ATAS -Air to air Stinger as alternative for gunless fighters?

[Icarus999 70]

I have been testing  this out as a short range option on the F-4 with some fairly good results. However  I have never seen it deployed on anything other than helicopters and drones IRL. Does anyone know if this concept has been tested in the real world?  Opinions on real world practicality as a short range option for fast movers without guns welcome.

Edited December 19, 2021 by Icarus999

[+EricJ 4,244]

I haven't seen anything on planes, mainly helos (Apache comes to mind) that's it.

[+daddyairplanes 10,235]

i believe it has been tested on light CAS birds (like the A-29)

would not do well for fast jet combat, limited size of missile equals limited rocket burn time and limited range/ manuvering to engage other fast jet. too small warhead against most bombers too

buuuttt....

on those light CAS birds it would do well against  other similar aircraft, helos and for light intercepts (Cessnas, Beech etc)

[bazillius 1,258]

I think Stingers have a very short fighting distance. The plane will quickly and easily leave its range in combat. I saw many times how the MiG-29 leaves  coverage  of the SA-18 Grouse missile. Even the Su-25. missile could not catch up it. Su-25 does a fast attack with crowd of S-8 and ammidiately turn out. Shot from the ground! The Grouse contersttacking and run after him!! It runs, runs closer,closer... loosing speed and self distract.  I did not see a single shoot down, although I was in Donbass during the hottest battles. I suspect it will be the same with the stingers. They are only good against helicopters. such missiles lack range and maneuverability. But hellicopter vs hellicopter it will do. so this is my opinion.

Edited December 20, 2021 by bazillius

[Icarus999 70]

25 minutes ago, bazillius said:

I think Stingers have a very short fighting distance. The plane will quickly and easily leave its range in combat. 

 

Yes I agree. My main use for the stinger is in very short range engagements, by aircraft that lack guns. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2021 by Icarus999

[+Gepard 11,289]

The Stinger is overrated. The soviets learned in Afghanistan such much about this missile, that they were able to invent counter measures which reduced the efficency of the Stinger very much. Lipa IR jammers, flares exactly working on search frequences of the Stinger seeker head and so on. Modern Stingers are much better now, but they cost a fortune. Over one million US$ the Lithuanians had to pay for one missile. Much to much. For the half price you get french Mistrale missiles.

One deciding factor for a missile on a fast jet are the power of wind and air drag, which the missile has to withstand. And this power is enourmous. The starting container of the stinger is very light and cannot withstand if the wind power becomes to much.

[+dtmdragon 2,703]

British had the SRAAM/ Taildog in the 70's that was a small missile housed in launch tubes. Never made it into production but was the starting point for the future ASRAAM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRAAM

 

[Icarus999 70]

On 12/20/2021 at 5:18 AM, Gepard said:

 

The starting container of the stinger is very light and cannot withstand if the wind power becomes to much.

starting container= launch tube, correct? 

[+Gepard 11,289]

2 hours ago, Icarus999 said:

starting container= launch tube, correct? 

Correct. In german we call it a container. My fault for wrong translation.