First privately-owned Su-27 Flankers in the US
Ewan,
Much of Farzad Bishop and Tom Cooper's information comes from emigree Iranian pilots. In the Osprey Air Combat "Iranian F4 Phantoms in Combat" tome they include a mission account from an IRIAF F4 pilot where he uses a combination of APX-80 Combat Tree and the TISEO to gain pre-merge advantage against a flight of 2 MiG-21s and 2 Mig-23s. According to the same book "Some 50 jets were also equipped with the ASX-1 TISEO electro-optical sensor,and, crucially, more than 80 had been fitted with the state of the art Combat Tree IFF."
What is easy to forget is that, pre-Revolution, Iran was the leading importer of US kit. Indeed, the Bank of Iran had provided funding to keep Grumman afloat during the F-14 programme. Given the importance of Iran's position (next to the USSR and in the crucible of the ME) she pretty much got what she asked for, including TISEO, Combat Tree and Zot Boxes. If the Revolution hadn't happened she would have received substantial numbers of F-16s to replace the F-5s.
Much of Farzad Bishop and Tom Cooper's information comes from emigree Iranian pilots. In the Osprey Air Combat "Iranian F4 Phantoms in Combat" tome they include a mission account from an IRIAF F4 pilot where he uses a combination of APX-80 Combat Tree and the TISEO to gain pre-merge advantage against a flight of 2 MiG-21s and 2 Mig-23s. According to the same book "Some 50 jets were also equipped with the ASX-1 TISEO electro-optical sensor,and, crucially, more than 80 had been fitted with the state of the art Combat Tree IFF."
What is easy to forget is that, pre-Revolution, Iran was the leading importer of US kit. Indeed, the Bank of Iran had provided funding to keep Grumman afloat during the F-14 programme. Given the importance of Iran's position (next to the USSR and in the crucible of the ME) she pretty much got what she asked for, including TISEO, Combat Tree and Zot Boxes. If the Revolution hadn't happened she would have received substantial numbers of F-16s to replace the F-5s.
My, my Ewan, a tad sensitive aren’t we old chap?!!!
My point is that from the late eighties China first and then Russia was an increasingly important economic and arms supplier to Iran. The Chinese are always particularly keen to get their hands on technology and Russian and Israeli sources have independently confirmed that Pakistan supplied China with an F-16.
Up until 1988 Iran was still at war with Iraq, and Moscow had very close ties with Baghdad well beyond then. It is a documented fact that the Iranians were extremely concious that any exploitations they permitted the Russians to conduct would generate intelligence that would eventually make its way into the hands or the Iraqi Air Force - they therefore did *not* allow Russia access to the F-14. In fact, throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Russians were supplying Iraq with new ECM and EW systems to counter the Tomcat/Phoenix combo!
As I said, Russia may have accessed an F-14 in more recent history, but it is not the case that they allowed Russia access to the F-14 in the 1980s as you originally claimed (along with the doctored photo that you also clearly believed to be true, and your rumour about an anecdote to back it up nicely).
As for China exploiting the Tomcat/Phoenix, I would once again ask you to provide some evidence to support this. You are correct that China is very enthusiastic about exploitation work, but you neglect to recognise that in the vast majority of cases, they are then equally as good at cloning and copying said technology. There is not a shred of evidence to support that idea that they copied anything from the F-14, the AWG-9, or the AIM-54A, which would be surprising if they had actually exploited it. Whatever the case, the onus is on you to show that they did get it, and I am afraid that throwing your arms up in the air and saying 'well, they must have!' doesn't cut the mustard.
Certainly the vast majority of the USN F-14 guys I’ve met have also assumed that to be the case. Moreover, there were specific mods done on some AIM-54 components based on that assumption.
. Assuming that your capes are compromised (or will be) when your friend becomes your enemy is a pretty elementary position to take!However, that assumption does not constitute evidence. That seems to be a tricky concept for you to grasp, given your emphatic position on the matter.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one old chap.
Suffice to say that the USN 'assumptions' were made for very good reasons.
Suffice to say the AIM-54C programme introduced some new technical aspects for very good reasons.
Neither of us will be able to get any open source evidence that the F-14/AIM-54A was or was not compromised. Likewise, you won't find photographs of Pakistan F-16s or Israeli Lavi in China. However, I know what I believe!!
Shall we now move on!
Regards,
MM
Suffice to say that the USN 'assumptions' were made for very good reasons.
Suffice to say the AIM-54C programme introduced some new technical aspects for very good reasons.
