American equipment.

In any case, my post on this page I have listed the original source for both of these incidents as reported by Yemeni media, with their original videos and photos included. The link is already translated, just visit them for the original information from Yemen. No third party adding their own interpretations or bias.

On an unrelated note, if these guys who wage war in sandals can give us this kind of video, I find it hard to accept the claims that the Russians were attacked by 13 advanced drones from state sponsors and are unable to give us more than the wooden and plastic duct tape hobby shop garage drones as evidence of credibility of the story. Especially considering they claimed to have hacked six of them.