Buzzard 72

oops I suck at math. If I get a chance, I'll ask him to clarify what he meant. There are many things that he just can't discuss as far as "just exactly what tactics and systems are employed" in a modern context.

I stand corrected...it wasn't Udorn it was Tan Son Nhut air base.

Also, as lead you really have know how to manage your flight. Often when I'm dealing with a 8 ship formation( or greater) I change the loadout on ships 5-8. I basically make my own escort or I stand them down and use a strict 4 ship policy. The AI can be 'R' -tards with the friendlies (they typically won't envelope the plane). Now with the 4 ship, 3 and 4 are going to run on AAA while I'm approaching the target. At about 10 miles I task them to engage ground targets. This usually keeps them out of trouble and allows them to use up some ordnance (nothing worse than having them hanging bombs for no reason). So that leaves Lead(me) and 2 going to the package. Decision time, have 2 run the target and I try and hit AAA or the reverse. Rarely do I miss that I need 2 to back me up on a bridge or runway. Rarely for fuel/oil depots or structures (though it does happen). After delivery it's "piss on the fire and call the dogs!" When I'm feeling fatal and have an F-4 or an F-8 I may loiter for ACM after making sure second element is headed for the stable. Good fuel management has allowed me to run from Udon to Dragon's Jaw bridge at 30% throttle, 10K + ft and have enough gas in the externals to burn into the target in A/B and drop just prior to roll in. That essentially leaves me about 98% internal fuel (F-4) after drop so I usually am carrying a good tank even after initial egress. Besides...Sparrows are all sorts of fun to shoot at Mig-17's from 15 miles.

thanks for that.

I guess it was more in referrance to getting my flight out during ACM. The AI for whatever reason can be Jug headed (no pun there) on following a form up call. During a Strike op I typically do that. Hit the target, have my wingman follow it up and out of the area low and fast calling second element in from ground interdiction. Against Mig-21's that carry heaters this can be a detrament if they've got speed and altitude...usually my escort takes care of this though. Once over the ridge, I'll send second element home and if I'm carrying AIM-7's I'll try and hit a regrouping enemy plane.

There is a reason that the Pentagon is called the "Puzzle Palace". Neither rhyne nor reason has a place in the Pentagon and Armed Services Committee decisions. They demonstrate this quality regularly. I think that the Hornet will fill in fairly well. Loiter time is the big issue, particularly in a deep penetration AO. What will be sacrificed during an op. Part of the ECM equipment? Missiles? Also, if you have 2 Hornets flying this op that's still 4 heads in the ECM package. I could see this though as an excellent SAM suppression platform. As for the gear itself, miniturization is what makes this capable at all. Smaller components, more efficient systems, automation...

I'd have to agree, if your in that dog F-100, DO NOT get into a circle fight with 17's. Keep your 'E', look for alt , use angles, blow thru and regroup...oh and watch your fuel! If they get on your tail and are at speed, nose down, full A/B and keep jinking (I suggest you just tell your wingman to stay on your wing unless he's outside the engagement, if that's the case have him run on the tailing Mig and hope for the best. Try and keep the Mig flying relatively straight that'll help you wingman). The S. Sabre is a sad A/A plane.

Yeah with out CCIP it's all TLAR bombing. I usually pickle at about 1000 ft or so with the target just under my piper(say 20 +/- degress angle down from piper at a 45 dive). With less angle more drop from piper, with more angle closer to the middle of my piper. In a true 90 degree dive, theoretically, the target should be smack dab in the middle...

I typically don't have much issue with multiple SAMs if I keep changing my heading and altitude. If I've eyeballed a SAM launch or have a RWR I nose down and perpindicular to the heading of the missle (slightly heading into it). I try and stay out of A/B as much as possible (maybe a little to get things rolling down hill faster). I try and keep my flight together as much as possible to within 10 miles of the target (when ground pounding). If I'm running escort or CAP I have to commit my second element and hold my wingman in cover or on my wing(which I prefer as they AI tends to let my wingman fly like he's learning disabled). Usually it's SAMS that get my wingmen, with the exception of egress, then the Migs get to have fun. I have to yell at them 2 or 3 times to get them to commit to my formation and pour on the heat and leave the engagement. During ACM the second element is on it's own. When I'm turning for targets in ACM I usually don't worry too much until I've got a radar lock/track and holding my heading for the lock/track for Fox one. Then it's dreadsville as I here SAM callouts so I scissor as much as my radar will allow and throw chaff (if i've got it) and light up the ECM (which I do on ingress anyhow) holding just below A/B if I can( all this after I've sent one off the rail). You get a virtual understanding of the chaos of an engagement. Especially when you 20+ callouts during the op. (all SAMS), then you throw in some A/A missiles...Oh What FUN!