Neither of us will be able to get any open source evidence that the F-14/AIM-54A was or was not compromised. Likewise, you won't find photographs of Pakistan F-16s or Israeli Lavi in China. However, I know what I believe!!
Shall we now move on!
Regards,
MM
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the 80s, I was at Davis Monthan, the boneyard doing a tour when tney still did tours. I was with a magazine at the time and got a young aiiirman assigned to drive me around the boneyard. It was full of beautiful F-8s in navy and marine squadron colors along with F-4s, A-4s and F-100s, F-105s.
We turned the corner and there was an F-14 in a desert scheme up on blocks. I asked the airman what was the story with the desert F-14,. He said, "What f-14?"
I said, "That F-14 right there", pointing to the obvious.
He said, "I see nothing."
I thought and said, "I would imagine that one can not take pictures of things one can not see."
"NO SIR, you definitely can not take pictures of things you can't see."
The F-14 was one never delivered to the Shah.
We went on our tour and near the fence sat maybe 3-5 D-21 drones. He looked at me and simply said, "No. we can't see them either.":
We turned the corner and there was an F-14 in a desert scheme up on blocks. I asked the airman what was the story with the desert F-14,. He said, "What f-14?"
I said, "That F-14 right there", pointing to the obvious.
He said, "I see nothing."
I thought and said, "I would imagine that one can not take pictures of things one can not see."
"NO SIR, you definitely can not take pictures of things you can't see."
The F-14 was one never delivered to the Shah.
We went on our tour and near the fence sat maybe 3-5 D-21 drones. He looked at me and simply said, "No. we can't see them either.":
wileydog3
I had a similar situation at DM Boneyard. late 80s
I was on a "Photo Tour" for a publishing group in London.
Liased all the visits myself.
Turned up at DM for a Base and Boneyard photo session.
Reported to the Public Affairs office and was assigned a very young
femail Airforce Officer as my Driver/Escort.
It quickly became evident she was new to the Base!!
On arriving at the Bone yard she said "where do you want to go"?
Having toured a few times before I had a good idea of the Layout.
It was "Open house".
Did the whole place ,took 4 Hours.
The dodgy bit was like yourself coming across the D21 Drones all lined up.
My escort didn't seem to realise the significance of the Drones.
So nothing ventured I photographed them to full advantage.
Kept quiet on my return to the Office.
I am sure she would have been in deep poo if it was known I had Photographed the Drones.
I kept the "Slides" of the Drones under wraps for many years ,not telling anyone I had pics. of them.
Noticed on a much later visit they were in the Public domain, so feel ok now relating this event.
On reflection I feel a little guilty at taking advantage of the situation, but at the time I only thought of getting Pics. as and when possible.
OPF
I was on a "Photo Tour" for a publishing group in London.
Liased all the visits myself.
Turned up at DM for a Base and Boneyard photo session.
Reported to the Public Affairs office and was assigned a very young
femail Airforce Officer as my Driver/Escort.
It quickly became evident she was new to the Base!!
On arriving at the Bone yard she said "where do you want to go"?
Having toured a few times before I had a good idea of the Layout.
It was "Open house".
Did the whole place ,took 4 Hours.
The dodgy bit was like yourself coming across the D21 Drones all lined up.
My escort didn't seem to realise the significance of the Drones.
So nothing ventured I photographed them to full advantage.
Kept quiet on my return to the Office.
I am sure she would have been in deep poo if it was known I had Photographed the Drones.
I kept the "Slides" of the Drones under wraps for many years ,not telling anyone I had pics. of them.
Noticed on a much later visit they were in the Public domain, so feel ok now relating this event.
On reflection I feel a little guilty at taking advantage of the situation, but at the time I only thought of getting Pics. as and when possible.
OPF
Last edited by Old Photo.Fanatic; 18th May 2009 at 17:02.
I wonder nowadays whether given a sample of the opposition's most up to date fighter you would be more interested in its radar/ecm/eccm etc - if there are there of course - rather than the airframe and its performance?
With an electronic map. so to speak, you could prepare your counter measures and find the system's weak points
With an electronic map. so to speak, you could prepare your counter measures and find the system's weak points
Brewster
True indeed, but that's something conducted by the US Government's clandestine FME programme elements.The EW exploitations are undertaken by those with access to black programmes, which is naturally a very limited number of people.
By contrast, these Su-27s are intended to induce in the average CAF pilot the infamous 'buck fever', and then to teach them BFM and ACM against the Flanker.
True indeed, but that's something conducted by the US Government's clandestine FME programme elements.The EW exploitations are undertaken by those with access to black programmes, which is naturally a very limited number of people.
