If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cat peeking out of the bag?
I've just finished reading the following book about the F-14 in Iranian
hands: http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg It is a well written account which is claimed to be based upon extensive research and talks with Iranian, and some Iraqi, aircrew. With the caveat of the usual inflation of kills when talking with "those who where there", particularly in what concerns BVR kills, the book is consistent with the many leaked details that have been emerging for several years. For those less attentive to the complexities of the Middle East politics and operations, it can be a bit of an eye opener, but there are plenty of people around, from the "air-warrior" community, that have claimed in print and on the net that they had interesting times they cannot speak openly about. To cut the introduction short, and getting to the theme I'd like to see discussed... It seems there is credible evidence for around 130 air-to-air F-14 kills, with some 40 of those been AIM-54 kills. Actual recorded claims are higher than that, but let's stay cautious. The Iraqis have sure lost quite a lot of aircraft during the long Iraq-Iran war, with quite a few MiG-21/23/25, Mirage F1, Su-22 and other assorted types being credited to the Tomcats by both sides. It has been often relayed as a fact that, during the 1st Gulf War, the Iraqis were very unwilling to go anywhere near the USN F-14s and their tell-tale AWG-9 signature, while not being so shy towards the Eagles. Reports have come out - both recent and old - of Iraqi pilots saying that the F-14s were the Iranian aircraft they most feared... So what do you think? Are the politicos (in and out of uniform) giving the Buffalo the thumbs down for reasons other than performance? Is the F-14 a more successful fighter than we have been lead to believe? Or not? _____________ José Herculano |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
It seems there is credible evidence for around 130 air-to-air F-14 kills,
with some 40 of those been AIM-54 kills. Actual recorded claims are higher than that, but let's stay cautious. Isn't there also evidence to suggest that the Iranians used the Tomcat as an airborne warning and control aircraft? The Iraqis have sure lost quite a lot of aircraft during the long Iraq-Iran war, with quite a few MiG-21/23/25, Mirage F1, Su-22 and other assorted types being credited to the Tomcats by both sides. It has been often relayed as a fact that, during the 1st Gulf War, the Iraqis were very unwilling to go anywhere near the USN F-14s and their tell-tale AWG-9 signature, while not being so shy towards the Eagles. Re the Iraqis purported preference to engage "the Eagles," I assume this refers to F-15s. I was not aware the Iranians purchased any F-15s. Of course I could be wrong. Can anybody weigh in on this point? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul Michael Brown" wrote in message news It seems there is credible evidence for around 130 air-to-air F-14 kills, with some 40 of those been AIM-54 kills. Actual recorded claims are higher than that, but let's stay cautious. Isn't there also evidence to suggest that the Iranians used the Tomcat as an airborne warning and control aircraft? The Iraqis have sure lost quite a lot of aircraft during the long Iraq-Iran war, with quite a few MiG-21/23/25, Mirage F1, Su-22 and other assorted types being credited to the Tomcats by both sides. It has been often relayed as a fact that, during the 1st Gulf War, the Iraqis were very unwilling to go anywhere near the USN F-14s and their tell-tale AWG-9 signature, while not being so shy towards the Eagles. Re the Iraqis purported preference to engage "the Eagles," I assume this refers to F-15s. I was not aware the Iranians purchased any F-15s. Of course I could be wrong. Can anybody weigh in on this point? he said 'during the 1st Gulf War' not the Iran-Iraq war. And while I will admit never taking a good look at the subject, everything I have read re the Iranian F-14s says that they had a lot of trouble keeping the aircraft and missles maintained once the US techs left. Because of this the few flyable F-14s left at wars end were pretty much AWAC only. 130 A2A kills sounds like an awful lot to me. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"rob" wrote in message ...
he said 'during the 1st Gulf War' not the Iran-Iraq war. To many people, that is exactly the same thing: 1st gulf war = Iran-Iraq 2nd gulf war = kicking Saddam out of Kuwait 3rd gulf war = Bush vs Hussein - the feud continues Rob |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
It seems there is credible evidence for around 130 air-to-air F-14 kills,
with some 40 of those been AIM-54 kills. Actual recorded claims are higher than that, but let's stay cautious. I would not even buy 1/3 that total! I don't think the Iraquies had that many planes to shoot down. Sparky |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
José Herculano wrote:
I've just finished reading the following book about the F-14 in Iranian hands: http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg It is a well written account which is claimed to be based upon extensive research and talks with Iranian, and some Iraqi, aircrew. [snip] Tom Cooper has been a pretty regular poster here; he may well be along to defend his statistics. So what do you think? Are the politicos (in and out of uniform) giving the Buffalo the thumbs down for reasons other than performance? AFAIK, no one within the Navy has ever claimed that the F-14 is being retired due to inferior performance. The decision has always been framed as being driven by cost, reliability, and maintainability issues. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
AFAIK, no one within the Navy has ever claimed that the F-14 is being
retired due to inferior performance. The decision has always been framed as being driven by cost, reliability, and maintainability issues. Well, that and the "F/A-18 mafia".... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
It seems there is credible evidence for around 130 air-to-air
F-14 kills, with some 40 of those been AIM-54 kills. Except for the fact that CIA ordered US ground crew in Iran to sabotage Phoenix related gear in Tomcats' radars as soon as the shah fell from power. Otherwise the AIM54 was never meant to be used against small and agile targets like fighter bombers, which Iraq had. In contrast a cruise missile or a bomb-laden Tu-95 cannot do the immelman, so they are easy to hit with a big and necessarily sluggish missile from 70 nm. Otherwise all variable wing planes suck a great deal: heavy, trouble-prone, cost a lot to maintain, wings mecha takes up precious place in the fuselage, won't survive battle damage. No wonder the USN is retiring all Tomcats. The MiG-23 has long hit the scapyard most places. Remaining F-111 has been deported to a place where planes normally fly upside-down. The Tornado flies only because anything else is better than an F-104. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Except for the fact that CIA ordered US ground crew in Iran to sabotage
Phoenix related gear in Tomcats' radars as soon as the shah fell from power. Ya I didn't know quite how to mention that I "might" have met some one who "might" have been involved in making sure that the Buffalo didn't work before he left that country. I have heard from fighter guys that in close while the motor is running that the buff can be a formibidal weapon that can make a pretty good turn. But then they were probably looking for an excuse to use the thing. It wasn't designed for the close in fight but only as a back up to something better. Sparky |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|