help meeee !!!

[Hamid]

hello ,
I want some information about bombs , aircrafts , gbu 10 , 12 and ...
can anybody help me by sending emails or introducing useful sites
I have searched sites already , but I want something interesting and
strange about gbu 10 and aircraft , I need information ,
please help mee
my email adress :
please mail me

[Michael Wise]

In article >,
(Hamid) wrote:

> From: (Hamid)
> Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military.naval
> Subject: help meeee !!!
> Date: 6 Nov 2003 00:57:31 -0800
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 8
> Message-ID: >
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.217.58.7
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1068109052 27424 127.0.0.1 (6 Nov 2003 08:57:32
> GMT)
> X-Complaints-To:
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:57:32 +0000 (UTC)
> Xref: core-easynews rec.aviation.military.naval:60641
> X-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 01:57:24 MST (news.easynews.com)
>
> hello ,
> I want some information about bombs , aircrafts , gbu 10 , 12 and ...
> can anybody help me by sending emails or introducing useful sites
> I have searched sites already , but I want something interesting and
> strange about gbu 10 and aircraft , I need information ,
> please help mee
> my email adress :
> please mail me


Let's see, you posted from an IP address in Iran: 213.217.58.7:

$ whois -h whois.ripe.net 213.217.58.7


inetnum: 213.217.48.0 - 213.217.63.255
netname: ParsOnline
descr: ParsOnline Corp.
descr: Internet Service Provider
country: IR
admin-c: AF1351
tech-c: RF489-RIPE
tech-c: HL591-RIPE
status: ASSIGNED PA
notify:
mnt-by: PARSONLINE-MNT
changed: 20030910
source: RIPE

route: 213.217.56.0/21
descr: announced by SMS for Parsonline
origin: as13126
mnt-by: AS13126-MNT
changed: 20030216
source: RIPE

person: Abdollah Fateh
address: Pars Online Co.
address: 224 Khoramshahr ave., No. 6C
address: Tehran 15337
address: Iran
phone: +98 21 875 7277
fax-no: +98 21 874 9595
e-mail:
nic-hdl: AF1351
changed: 20000628
changed: 20020130
mnt-by: PARSONLINE-MNT
source: RIPE

person: Reza Fateh
address: Pars Online Co.
address: 224 Khoramshahr ave., No. 6C
address: Tehran 15337
address: Iran
phone: +98 21 875 7277
fax-no: +98 21 874 9507
e-mail:
nic-hdl: RF489-RIPE
notify:
mnt-by: PARSONLINE-MNT
changed: 20020410
changed: 20030715
source: RIPE

person: Hossein Lotfi
address: ParsOnline Co.
address: 224 Khoramshahr ave., No. 6C
address: Tehran 15337
address: Iran
phone: +98 21 875 7277
fax-no: +98 21 874 9595
e-mail:
nic-hdl: HL591-RIPE
mnt-by: PARSONLINE-MNT
notify:
changed: 20030719
source: RIPE


Why does somebody in Iran want to know about US strike capabilities??




--Mike

[Tom Cooper]

Is GBU-10 as such even in use in the US military any more?

Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but my feeling is that the Paveway I
systems are not in service; at least I haven't seen any being loaded on US
or NATO aircraft in the last four years. Paveway IIs and Paveway IIIs, on
the contrary, are very much still in service.

But, the GBU-10s were used - between others, also on Iranian F-4Ds, in
conjunction with the AVQ-9 Zot Box, and especially during the first weeks of
the war against Iraq, in September/October 1980....

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

[Dave LaCourse]

Tom Cooper writes:

>But, the GBU-10s were used - between others, also on Iranian F-4Ds, in
>conjunction with the AVQ-9 Zot Box, and especially during the first weeks of
>the war against Iraq, in September/October 1980...

We sold the Shah lots of F-4Ds, and lots of IR avionics to go with it. I sure
as hell wouldn't want them to know *anything* about current weapon systems, not
that a 25 year old F-4D which hasn't been maintained properly is a threat.
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Charlie Wolf]

Yes - I can help. The preferred method for testing aircraft bombs is
to get yourself a really big hammer - 8 lb. ball-pean type hammer
should work. Walk up to the bomb and strike it just as firmly as you
can on the pointy end - thats the opposite end from the fins. Do this
repeatedly until you here Allah telling you the bomb is OK to use.
Then go to the next bomb and repeat.

