Browsing other forums

[lunaticfringe]

Mucynski continued:

 

At approximately eight miles I saw the two Su-22s on the nose. They were flying a formation we refer to as welded wing, within about 150ft (50m)

 

He states he saw them- not that he identified the type of said specks at 8 miles.

 

Well I have looked at the information I can find on the engagement and given you a reason why they did that - it has nothing to do with the range and everything to do with the situation.

 

By your definition, and using apparent USAF doctrine, being tagged by an opposing radar constitutes an emergency.

 

Please provide me the USN doctrine from this era (in your next reply) that states all FA-18 drivers must do all AA with all AG and tanks on at all times regardless of the situation.

 

I'll get right on picking through materials when you find me the F-15's MCM 3-1 instructions to drop tanks at any little buzz on the RWR and include it in your next reply (let's all just be internet tough guys), because I'm getting all sorts of good laughs from this conversation. :D

 

Okay.............and totally Irrelevant.

 

Okay, and... totally a mistaken entry on the phone intended to carry on with the sentence on the carriage return line below. Which, I notice you don't want to mention, because it undermines the nature of what you think is important, what constitutes a threat based on training experience, and what is available on an airframe for options in an emergency with stores in place.

[Basher54321]

He states he saw them- not that he identified the type of said specks at 8 miles.

 

True at 8 miles sure - no TCS although wasn't sure if AWACS had any means to identify them although they would have had some knowledge of the Libyan inventory at the time.

 

 

By your definition, and using apparent USAF doctrine, being tagged by an opposing radar constitutes an emergency.

Nope - point missed I haven't defined anything. :)

 

 

I'll get right on picking through materials when you find me the F-15's MCM 3-1 instructions to drop tanks at any little buzz on the RWR and include it.

 

I would like to think you are still not getting it - you are trying very hard to pull this into a personal argument aren't you - please go on - I seem to remember you trolling before.

[lunaticfringe]

I would like to think you are still not getting it - you are trying very hard to pull this into a personal argument aren't you

 

Not at all. I simply find your desperation to hold onto a position actual events have refuted, bending all the while, amusing to watch.

 

Frankly, given prior history, I'm surprised you didn't say "look- I drew a hard line that isn't actually the case, and positioned things that do in fact happen in combat in a derogatory light unnecessarily based on a lack of reviewing pertinent information", because you seem to generally be reasonable, and we'd have moved on by now. Instead, you've attempted to use technical limitations, operational intentions and instruction, and incomparable events as a basis with which to support a line that evidence would show just doesn't want to be reinforced.

 

- please go on - I seem to remember you trolling before.

 

Considering the relative track records of repudiating garbage on this forum with hard, certifiable evidence out of service publications and providing further documents for development purposes, if you really want to play the troll card, you'd likely be better off looking up the definition of "psychological projection".

 

But that's perhaps just you- or maybe it's not. I trend towards giving people the benefit of the doubt given the lack of actual perceivable body language and inflection on the internet.

[Basher54321]

Not at all. I simply find your desperation to hold onto a position actual events have refuted, bending all the while, amusing to watch.

 

Frankly, given prior history, I'm surprised you didn't say "look- I drew a hard line that isn't actually the case, and positioned things that do in fact happen in combat in a derogatory light unnecessarily based on a lack of reviewing pertinent information", because you seem to generally be reasonable, and we'd have moved on by now. Instead, you've attempted to use technical limitations, operational intentions and instruction, and incomparable events as a basis with which to support a line that evidence would show just doesn't want to be reinforced.

 

Okay let's look at this :

However the the idea that you would give your self a disadvantage when your life is on the line seems to be an attitude right out of computer sims.

 

 

This was not a swipe at you - where I am coming from is that the above is generally the done thing (I wasn't just referring to drop tanks) - For the majority of platforms dropping tanks in AA or when a SAM is fired at them has been pretty much SOP throughout history.

 

I can now see where you are coming from re the F-14 crews and so I can see why you were taking that line. There are not many USN A-A engagements compared to the USAF to go on. However you could have provided a document that states ROE regarding tanks for F-14 crews if you have it. Turkey Driver was the first to provide information that might back up what you were claiming. You have provided nothing so far regarding ROE/SOP for the FA-18 crews that would back up that engagement in 1991.

 

If you think I am being awkward here you need to go back to my post and see the example of an Israeli F-16 not dropping its tank in combat - because the engagements you brought up seem no different to that whatsoever. I had already said (to effect) the F-16 was probably not in a disadvantaged position despite having its tank on. Without having information on SOP it is not unreasonable to think that the pilot can make the decision to jettison stores entirely based on the situation - especially when there are countless other examples of it happening.

 

 

You seem to be a knowledgeable person but seem to have degenerated into a defensive posture on here on more than one occasion when you are probably better than that.

 

Also telling someone how funny you are finding things etc comes across as nothing more than an attempt to wind the other person up so bare that in mind.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Basher54321

[Hummingbird]

I really think you two have completely misunderstood each other, because as far as I can see you don't actually disagree....

[Vampyre]

Of course, but if it comes to a life or death situation where you are unsure of your chances against an enemy aircraft then you will drop the tanks to increase your chances. Better to lose some tanks than to lose an entire aircraft + its pilot after all ;)

 

It also needs to be noted that during wartime there will be a tank build up in addition to tank building teams at every forward base. i.e. in a war against a foe with capabilities remotely similar to your own a large expenditure of drop tanks is infact expected and taken into account.

