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

71–80 of 86 posts

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

#71

Post by pas »

PeterGerlie wrote: post #67

No mention, of course, that the American pilot was actually protecting the terrorists(even Michael Flynn talked about US financing the terrorists in Syria before he got sacked) the SU-22 was targeting but this is a different story here( here we are talking about geeky technical things like why the exceptional missile from an exceptional country was not so successful)

What acts of terror did those commit? Oh, none? So why are they terrorists and not freedom fighters?

How come "anti-establishment" doesn't mean anti-Russian/Syrian-dictatorship?

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

#72

Post by PeterGerl0 »

pas wrote: post #71
PeterGerlie wrote: post #67

No mention, of course, that the American pilot was actually protecting the terrorists(even Michael Flynn talked about US financing the terrorists in Syria before he got sacked) the SU-22 was targeting but this is a different story here( here we are talking about geeky technical things like why the exceptional missile from an exceptional country was not so successful)

What acts of terror did those commit? Oh, none? So why are they terrorists and not freedom fighters? How come "anti-establishment" doesn't mean anti-Russian/Syrian-dictatorship?

I just mention what your ex defence minister has told the public. Period. And there are no freedom fighters in Syria. Just missionaries on washington's payroll. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47311.htm

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

#73

Post by PeterGerl0 »

PeterGerl0 wrote: post #72
pas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What acts of terror did those commit? Oh, none? So why are they terrorists and not freedom fighters? How come "anti-establishment" doesn't mean anti-Russian/Syrian-dictatorship?

I just mention what your ex defence minister has told the public. Period. And there are no freedom fighters in Syria. Just missionaries on washington's payroll. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47311.htm

...in 2012-13 the Obama administration helped its Sunni allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar provide arms to Syrian and non-Syrian armed groups to force President Bashar al-Assad out of power. And in 2013 the administration began to provide arms to what the CIA judged to be “relatively moderate” anti-Assad groups—meaning they incorporated various degrees of Islamic extremism.

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

#74

Post by vlehto »

mcguire wrote: post #40

Out of curiosity, anyone know the overall expenses for an AIM-9X and AIM-120, vs. an SU-22?

Wikipedia lists: AIM-120 400 000$ and AIM-9X 600 000$.

Which is very surprising, typically short range missiles are cheaper. Apparently AIM-9X has gone through recent face-lift that still affects prices.

Su-22 is harder to find, but comparable aircraft SEPECAT jaguar goes for about 8 million.

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

#75

Post by vlehto »

greedo wrote: post #68
ajmurmann wrote: post #52

This unfortunately seems to again validate John Boyd's sentiment that a low tech, highly maneuverable, simple and reliable single purpose fighter with a simple gun is a better investment for actually winning a war than incredibly expensive high-tech planes tested by people with clip boards. Edit: Between 1 F35 for $85 million or 5 F16 for $73 million total my money would most certainly be on the F16s.

Boyd hated the F-15. Funny how the F-15 is undefeated, and if you look at how it has fared in Israeli hands, it's one of the most exceptional fighters when it comes to actual combat... And you seem to be implying that numerous SU-22s would have fared well against the Super Hornet? You could put 10 Fitters up against the Bug, and it'd still win before going winchester.

The super hornet typically only carries 6 air to air missiles. While SU-22 can carry the most modern short range aa missiles.

Hornet would not win with gun only against 4 missile armed fitters. If the missiles are modern. In air warfare numbers have always mattered and always will.

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

#76

Post by RealityVoid »

paulmd wrote: post #21
WalterBright wrote: post #6

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

North Korea deploys canvas-on-wood Antonov An-2 biplanes as "low observable" stealth aircraft. Most of the radar energy goes right through it, there's very little metal to generate a return. (Similarly, during the Battle of Britain the Hawker Hurricane was notable for the way German 20mm cannon shells passed through its doped cloth-on-tube airframe. No impact to trigger the fuzes.) Another interesting property of the…

I actually did a couple of skydive jumps out of old AN-2 planes. Interesting experience, but looking at them, warplane is not the word that comes to mind.

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

#77

Post by pas »

PeterGerl0 wrote: post #72
pas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What acts of terror did those commit? Oh, none? So why are they terrorists and not freedom fighters? How come "anti-establishment" doesn't mean anti-Russian/Syrian-dictatorship?

I just mention what your ex defence minister has told the public. Period. And there are no freedom fighters in Syria. Just missionaries on washington's payroll. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47311.htm

I'm not even on the same continent as the USA, and I don't reckon belonging to or owning any secretaries of defense.

That's certainly a nice collection of links, yet don't seem to answer my question at all.

Also, claiming there are not freedom fighters in Syria is denying the whole civil uprising in 2011, and all of the utmost brutality and horrors perpetrated by the Assad regime against those protesters.

I'm not advocating funding terrorist groups, nor do I think the CIA and the Pentagon did a great job. (The whole intel/defense community is in shambles. Too much internal infighting, too few people taking responsibility, too much politics, funding issues, too much corruption because too much high-tech gadgets that must be maintained, produced, supported. You know.) But your worldview is overly simplistic if you think the story is that "a US plane was protecting terrorists". Those fighting on the ground probably have a very flawed sense of religion and what's right, how the world should be, but they're are currently fighting a fucking dictator. And that's a good thing.

The situaion around Raqqah (where Tabqah is) is basically the Rojava trying to purge ISIS from Raqqah while keeping Assad at bay at Tabqah.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rojava for who these folks are.

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

#78

Post by fit2rule »

delazeur wrote: post #70
fit2rule wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What are you suggesting? That the Su-22 wasn't actually shot down? That the AIM-9X was actually successful, and the AIM-120 wasn't used? You can't just say "blah blah propaganda, blah blah misdirection" every time you see a news article from a war zone.

Read what I said: this article may be full of misdirection and half truths.

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

#79

Post by noir_lord »

gaius wrote: post #54
noir_lord wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the Radar on the Mig-25 that a defector landed in Japan, they used Valves when all the US radars had moved almost entirely to transistors. Fun history, the Russians demanded it back off the US/Japanese so the Japanese government let the US take it apart, photo and test the parts (as quickly as possible) then shipped it back in crates and billed the Russians for the shipping. Which iirc they never paid.

Was the Radar on the Mig-25 that a defector landed in Japan There's a similar story about the "sloppy" riveting work on the Mig-25. Turned out to have significant beneficial effect in the airflow.

The USSR was brilliant at doing more with less (advanced technology).

That was brought home to me in a documentary I watched about the Mig-29, the US/Nato avoided FOD (Foreign Object Damage) by scrupulously walking the runway/apron every day and cleaning up.

The USSR just put air intakes on the top for taxiing so crap didn't get sucked into the main inlets.

It was such a simple design and yet the advantages in a war situation operating from crappy debris strewn airfields where obvious, they had Mig-29's taxing over rough dirt berms and all sorts of crazy things (at least from a western viewpoint).

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

#80

Post by iamjeff »

Animats wrote: post #11
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…

The comment sections (Alas1, this is Youtube after all), on the other hand, are depressing.
Post reply on HN