If we can be of any further help, please don't hesitiate to ask.
Regards,

On 6 Nov 2003 00:57:31 -0800, (Hamid) wrote:

>hello ,
>I want some information about bombs , aircrafts , gbu 10 , 12 and ...
>can anybody help me by sending emails or introducing useful sites
>I have searched sites already , but I want something interesting and
>strange about gbu 10 and aircraft , I need information ,
>please help mee
>my email adress :
>please mail me

[Dave LaCourse]

Charlie Wolf writes:

>Yes - I can help. The preferred method for testing aircraft bombs is
>to get yourself a really big hammer - 8 lb. ball-pean type hammer
>should work. Walk up to the bomb and strike it just as firmly as you
>can on the pointy end - thats the opposite end from the fins. Do this
>repeatedly until you here Allah telling you the bomb is OK to use.
>Then go to the next bomb and repeat.
>
>If we can be of any further help, please don't hesitiate to ask.
>Regards,
>
>On 6 Nov 2003 00:57:31 -0800, (Hamid) wrote:
>
>>hello ,
>>I want some information about bombs , aircrafts , gbu 10 , 12 and ...
>>can anybody help me by sending emails or introducing useful sites
>>I have searched sites already , but I want something interesting and
>>strange about gbu 10 and aircraft , I need information ,
>>please help mee
>>my email adress :
>>please mail me

Only one thing wrong, Charlie. Old Hamid lives in the Stone Age thanks to the
Eye-ah-tollahs. They don't have hammers. Would a large rock do the job?
Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Tom Cooper]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> Tom Cooper writes:
>
> >But, the GBU-10s were used - between others, also on Iranian F-4Ds, in
> >conjunction with the AVQ-9 Zot Box, and especially during the first weeks
of
> >the war against Iraq, in September/October 1980...
>
> We sold the Shah lots of F-4Ds, and lots of IR avionics to go with it. I
sure
> as hell wouldn't want them to know *anything* about current weapon
systems, not
> that a 25 year old F-4D which hasn't been maintained properly is a threat.
> Dave
>
> http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

Dave,
don't know if you want to know, but they bought only 32 F-4Ds (and 177
F-4Es) - and these were supplied without any IRST-systems (their Phantoms
had no housings under the chin).

Their F-4Ds were delivered between 1968 and 1970 so are now actually between
34 and 35 years old. Some 15 have survived the war with Iraq, and remain
very much in service. In fact, instead of GBU-10s they are now armed with
indigenious Iranian Sattar-1/2/3 laser-guided missiles (a mix of (US) GBU-10
and (French) AS.30L technology), the Noor (an Iranian version of the
160km-range C.802K-2 anti-ship missile, directly comparable in capabilities
to the Harpoon), and R-73/AA-11 Archer air-to-air missiles (the last in
addition to the usual Sparrows)...

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

[Dave LaCourse]

Tom Cooper writes:

>Dave,
>don't know if you want to know, but they bought only 32 F-4Ds (and 177
>F-4Es) - and these were supplied without any IRST-systems (their Phantoms
>had no housings under the chin).

Hi Tom.
Scary. I retired from the Navy in 1976 and went to work as an engineer at a
large well known company on RT 128 outside of Boston. I specifically worked on
the AN/AAD-5 system, and our customer was the Shah of Iran for use with the
F-4s bought from us. I imagine they are now obsolete.


>Their F-4Ds were delivered between 1968 and 1970 so are now actually between
>34 and 35 years old. Some 15 have survived the war with Iraq, and remain
>very much in service. In fact, instead of GBU-10s they are now armed with
>indigenious Iranian Sattar-1/2/3 laser-guided missiles (a mix of (US) GBU-10
>and (French) AS.30L technology), the Noor (an Iranian version of the
>160km-range C.802K-2 anti-ship missile, directly comparable in capabilities
>to the Harpoon), and R-73/AA-11 Archer air-to-air missiles (the last in
>addition to the usual Sparrows)...
>
>Tom Cooper
>Co-Author:
>Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:

Very scary, but if there is only 15, I suspect they would be called "turkey
meat" if they challenged F-14s, 15s, 16s or 18s.

You seem well informed -- so, what *do* they have that would be a challenge to
us.?




Dave

http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html

[Tom Cooper]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...

> Hi Tom.
> Scary. I retired from the Navy in 1976 and went to work as an engineer at
a
> large well known company on RT 128 outside of Boston. I specifically
worked on
> the AN/AAD-5 system, and our customer was the Shah of Iran for use with
the
> F-4s bought from us. I imagine they are now obsolete.

Sounds interesting. Sorry for my ignorance: what exactly is the AAD-5? An
IRST?

Namely, I've always been told that the IIAF was never very much interested
in IRST-systems, and that this was the reason they haven't purchased any for
their F-14s either.

