Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Royal Navy F-35B compared with anything

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Royal Navy F-35B compared with anything

Old 9th Oct 2018, 15:53
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
Royal Navy F-35B compared with anything

PN,

Unless they are supplied wholesale as in Vietnam they could soon be shot out.
It is my understanding the North Vietnamese were out of stock of SAM's at the end of the War when the B-52's went to downtown Hanoi and other hi-value targets.

The Buffs lost quite a number of aircraft in the process but in the end they pretty much had a free hand with not much resistance.

That encouraged the North Vietnamese to get over what shape the negotiating table was and them do some serious bargaining.


http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineA...linebacker.pdf

Last edited by SASless; 9th Oct 2018 at 16:10.
SASless is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2018, 17:24
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,120
Winged Walrus,

Yes - it always has bewildered me that some experts viewed the Argentinian ability to go supersonic as a ‘war winner’.

I get that faster aircraft throw weapons further...but not every aircraft in their inventory was a Mirage or Dagger and if they weren’t going to be throwing semi active shots then it really is a case of ‘So f-ing what!?!’. I guess they could blow through quicker...if they wanted to be on the wrong side of the CAP.

The ability to go supersonic somewhere near the Falklands seemed to me to be a good way of making the fuel calcs on the way home more fun - other than that only really relevant in the Top Trumps world of Jeremy Clarkson does air combat.

9L - now if that was not a game changer it was certainly close!
orca is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2018, 17:35
  #3 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,646
SASLess, indeed, when they went from single launcher to quad and used salvo and blind fire it was much a 'Brock's Benefit '.. I wonder what it did for Soviet war reserves. Did they Soviets resupply from surplus early MOD stocks or pull from their own war reserves? Turnover is good for war stock but I wonder if then ran theirs down. Also I don't know if they upped their sites to quad launchers too.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2018, 17:36
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,134
Running outta missiles

Salute!

@SAS, et al

The Vee definitely had problems at the end of Linebacker II, the "Twelve" Days of Christmas in 1972.

Flew three missions to Hanoi that battle and last one was a hoot. We had hit a wharehouse that alledgedly had missiles and apparently done good.

My last mission was a "sky puke" 28 or 29 December( aka Loran drop on the wing of a Double Ugly due to bad wx. Flight ahead of us tried visual and I have the audio of that goatrope). SA-2's were launched, but few guided and some went into a "chinese pinwheel" right after launch.

So our thots were they had used so many that they did not have enuf time to fully inspect and prep the new ones right from the crates. Worked for me, as I had seen one explode right in front of me just a few days before.

I would take all the PR about the missiles with a pinch of salt, except the AIM-9L ( ask the Falkland Harrier folks and Israeli pilots about that).

Gums sends...
gums is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2018, 23:33
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
Why was Ho Chi Miinh's house not bombed....there was a Command Bunker adjacent to the thing in Hanoi?
SASless is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 01:49
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,134
Salute!

Many things were off limits in Hanoi.

We especially did not want to hit our buddies in prison. They even marked the hotel that Joan Baez was staying at.

We did not wish to "inflame" the Vee at that point, and all we wanted was to get our friends outta jail and then get outta the war.

On my visual mission, we rolled in from about 20K and this was my tgt:



We had 2 x 2000 pounders, two drops, two jamming pods and two AIM-9E. Only planes that did not refuel in or out.

Gums sends...
gums is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 02:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,597
Gums, the father of one of my buddies when I was in college was a BUFF pilot during Linebacker II (I think is was the 12 days of Christmas, 40 plus year memory is a bit fuzzy). On their first mission he figured it would be, ah, interesting since the NV had been preparing their SAM reception unimpeded for some time, so he brought a small cassette tape recorder along and turned it on during the bomb run (apparently a pretty big no-no).
He played that tape for a group of us Aero Engineering students once - pretty sobering stuff. IIRC they lost 3 Buffs from his flight on that mission According to him, the planners did some pretty dumb things on that mission with countermeasures but I won't elaborate.
One thing that really stuck with me - after they'd turned for home and were out of harm's way, someone said 'I sure hope we don't have to go through that again'...
tdracer is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 07:15
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,120
This thread is brilliant. We started with F-35 and Harrier. We’ve got onto Hanoi and BUFFs and Linebacker without the (I thought inevitable) PPRuNe carping about thread drift. (A thread without drift is just a series of cut and pastes!) Well done us.