By contrast, these Su-27s are intended to induce in the average CAF pilot the infamous 'buck fever', and then to teach them BFM and ACM against the Flanker.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a good idea. With the hawks of 100 Sqn getting close to their end of service life and the F3 being axed too, it could be a tad tricky to find RED AIR in the future. This is going to be a real issue as the FJ fleets become multi roll and the OCU and sqn training syllabi demand radar threats more and more. Even the Lakenheath boys and girls will run out of patience if we are persistent in asking them for a radar/agile threat twice a day every day.
Hawk 128 with a ECM pod under it and rear crew to run the kit? Ex-ANG F16s? Or we could loose the capability altogether. And before the AT and SH guys get on board, 100 Sqn trains the troops in the art of CAS too. If we combined that with the capabilities provided by FRAs Falcons, we'd be well placed for excellent training opportunities at home.
Hawk 128 with a ECM pod under it and rear crew to run the kit? Ex-ANG F16s? Or we could loose the capability altogether. And before the AT and SH guys get on board, 100 Sqn trains the troops in the art of CAS too. If we combined that with the capabilities provided by FRAs Falcons, we'd be well placed for excellent training opportunities at home.
Gashman,
No complaints from this SH mate. The Ton provide a valuable aggressor role for the SH and AT communities too, not to mention escort when training demands it. It's not a skill that is in much demand at the moment, but, like RF EW trg, it is perishable and one cannot discount the possibility of fighting an enemy that really wants to play one day.
Ex-ANG F-16s would be fun (but probably a little dear....), Hawk 128 is ok for the agile threat, but no use for BVR trg. What would be good would be a large fleet of radar equipped FJs that are doing f**k all for the foreseeable future...hmm, what's the GPTN for Coningsby again?
No complaints from this SH mate. The Ton provide a valuable aggressor role for the SH and AT communities too, not to mention escort when training demands it. It's not a skill that is in much demand at the moment, but, like RF EW trg, it is perishable and one cannot discount the possibility of fighting an enemy that really wants to play one day.
Ex-ANG F-16s would be fun (but probably a little dear....), Hawk 128 is ok for the agile threat, but no use for BVR trg. What would be good would be a large fleet of radar equipped FJs that are doing f**k all for the foreseeable future...hmm, what's the GPTN for Coningsby again?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FRA guys can produce spikes as well as jamming. I think the hawk with a similar pod and an operator in the boot could do a pretty good job. Painted black with big red stars on them of course. I'm guessing that the platform has enough tech on board to be able to be in the right place at the right time, and loiter for a while. Slap on a few radar reflectors to mimic the size of a Flanker at range and jobs a good -un.
A proper red fleet. Too expensive for what we have in the pot? Yup. Will it stop us using £68m jets as self help red air? Yup. Will that allow future MR sqns to be more effective for the hours flown? Possibly. How important is a red asset to other parts of the RAF? Interesting to hear about the RW point of view. Are the sims good enough that we can do without? I personally don't think so.
A proper red fleet. Too expensive for what we have in the pot? Yup. Will it stop us using £68m jets as self help red air? Yup. Will that allow future MR sqns to be more effective for the hours flown? Possibly. How important is a red asset to other parts of the RAF? Interesting to hear about the RW point of view. Are the sims good enough that we can do without? I personally don't think so.
Gash,
Agreed that FRA can provide a valuable trg resource (used them a lot, even into the merge when other assets have cried off...) but just spiking with a pod only provides half of the training benefit. A couple of hooters running hot is a great way to corrall assets to a point in space that you want them. However, the advantage of using a "live" asset is the ability to get a hot debrief off the user to gauge the effectiveness of the evasion manoeuvre flown and the CMs employed. The RW sim is excellent at teaching basic EW (inc BVR A-A) and has a number of threat systems modelled. It is ok at teaching post merge manoeuvring, but has a limited vertical visual system so only flat fights work.
Agreed that FRA can provide a valuable trg resource (used them a lot, even into the merge when other assets have cried off...) but just spiking with a pod only provides half of the training benefit. A couple of hooters running hot is a great way to corrall assets to a point in space that you want them. However, the advantage of using a "live" asset is the ability to get a hot debrief off the user to gauge the effectiveness of the evasion manoeuvre flown and the CMs employed. The RW sim is excellent at teaching basic EW (inc BVR A-A) and has a number of threat systems modelled. It is ok at teaching post merge manoeuvring, but has a limited vertical visual system so only flat fights work.