What I've heard is that in 1978, in the Project Peace Enforcer, some of
their F-4Ds were modified to get the IRST housing, but that this contained
the ALR-17 basic countermeasure warning receiver, and the APG-26 SAM-launch
detection system. I don't know who run this upgrade (i.e. USAF, USN, McD or
somebody else), but four Iranian F-4Ds should've been modified that way
before the revolution (in February 1979), and they've also got additonal
kits to upgrade six other Phantoms, plus a three-year spare support packages
for them. I know they used such Ds to lead their strike-packages deep into
Iraq with immense success.

> Very scary, but if there is only 15, I suspect they would be called
"turkey
> meat" if they challenged F-14s, 15s, 16s or 18s.

Surely, in air-to-air they are dead meat, but I consider them still potent
platforms in the anti-ship role - at least for local circumstances. Namely,
one must bear in mind that the IRIAF is still flying also more than 50
F-4Es, which are modified with similar weapons like the F-4Ds, so there is a
large number of platforms each of which can carry two C.802s. The testing of
the C.802 in Iran was very rigorous, and proved that the weapon has a
capability comparable to the AGM-84 Harpoon. Of course, in the case of any
kind of serious action their eventual capability would heavily depend on the
capability of the IRIAF to supply them with any kind of proper targeting
info in the first place....

> You seem well informed -- so, what *do* they have that would be a
challenge to
> us.?

Their most potent fighters remain F-14s - that are not only still very much
operational but meanwhile also armed with some kind of a reverse-engineered
AIM-54s (I guess we'll get some uproar from specific people on this NG
regarding this, but I can't help), and the R-73/AA-11s too. Of course, one
can argue a lot about the capabilities of current IRIAF pilots when compared
to their potential USAF/USN opponents, or about the whole air combat system
of the US military, but the fact is that the AIM-54 remains longer-ranged in
comparission to the AIM-120, so - at least in theory - there is always an
unknown factor there...

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

[Doug \Woody\ and Erin Beal]

On 11/6/03 10:58 AM, in article ,
"Tom Cooper" > wrote:

> Is GBU-10 as such even in use in the US military any more?
>

Absolutely is...

> Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but my feeling is that the Paveway I
> systems are not in service; at least I haven't seen any being loaded on US
> or NATO aircraft in the last four years. Paveway IIs and Paveway IIIs, on
> the contrary, are very much still in service.
>

Currently Paveway II is stan. Paveway III is GBU-24.

> But, the GBU-10s were used - between others, also on Iranian F-4Ds, in
> conjunction with the AVQ-9 Zot Box, and especially during the first weeks of
> the war against Iraq, in September/October 1980....
>
> Tom Cooper
> Co-Author:
> Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
> http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
> and,
> Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
> http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585
>
>

[Charlie Wolf]

On 06 Nov 2003 17:58:15 GMT, (Dave LaCourse)
wrote:

>Charlie Wolf writes:
>
>>Yes - I can help. The preferred method for testing aircraft bombs is
>>to get yourself a really big hammer - 8 lb. ball-pean type hammer
>>should work. Walk up to the bomb and strike it just as firmly as you
>>can on the pointy end - thats the opposite end from the fins. Do this
>>repeatedly until you here Allah telling you the bomb is OK to use.
>>Then go to the next bomb and repeat.
>>
>>If we can be of any further help, please don't hesitiate to ask.
>>Regards,
>>
>>On 6 Nov 2003 00:57:31 -0800, (Hamid) wrote:
>>
>>>hello ,
>>>I want some information about bombs , aircrafts , gbu 10 , 12 and ...
>>>can anybody help me by sending emails or introducing useful sites
>>>I have searched sites already , but I want something interesting and
>>>strange about gbu 10 and aircraft , I need information ,
>>>please help mee
>>>my email adress :
>>>please mail me
>
>Only one thing wrong, Charlie. Old Hamid lives in the Stone Age thanks to the
>Eye-ah-tollahs. They don't have hammers. Would a large rock do the job?
>Dave
Dave - Thanks for your technical question concerning our bombs.
Large rock will do the job, but only if it's a left-handed rock.
These rocks can be pruchased through DoD contract for a mere $600.
:)
Regards,

>
>http://hometown.aol.com/davplac/myhomepage/index.html
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Dave LaCourse]

Tom Cooper:

>Sounds interesting. Sorry for my ignorance: what exactly is the AAD-5? An
>IRST?

It's an IR detector system, two bands.