With all do respect, what you say about A-10's is exactly opposite of what my cousin says about their operations (he is a Hog pilot BTW). As I pointed out above, the A-10 is CAS par-excellence(obviously). With or without CAP or escort. Still, obviously having an escort or CAP is BETTER but not absolutely neccessary for Hogs. In addition, Hogs can engage mobile SAM's and Man-portables much easier than Eagles, Vipers, or Hornets. Also engaging armor or any other ground mobile contingent. We are given a false image of the capability of JDAMS as well as laser guided ordnance asnd the versatility of these weapons and the A/C that carry them on a regular basis. Hogs will be carrying JDAMS soon. Another consideration is range and endurance over the AO. Vipers are famous for there short legs and their truly limited ordnance carrying capability (originally conceived as a short range defensive response interceptor) not a multi-role F/A aircraft (as where the F-4 proved to be very capable in both arenas and had the legs to do it in a big AO). Hogs can carry ECM, are already equipped with mass countermeasures. Low level SAMS are already calculated into ops. During an engagement a missile crew lives between the world of reluctance and neccesity. They have to engage, but if they do they are going to die, whether or not they hit their target. Being a SAM operator is a world of deadly dichotomy. Stay hidden and live...engage and most assuredly die. Still, the Hog is getting old as well. It will need to be retired. As will F-4's (regardless of upgrades and new weapons). Phantoms cannot compete with any of the post 80's fighters that have been developed. they may be fast and can engage BVR but they start running out of options against Mig-29's and later Soviet Bloc A/C. Essentially, I see it this way: the F-22 will be a purely airsuperiority aircraft(hopefully) though using JDAMS isn't out of the possibility. The F-35 replaces the Viper, Harrier, and the Hornet, though I am curious what it's ground ordnance delivery capability will be. That leaves one last unfilled, much needed category...CAS/SANDY. While the Hog platform is great, I can see the need for something faster than the Hog. The Frogfoot (which is ostensibly based on the YA-9 platform) is the oppossing mentality of CAS operations. Hopefully, the future will hold a CAS plane that has redundancy, durability, range, payload and SPEED. I'm aware of the Hornet crossover to replace tha EA-6B (a plane who's sunset has come and gone). Still, will the Hornet have the same capabilty of ECM interdiction that the Prowler did? There are plenty who say no. That the Hornet just doesn't have the room (structurally). This also means more automation which is a good/bad alternative for that air op. Also original block Hornets will be 47 years old in 2020. A/C development and aquisition is going to happen. The Russians certainly aren't blanching at it nor are the Chinese (the two real primary threats to the non-communist West).

Speaking only for the F-22 and possibly the F-35 there are quite a few interesting characteristics involved. Namely the datalink aspect. The ability for numerous aircraft to have detailed SA from just one aircraft or from multiple sources (AWACS, SAT, Ground Controller) in real time. I've been told that standard combat posture for a 2 plane element for AtA is 50+ miles. That's a helluva spread. Not to mention the phase array radar that the F-22 carries and that via the datalink the other Raptors in the flight can use that ONE radar to target, track and fire from. Talk about not knowing what hit them! All the evildoers see is one A/C. They realize there has to be more, but just where "they" are who knows? Time to DiDi Mau! Supercruise, thrust vectoring, so on and so forth. Yes these planes COST BIG. Are they worth it? Wait and see. Chances are yes. As a deterrent? During an actual "big" conflict? Is that something anyone really wants? What I find interesting about the Russian developments is the number of different aircraft or different incarnations of the same plane. Sukhoi must be a mad house of design and production. The Su-27, Su-30, Su-35, Su-47 and whatever else that they are working on. Then there's all of the Migs. The US military is looking to consolidate. Down to 3+ primary combat aircraft. Sounds cheaper in the long run to me. At one point the Airforce, Navy and USMC operated these combat A/C : F-15, F-16, F-14, F/A-18, F-4, A-7, AV8-B, A-10, A-6, EA-6B. Now certain aircraft a mission specific and difficult to replace. The A-10 is a perfect example. As much as Viper pilots want to say they do CAS great, realistically they can't do it the way Hogs can. Likewise F-15E's can't either. Can the Hornet pull the same duty as an EA-6B? I've read varying opinions. The F-15 is almost 40. The Tomcat is out to pasture. The F-16 is where the F-5 was in 1980. Tapped out. The F/A-18 has a new lease but till when? 2020? What's that...50 years from beginning of active service? Too put it all in perspective, something to think about, the Spitfire design will be 100 years old within the FIRST half of this century! Not too long after the P-51. By 2063 the F-4 will be 100 years old (I'll be in my 90's). Will countries be operating Phantoms in 2020? So, time must march on and old horses do eventually get put down and new designs and innovations take their place. All Except the B-52 (the only fossilized active duty combat aircraft). As to the original post: couldn't the Russians gotten enough info on Tomcats from the Iranians?