 

I never saw a tank build up of any sort in 2003. We went with our original complement of assets and received no spares even though aerial opposition was expected... it might be an Air Force thing because I know they stock war reserve tanks built specifically for dropping. These war reserve tanks are far less expensive than normal tanks because they do not contain a lot of the baffling and valves a standard tank contains.

[Hummingbird]

I never saw a tank build up of any sort in 2003. We went with our original complement of assets and received no spares even though aerial opposition was expected... it might be an Air Force thing because I know they stock war reserve tanks built specifically for dropping. These war reserve tanks are far less expensive than normal tanks because they do not contain a lot of the baffling and valves a standard tank contains.

 

Might very well be, can't speak for the Navy, I just know the army does it and can build them on site at a rate of ~12-15 tanks a day IIRC.

 

Regarding 2003 I don't think they ever felt the need for a large reserve though considering the opposition.

[captain_dalan]

Just to be clear, according to Captain R.R. (feels wrong to post his full name on a public forum, but if you want to try and contact him, drop a line in inbox), the bags on Cat did effect it's performance in ACM. Mostly to do with them disrupting the airflow on the aft ventral fuselage and over the bottom vertical stabilizers, not so much to with turning performance, but a lot to with jet stability. He also mentioned, for the said reasons, nobody wanted to fly with them and yet, they ware mandatory at all times, even ACM. His words on the question of if they ever dropped them " They slowed the airplane down, a slight drag increase, but endurance around the boat was improved. We wouldn't drop them for a fight, unlike F-15s, who would punch them off when on a vector to intercept. Now, if I was losing a fight, say BFM with a MiG-29, then, you bet, they would be coming off....we flew with stations 2 & 7 selected, so the ACM Jett on the pilot's ACM panel would punch them off in an instant."

 

EDIT: edited to copy paste the full quote.

Edited July 1, 2016 by captain_dalan

[Basher54321]

Just to be clear, according to Captain R.R.

 

 

Many thanks to you both for clarifying this.

[Aginor]

I don't want to get into this discussion too much, but maybe we should take into account that even if something is a clear disadvantage and the orders say you shouldn't do it, it might still be done because of overload (forgetting to drop the tanks).

Not really fitting, but IIRC Pacific WWII ace Thomas McGuire reportedly died because he forgot to drop the external tanks from his P-38 during a dogfight. So if you see a plane in a dogfight with the tanks still on it, the pilot might just have forgotten it.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Aginor

[SUBS17]

I don't want to get into this discussion too much, but maybe we should take into account that even if something is a clear disadvantage and the orders say you shouldn't do it, it might still be done because of overload (forgetting to drop the tanks).

Not really fitting, but IIRC Pacific WWII ace Thomas McGuire reportedly died because he forgot to drop the external tanks from his P-38 during a dogfight. So if you see a plane in a dogfight with the tanks still on it, the pilot might just have forgotten it.

 

In some situations you can drop tanks and every bit counts towards performance in a dogfight but in some situations a dogfight can happen where you don't have time straight away to drop ordnance/tanks and in some situations you maybe left with the problem of if you drop them how do you get back to base! So in some situations dropping the tanks is a good idea its up to the pilot to get that extra performance if a Tomcat pilot was up against something that was better a pilot might drop his tanks just to get that extra bit of performance win although as far as I've heard such a thing has never happened but it could happen vs Flanker or Fulcrum even with ROE etc its up to the pilot so IRL not so far as we know(don't know about Iranian F-14s dropping tanks?). But in DCS it will happen no doubt. Another thing regarding dropping stuff some aircraft cannot land on the carrier with to much weight so aircraft like the Hornet often drop bombs etc in the ocean in some cases to land. So lets not worry about the ROEs etc of weather a pilot would or would not fact is in DCS you have the button and you have the option. BTW I wonder if Leatherneck is going to model the stuck in Afterburner fault lol.:pilotfly:

[Hummingbird]

In some situations you can drop tanks and every bit counts towards performance in a dogfight but in some situations a dogfight can happen where you don't have time straight away to drop ordnance/tanks and in some situations you maybe left with the problem of if you drop them how do you get back to base! So in some situations dropping the tanks is a good idea its up to the pilot to get that extra performance if a Tomcat pilot was up against something that was better a pilot might drop his tanks just to get that extra bit of performance win although as far as I've heard such a thing has never happened but it could happen vs Flanker or Fulcrum even with ROE etc its up to the pilot so IRL not so far as we know(don't know about Iranian F-14s dropping tanks?). But in DCS it will happen no doubt. Another thing regarding dropping stuff some aircraft cannot land on the carrier with to much weight so aircraft like the Hornet often drop bombs etc in the ocean in some cases to land. So lets not worry about the ROEs etc of weather a pilot would or would not fact is in DCS you have the button and you have the option. BTW I wonder if Leatherneck is going to model the stuck in Afterburner fault lol.:pilotfly:

 

Keep in mind that drop tanks are always emptied before you start drawing any fuel from the internal tanks, so usually the drop tanks will be empty or close to it if you drop them over enemy territory. As a result many times it actually increases your chances of making it home by dropping your empty bags as you cut a lot of drag in the process.

[SUBS17]

In most cases but it can also in some aircraft mean more inflight refueling to get back to base or not getting back at all.