May 30, 200917 yr Author 2x AIM-54A’s failed their lunch roll.1x AIM-54A hit, destroying a MiG. 5x AIM-54A missed their target outright. That doesn't sound surprising to me- as I've mentioned elsewhere, the AIM-54 was designed for bombers, not "Supersonic Sportsplanes". I hear ya...and that was my understanding as well. ...And another thing, where do I get one of those "lunch rolls", I sure am hungry.
May 30, 200917 yr That doesn't sound surprising to me- as I've mentioned elsewhere, the AIM-54 was designed for bombers, not "Supersonic Sportsplanes". I hear ya...and that was my understanding as well. ...And another thing, where do I get one of those "lunch rolls", I sure am hungry. I've long held a belief that the Migs probably had no way of knowing they were under attack by the early F-14/Phoenix combo and that this would impact the combat results in a big way if the Migs weren't following an erratic base course (and given the short legs on the Migs I think they'd not be wandering randomly). A non-maneuvering fighter isn't much different from a non-manuevering Tu-95 if neither knows missiles are incoming.
May 30, 200917 yr I've long held a belief that the Migs probably had no way of knowing they were under attack by the early F-14/Phoenix combo and that this would impact the combat results in a big way if the Migs weren't following an erratic base course (and given the short legs on the Migs I think they'd not be wandering randomly). A non-maneuvering fighter isn't much different from a non-manuevering Tu-95 if neither knows missiles are incoming. Fishbed J had an RWR. They would know when they were under radar guided missile attack.
May 31, 200917 yr I think RWR and ESM are instruments of very different sensibility, I suppose very old RWR, like the RWR of MiG-17 and MiG-19, can't detect modern radars, and I suppose they're a broad variety of capabities of detection in RWR and ESM. Another example, the Indian Il-38, modernized with a big (and failed) ESM complex about the cockpit, replacing old ESM, and almost rejected (the new ESM system) by the indians. If the new ESM are very deficient, how deficient is the old ESM ? I think is good thing in the new data annex the suppresion of ESM capabilities in most of the aircrafts.
May 31, 200917 yr I think RWR and ESM are instruments of very different sensibility, I suppose very old RWR, like the RWR of MiG-17 and MiG-19, can't detect modern radars, and I suppose they're a broad variety of capabities of detection in RWR and ESM. For sure, and radars of different calibers too. We've expanded our exploitation of the RF spectrum considerably in recent years, so there are now a much wider range of possible radar frequencies (e.g. low probability of intercept (LPI) radars, etc). Not all RWR and ESM gear may be able to detect or identify them, but H4 simplifies much of this for the sake of gaming). Another example, the Indian Il-38, modernized with a big (and failed) ESM complex about the cockpit, replacing old ESM, and almost rejected (the new ESM system) by the indians. If the new ESM are very deficient, how deficient is the old ESM ? I suspect the problems experienced with the Morskoy Zmei (Sea Dragon) suite is related to the integration of so many new capabilities into an old airframe, rather than the inability of the ESM to detect anything.
May 31, 200917 yr Not all RWR and ESM gear may be able to detect or identify them, but H4 simplifies much of this for the sake of gaming). Yes, for the same sake, in my own database, I do this equivalence in the aircraft's flags: RWR = RWR ESM level 1 = RWR ESM level 2 = ESM (without RWR) ESM level 3 = ESM + RWR
Create an account or sign in to comment