This is similiar to what my cousin ( an AirForce Capt., Hog driver) related about flying AtA against Vipers and Eagles. It certainly wasn't one sided to be certain, but the area of operation that Hogs typically run is literally in the weeds. Also it's at speeds that typical combat aircraft don't have much appreciation for. Above 5000 ft is the danger zone for engagement with faster A/C, and the general response is to go lower and begin a defensive circle. From what I gather an A-10 is RARELY going to take initiative in an AtA engagement. By dropping below say a 1000 ft Vipers and Eagles have limited opportunity to line up a firing solution on a Warthog and they generally are not going to fly that low to risk a longer opportunity with a plane that can easily out turn them and has another Hog in the circle that will immediately get a guns/missle(w/ a GAU 30mm) shot. The worst thing for Hogs is BVR missile engagements at altitiude, which for no wonder they tend to avoid and ingress/egress at low altitude. The tactic of "circling the Hogs" is essentially the same thing that Hurricanes and P-47's would do at low altitude against faster or more manueverable A/C. If I had been your friend in the Hornet I would have "Fox oned" you from 15+.

Very funny.

I've been reading this thread (essentially the same as another I've read elsewhere). I'm not sure wher some of these numbers are coming from about payloads and what not. The V-22 has apatented advantage in all operational aspects of importance: Range, Payload, Speed. As with all new designs problems arise and lives get taken in the process of these developments (not that it makes this good or exceptable, just unavoidable). I dare say the number of lives lost due to Sea knight incidents far exceeds what any of us realizes. My uncle(a 30+ veteran of the US Army and a Warrant Officer in The USAR) has flown Chinooks (as well as flying DHL 727's) for over a dozen years now nad eggbeaters in general for 20+. Spent 19 months flying CH-47's in Iraq for SOC. Started his career as a Crew Chief in a UH-1 during Operation Pipesmoke(aircraft wreckage recovery and disposal) and later flew Hueys for the Reserves. He has commented that there is a definite need for a better platform with VTOL capabilities or at VSTOL capabilities. While he agrees that the V-22 has it's problems and needs those rectified(some of which may not have presented themselves yet) it has been the same with every aircraft design ever devised by man and the platform that is the V-22 is the next generation of prop driven VSTOL aircraft. V-22 (FAS)(Boeing) PAYLOAD 47,500 lb Vertical Takeoff/Landing (VTOL) 55,000 lb Short Takeoff/Landing (STOL) 60,500 lb Self Deploy STO RANGE 200nm Pre-Assault Raid with 18 troops 200nm Land Assault with 24 troops 50 nm (x2) Amphibious Assault 500 nm Long Range SOF Missions (USAF/CV-22) 2100 nm Self Deploy (with one refueling) 50 nm External Lift Operations with 10,000 lb load Criusing Speed 240 kts (MV-22) 230 kts (CV-22) CH-46 Sea Knight (FAS)(Boeing) Maximum takeoff weight: 24,300 pounds (11,032 kilograms) Range: 132 nautical miles (151.8 miles) for an assault mission Speed: 145 knots (166.75 miles per hour) Payload: Combat: maximum of 14 troops with aerial gunners Medical evacuation: 15 litters and 2 attendants Cargo: maximum of 4,000 pound (2270 kilograms) external load Introduction date: January 1978 Now by looking at the above numbers...I guess I'm not reading them right.

Who needs "5th" generation when the US "4th" generation is just as advanced. Case in Point the only "6th" generation plane -

New poster, thought I'd add my thoughts...too many planes with too many things to like. As for the US inventory - Top billing has to go to the F-14 Tomcat - a childhood fixation that grew with more knowledge about just what the plane was capable of and what the pilots who flew it thought. Next would be the F/A -18 series, after some minor reticnece over the mothballing of the premier fleet defence fighter I've grown to appreciate this plane for what it is and can do. Finally but certainly not last the A-10 'Hog - Really an ingenious use of modern tech and time and tested battlefield knowledge produced a deadly CAS aircraft. Not to mention I have a cousin who yanks one of these flying artillery positions around the sky, Go Assam Dragons! From the Brits - Gotta say the Harrier - True innovation Followed by the Jaguar - I'm not even sure why I like this plane Soviet Bloc - Flogger series planes - They intrigue me and I want to know more SU -25 Frogfoot - Another interesting plane of Russian design, by all accounts a great CAS plane. Vietnam Era This is tough but I'll say this: The Thud and the Rhino are a definite tie. Followed by the F-8 Crusader.