MigBuster

Erik must be delighted that you have all this free writing time on your hands

Ha ha - I suppose hes locked up now awaiting trial - still could have been worse - thought you were going to say it was shot down

I most definitely came here to find about that terrific film.................. that seems to be stuck in the 1970's

What would you say were the main mistakes apart from over confidence? I expect they thought it might be another trench warfare attrition affair (as WW1)

http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php/id-71099422:tv-k%C3%A6mpesten-t%C3%A6t-p%C3%A5-at-knuse-bil.html

ha - yeah that cats gonna get revenge - will probably involve digging claws in somwhere.

Good find that - has loadout information for the centerline pod

Is that a well known saying in Poland for that event?

Thought that would have been made public somewhere. I suppose there would have been 10 years of radar development from 78 to the time the A-4K come off the line in 88 so its possible they overcome the antenna gain limits through other means. In 1988 the APG-68v / v1/ v4 were in use and the v5 was due for production jets from 89.

Yes certainly the A-4Kahu upgrade gave it the best avionics an aircraft of that size could have had and a top line ability for that era.

If you feel anything I have stated is incorrect than please state what that is with evidence to support it - because I can back up everything I have just stated.

That's not entirely true - although the A-4Kahu was a superb budget fighter for that era The A-4Kahu is a conventional aircraft with a standard control system - The added MIL-STD-1553 in the A-4 would have only been putting in a bus to allow it to fire the AGM-65 and AIM-9L etc - this is not the same as the F-16A B10 where it was also integrated as part of a highly responsive FBW system and an unstable airframe. For wiki to say it has the eyes and ears of an F-16A B10 is also incorrect - in a merge you need to be able to see the other person so a raised bubble canopy is essential - and that person also probably didnt take the antenna size of the radar into account. The F-16 was actually designed to sustain 9Gs and in 1978 was the only production jet on the planet that could do this. this btw is not the same as withstanding 9Gs for a second or so (like Red Bull racing Aircraft do) Obviously no point talking about energy when it comes to the A-4 - anyway there are videos of the A-4K with an F-16 in the HUD - the same as there are Eurofighters getting blasted by F-16AMs - all this means is that if you put a **** pilot in a top line jet even an A-10 has a chance in a merge.

The A-4K had a designated version of the APG-66NZ modified for maritime use it states on several sites - the A-4AR also has a version (incorrectly given as the APG-66v2) Looking at its location the antenna dish seems to be a lot smaller A-4K F-16B A-4AR And yes today the F-16AM (MLU) uses a modified APG-66v2 which gives it similar capability to the APG-68v5 (F-16CM and B50/52+ use the superior APG-68v9) - so the A-4 version could maybe be upgraded but would have radar range limitations.

Sounds like it was worth the wait ! I want one

Interesting read none the less Includes Part 1: The “Big Two” Close Air Support (CAS) Myths Part 2: Those "not so good old days” Part 3: Vietnam and the Rise of the “No-CAS Air Force” Myth Part 4: Origins of the A-X Program Part 5: Defining a New CAS Platform: the Evolution of the A-10 Part 6: A-10s 'Forever' ? CAS Myths Sidebar: The A-10 and the 'Cult of the Gun' CAS Myths Sidebar: Army-Air Force Views on CAS and Airpower

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RYezgMj7IJw

Viper team F-16 packs have a lot of skins - the B50 pack has the 14th FS http://combatace.com/files/category/666-f-16/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0sfA-NsbzJY

In this High res video...........great shooting Right click and select watch on Vimeo for larger display