Gums, why 2 x 2000lb weapons? What was the target? (Or target construction...)
orca is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 08:42
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: EUSSR
Posts: 390
OT: Interesting how the receiving end promulgates a different tale. Extrapolating the B-52 loss rate (of course claiming a higher loss rate than in the article) and coming to the conclusion that the US would run out of B-52s in a fairly short amount of time had it chosen to continue the bombing compaign.
wondering is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 11:10
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
orca, sure looks like Gums' DMPI is the concentration of railway lines and switch-points at the entrance/exit of that railyard?

OAP
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 14:45
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Up the creek
Posts: 49
orca -
9L if not a game changer then at least a 'God send', especially when only carrying two! Far cry from F-15X!

I remember a very famous photo of a GR3 blasting along at about the same height as my shoe laces, that captured a photo almost looking up at an ARG soldier trying to swing a shoulder launched SAM in his direction.

gums -
were you flying A-7? Were Wild Weasels in on your mission?
Wingless Walrus is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 16:24
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 350/3 Compton
Age: 72
Posts: 259
I remember a very famous photo of a GR3 blasting along at about the same height as my shoe laces, that captured a photo almost looking up at an ARG soldier trying to swing a shoulder launched SAM in his direction.

What, this one?
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
Bpipe.pdf (251.1 KB, 430 views)
Mogwi is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 04:02
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,134
Salute!

First, TNX to those tolerating the war stories of an old attack pilot. I had almost 2500 hours in "A" planes compared to 700 or 800 in "F" jets, and none of those hours were in combat getting shot at.

Secondly, sorry about thread drift, but I flew one of the best fuel-to-miles-to-payload attack jets ever built, if not THE BEST. The SLUF. I have learned a lot about the Harrier on this thread, but I have to vote for the Stubbie for range and mission effectiveness My close friend who flew the Harrier in RAF and the Sluf ( A-7) also votes for the Stubbie ( aka F-35). I have a hard time with a Harrier taking an equal load for an equal distance and getting home with enuf gas for a go-around and second try.

Third, someone mentioned the new and greatest SAM threat. From experience, and several here have that, the Pk of the ground was 100%, and Pk of the best enema missile was maybe 30% on a good day and stoopid attack pilot.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Before thread cutoff, I answer some folks. NOW Recovering from a major hurricane that hit 50 miles from me, and all we lost was electricity for a few hours due to new equipment the power company put in to help in emergencies!! LOL.
- My wing flew A-7D Slufs. 354th TFW. Weasels right down the flightline were there all the time.
- We carried 2 x 2000 lb MK-84 for first 7 or 8 missions. Then our high purple decided to count bombs versus effectiveness, so we carried 12 x Mk-82 500 pounders and no tanks the last 3 or 4 days (same loadout as a WW2 B-17). Had to refuel on the way in just to top off, and came back easily.
- My aimpoint photo shows the split in the rail line before the main railyard. The line came from across the river to the north. I was "green 16" ( 356th Green Demons) in the gaggle, and #15 was our Ops Officer. We were assigned to hit the fork, and we did as the last two folks down the chute. Our accuracy from a 8,000 foot drop at 30-45 degree dive was easily 50 meters or less, usually like 20 or 30. The guys in front hit the loading docks and such and not the freight on the switchyard.
- Finally, the Buff losses the first three nights were not satisfactory. I was on Sandy alert the morning after first downtown Buff missions. Walked in for our usual intell brief two hours before sunup and glanced at the SAR board that showed potential missions for we rescue folks. Holy Cow!! A half dozen planes and all within a few miles of Hanoi, and all were B-52's!! The game was changing, huh?
The initial raids had the buffs flying in predictable paths and from predictable bases and then predictable egrees routes and on an on. So a few wise folks at 7/13th AF had a "come to Jesus" meeting and fighter, recce, weasel and buff folks gor together. Hell, we had lost a dozen buffs and the Vee still had lottsa missiles.
The days after Christmas saw a big change in tactics and timing of the raids. Only thing the same was we mudbeaters still flew in brioad daylight and buffs flew at night.
Between us and the buffs, we ran the Vee outta good missiles.

