rlwicker1967 32 Posted February 16, 2023 So, an object was shot down over Lake Huron with one sidewinder missing and the second one hitting its mark which is a 50% success. Those of us flying WoV are like, "Really? WOW!" 🤣 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Shootingstar2 26 Posted February 16, 2023 doesn't say much for modern sidewinders does it makes you wonder if they still got some old B models in stock trying to get rid of Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bazillius 1,259 Posted February 16, 2023 Such a small sample means nothing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,885 Posted February 16, 2023 4 kills from 5 shots on objects. Don't know if they were designed for such low heat and slow objects - presumably dependent on heating from the sun to some degree. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clim995 18 Posted February 16, 2023 i if it was a balloon (if that is what you are referring to) with minimal thermal signature and not a high-performance combat jet with portable hell in its engine exhaust. i suppose it's excusable for the sidewinders to miss. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Righteous26 70 Posted February 16, 2023 It could be a negative habit transfer from the simulator. The missile may work just a little differently there and it could throw the pilots off the first time they fire a live missile. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gepard 11,360 Posted February 18, 2023 (edited) To use missiles, which costs 440.000 US$, to shot down a weather balloon, which costs 12 US$, is a waste of money. When the Americans sent hundreds of ballons from Westgermany to the east in the 1950th, 60th and 70th we used the guns of the fighters to down them. This worked very well, was a good training for the pilots and it was cheap. Edited February 18, 2023 by Gepard Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Shootingstar2 26 Posted February 18, 2023 (edited) therefore use the gun that's what it's there for Edited February 18, 2023 by Shootingstar2 unfinished Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rlwicker1967 32 Posted February 19, 2023 Much cheaper than live fire tests. Those target drones cost more than $12.😂 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wrench 9,883 Posted February 21, 2023 this might of of interest 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,885 Posted February 21, 2023 On 18/02/2023 at 7:27 PM, Gepard said: When the Americans sent hundreds of ballons from Westgermany to the east in the 1950th, 60th and 70th we used the guns of the fighters to down them. This worked very well, was a good training for the pilots and it was cheap. The Soviet PVO used missiles, unguided rockets and guns - even Tu-128s were used to shoot at them. A lot of missiles of course missed, sometimes a direct hit by the missile was enough. See defending Rodinu vol 2 by Krzysztof Dabrowski. flying directly at a balloon at 60000ft means you have to be fast so getting out of the way is going to be problematic. an off boresight shot was the best way to keep things as cheap as possible. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Gepard 11,360 Posted February 22, 2023 On 21.2.2023 at 11:09 AM, MigBuster said: flying directly at a balloon at 60000ft means you have to be fast so getting out of the way is going to be problematic. an off boresight shot was the best way to keep things as cheap as possible. The pilots were trained for such actions. In the so called "Luftzielschießzone 1" (air shooting area) it was common to shot on flares which hung under parachutes. The closing speed was fast and to avoid a collision the MiG drivers had to act very fast. BTW. While a night training, the flares on parachutes were misidentified by western tourists as "alien spaceships" 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites