Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

combataircraft.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#11

Post by Animats »

WalterBright wrote: post #6

I've often wondered if a WW1 stringbag could fly right past modern air defenses without being detected or tracked.

Probably not, since modern air defenses are effective against small missiles and even mortar rounds. Here's a CIWS in Afghanistan shooting down incoming mortar rounds.[1] (Read the comments for more explanation from people who have been there.) The CIWS has radar which can track not just the target, but its own bullets. It makes quick adjustments until bullets and target are in the same place at the same time.

On one occasion, a US ally shot down a hobbyist-sized drone with a Patriot missile. Very expensive, but it hit the target.

[1] https://youtu.be/KsVUISS8oHs

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#12

Post by alkonaut »

Obvious follow up question: soviet tech is easy to come by, at least the kind that's now used in dozens of countries. How is the missile not designed to be effective against the most likely target? Surely Raytheon must have a dozen versions of Russian and European flare dispensers and not just the US kind?

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#13

Post by sleepingeights »

This is why Japan and S. Korea, as well as many EU countries are developing their own military weapons. They can't rely on US products being up to spec or even close to what is advertised. Instead the US resorts to strong-arming and bully tactics as they did with Saudi Arabia to sell their poorly developed shit.

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#14

Post by fit2rule »

alkonaut wrote: post #12

Obvious follow up question: soviet tech is easy to come by, at least the kind that's now used in dozens of countries. How is the missile not designed to be effective against the most likely target? Surely Raytheon must have a dozen versions of Russian and European flare dispensers and not just the US kind?

The answer: this is war propaganda. There are no real facts here, only half-truths and mis-direction.

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#15

Post by arethuza »

Elv13 wrote: post #9
wcdolphin wrote: post #7

I find it interesting the US jet was an FA-18, which entered service November 1983 (USN) is actually more than 30 years old as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hor...

This is equivalent to say a couple years old Ford F-150 is a truck from 1975. The branding is the same, the shape is similar, but it ain't the same plane. Super Hornets are still being produced, upgraded and improved and will probably still be in the assembly line in 20 years. A 30 second Google didn't show the year of the F/A-18 in question, but I assume it is from the mid 2000 or something like it. This was even mo…

The Tu-95 "Bear" is still is service:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#16

Post by Elv13 »

arethuza wrote: post #15
Elv13 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is equivalent to say a couple years old Ford F-150 is a truck from 1975. The branding is the same, the shape is similar, but it ain't the same plane. Super Hornets are still being produced, upgraded and improved and will probably still be in the assembly line in 20 years. A 30 second Google didn't show the year of the F/A-18 in question, but I assume it is from the mid 2000 or something like it. This was even mo…

The Tu-95 "Bear" is still is service: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95

Yes, but my point was more about the Soviet program of continuous improvement associated with it. According to your link, they stopped the assembly line at the collapse of the USSR. It doesn't prevent them from upgrading the existing airframes like for the B-52, but it isn't a true rolling replacements/improvements program anymore like the F/A-18 [almost] is.

Edit: Maybe the F-104 starfighter program would be another good example.

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#17

Post by bertjk »

vlehto wrote: post #10
wcdolphin wrote: post #7

I find it interesting the US jet was an FA-18, which entered service November 1983 (USN) is actually more than 30 years old as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hor...

Actually it was super hornet. It has so few common parts with the original, that many people consider it completely different airplane. The program costs we're also big enough to hint new design if I recall correctly. The reason it is called "hornet" and why it shares so much external similarity is some kind of domestic propaganda reasons. To make people think that US Navy doesn't have modern equipment when they actu…

The more commonly cited reason is that it was easier to get Congress to approve a budget for an improvement on an existing fighter than for a brand new fighter program.

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#18

Post by dingaling »

WalterBright wrote: post #6

I've often wondered if a WW1 stringbag could fly right past modern air defenses without being detected or tracked.

There was a team from a Large Defense Contractor at my local airfield recently with thermal-imaging equipment that seemed to be doing a good job of tracking light piston-engined aircraft, many of which are tube-and-fabric construction like WW1 machines.

They wouldn't say what they were testing but it seemed fairly obvious. The whole engine block glowed hot as did the uppersides exposed to the Sun, let alone the exhaust, at what I guessed to be several kilometres distance. Before we were shooed away :)

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#19

Post by nl »

Elv13 wrote: post #9
wcdolphin wrote: post #7

I find it interesting the US jet was an FA-18, which entered service November 1983 (USN) is actually more than 30 years old as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hor...

This is equivalent to say a couple years old Ford F-150 is a truck from 1975. The branding is the same, the shape is similar, but it ain't the same plane. Super Hornets are still being produced, upgraded and improved and will probably still be in the assembly line in 20 years. A 30 second Google didn't show the year of the F/A-18 in question, but I assume it is from the mid 2000 or something like it. This was even mo…

Worth noting that the Su-22 is actually just a variant of the Su-17 which first was produced in 1966.

Re: How did a 30 year-old Su-22 defeat a modern AIM-9X?

#20

Post by BatFastard »

bertjk wrote: post #17
vlehto wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it was super hornet. It has so few common parts with the original, that many people consider it completely different airplane. The program costs we're also big enough to hint new design if I recall correctly. The reason it is called "hornet" and why it shares so much external similarity is some kind of domestic propaganda reasons. To make people think that US Navy doesn't have modern equipment when they actu…

The more commonly cited reason is that it was easier to get Congress to approve a budget for an improvement on an existing fighter than for a brand new fighter program.

And indeed there is much less risk in improving a good design over starting a new project from scratch. One wonders what we could have accomplished if we have invested the trillion dollars we are putting into the F-35 into say unmanned drone fighters, or batteries so that we dont have to defend the middle east.
Post reply on HN