[Dave LaCourse]

Charlie Wolf writes:

>Dave - Thanks for your technical question concerning our bombs.
>Large rock will do the job, but only if it's a left-handed rock.
>These rocks can be pruchased through DoD contract for a mere $600.
>:)
>Regards,

<SPLORK> I didn't get it on my keyboard, but there is coffee running down my
shirt and all over my pants. Thanks. d;o)

[tom c]

"Charlie Wolf" > wrote in message
...
> Yes - I can help. The preferred method for testing aircraft bombs is
> to get yourself a really big hammer - 8 lb. ball-pean type hammer
> should work. Walk up to the bomb and strike it just as firmly as you
> can on the pointy end - thats the opposite end from the fins. Do this
> repeatedly until you here Allah telling you the bomb is OK to use.
> Then go to the next bomb and repeat.
>


http://www.jenn98.com/bugs/1943-6.html

[Rob van Riel]

"Tom Cooper" > wrote in message >...
> Their F-4Ds were delivered between 1968 and 1970 so are now actually between
> 34 and 35 years old. Some 15 have survived the war with Iraq, and remain
> very much in service. In fact, instead of GBU-10s they are now armed with
> indigenious Iranian Sattar-1/2/3 laser-guided missiles (a mix of (US) GBU-10
> and (French) AS.30L technology), the Noor (an Iranian version of the
> 160km-range C.802K-2 anti-ship missile, directly comparable in capabilities
> to the Harpoon), and R-73/AA-11 Archer air-to-air missiles (the last in
> addition to the usual Sparrows)...

Tom,

I hope everyone else will forgive me for approaching this from a
modellers point of view, but a Phantom with a mix of Archer and
Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
you mention?

Thanks

Rob

[Tom Cooper]

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
m...
> "Tom Cooper" > wrote in message
>...
> > Their F-4Ds were delivered between 1968 and 1970 so are now actually
between
> > 34 and 35 years old. Some 15 have survived the war with Iraq, and remain
> > very much in service. In fact, instead of GBU-10s they are now armed
with
> > indigenious Iranian Sattar-1/2/3 laser-guided missiles (a mix of (US)
GBU-10
> > and (French) AS.30L technology), the Noor (an Iranian version of the
> > 160km-range C.802K-2 anti-ship missile, directly comparable in
capabilities
> > to the Harpoon), and R-73/AA-11 Archer air-to-air missiles (the last in
> > addition to the usual Sparrows)...
>
> Tom,
>
> I hope everyone else will forgive me for approaching this from a
> modellers point of view, but a Phantom with a mix of Archer and
> Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
> showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
> you mention?

There is nothing of this kind on the internet, Rob: some first photos might
be published in a specific publication in December, but I can't definitely
confirm or deny this yet.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585

[Tex Houston]

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
m...
> Tom,
>
> I hope everyone else will forgive me for approaching this from a
> modellers point of view, but a Phantom with a mix of Archer and
> Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
> showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
> you mention?
>
> Thanks
>
> Rob

You might try rec.models.scale as someone there might have already done so.

Tex

[Rob van Riel]

"Tom Cooper" > wrote in message >...
> "Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
> > showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
> > you mention?
>
> There is nothing of this kind on the internet, Rob: some first photos might
> be published in a specific publication in December, but I can't definitely
> confirm or deny this yet.

I hope you won't mind be coming back to this subject in a few months then.

Rob

[Rob van Riel]

"Tex Houston" > wrote in message >...
> "Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Tom,
> >
> > I hope everyone else will forgive me for approaching this from a
> > modellers point of view, but a Phantom with a mix of Archer and
> > Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
> > showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
> > you mention?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Rob
>
> You might try rec.models.scale as someone there might have already done so.

I will (another one of my regular haunts). However, I prefer a paper
reference to a plastic one; you wouldn't believe some of the ordinance
loads that end up on kits occasionally.

Rob

[Tex Houston]

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
om...

> I will (another one of my regular haunts). However, I prefer a paper
> reference to a plastic one; you wouldn't believe some of the ordinance
> loads that end up on kits occasionally.
>
> Rob

If you want a paper reference, you might try Google and spell the word
ordnance and not the improper ordinance which is a legal term.

Tex

[Tom Cooper]

"Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
om...
> "Tom Cooper" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Rob van Riel" > wrote in message
> > m...
> > > Sparrow missiles sounds like a must-build to me. Are there pictures
> > > showing how these are carried either on the web or in one of the books
> > > you mention?
> >
> > There is nothing of this kind on the internet, Rob: some first photos
might
> > be published in a specific publication in December, but I can't
definitely
> > confirm or deny this yet.
>
> I hope you won't mind be coming back to this subject in a few months then.

No problem at all. I'd even be glad to let you know - should anything come
out.

Tom Cooper
Co-Author:
Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988:
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
and,
Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat:
http://www.osprey-publishing.co.uk/title_detail.php/title=S6585