Thanks for tolerating this old warrior.

Gums sends....
gums is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 13:18
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,120
Great stories Gums - just one point for you...that of going home with enough gas for a second try; a perennial argument in the Harrier, particularly when operating from the boat was whether it was better to keep ‘another go’ in the hip pocket - or would you rather have a better thrust margin and make the first go work.

I was always a ‘first go’ man myself - mainly because that’s how I was brought up - and you’ve got to land sometime, might as well be the first time! (Just my opinion having gone ‘non div’ a couple - of hundred - times!)
orca is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 14:36
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,134
Salute Orca!

I like the "do it right on first approach" as you do. Some sortie in your career when still a clueless nugget is gonna require that.

OTOH, there's that "get home/get on the ground at any cost" syndrome that has shortened many a career (permanently).

With all the cosmic nav gear we had in the Sluf, and the great fuel stats, the two big fears we fighter pilots had were diminished - we always knew where we were and we weren't worried about running outta gas, heh heh.

Gums sends...
gums is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 16:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 507
Thanks for tolerating this old warrior.

Gums sends....
Just wanna salute and say a hearty thank you to all you "old warriors"! You made me proud to wear Air Force blue.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 16:52
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not scotland
Posts: 187
Having been accused of being disrespectful to "old duffers" I have to say this thread drift is excellent. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading about your exploits. I'm not sure how we could handle the losses you guys had nowadays.

Much respect.
Toadstool is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 00:01
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,134
Salute!

Besides the two I mentioned about landing fuel, someone's post mentionng y aimpoint is also missing.

Sheesh, if this is a Military Aviation forum, and we are comparing planes and range and such, who gives a ratis about thread drift. When the posters bitch and whine, then we can start a new thread, huh.

Gums sends...
gums is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 00:02
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,597
- Finally, the Buff losses the first three nights were not satisfactory. I was on Sandy alert the morning after first downtown Buff missions. Walked in for our usual intell brief two hours before sunup and glanced at the SAR board that showed potential missions for we rescue folks. Holy Cow!! A half dozen planes and all within a few miles of Hanoi, and all were B-52's!! The game was changing, huh?
The initial raids had the buffs flying in predictable paths and from predictable bases and then predictable egrees routes and on an on. So a few wise folks at 7/13th AF had a "come to Jesus" meeting and fighter, recce, weasel and buff folks gor together. Hell, we had lost a dozen buffs and the Vee still had lottsa missiles.
One of the things my buddy's dad said they did that was 'less than smart' was they sent the countermeasure aircraft in from different directions, but their paths intersected right where the BUFFs where going to drop their bomb loads. It didn't take a genius to figure out where the BUFFs were going - almost literally "X marked the spot". So the NV would saturate that area with missiles.
tdracer is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 00:37
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 250
Originally Posted by gums View Post
Salute!

Besides the two I mentioned about landing fuel, someone's post mentionng y aimpoint is also missing.

Sheesh, if this is a Military Aviation forum, and we are comparing planes and range and such, who gives a ratis about thread drift. When the posters bitch and whine, then we can start a new thread, huh.

Gums sends...
Fantastic posts, Gums. Thank you!
BVRAAM is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.