my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Jets   » New sim

   
Author Topic: New sim
RubenJames
Member
Member # 2645

posted 06-09-2000 02:29 PM     Profile for RubenJames   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Perhaps it's time for a change. What about a hard-core MiG-21 with mission editor set in North Korea ?

RJ


Posts: 1093 | From: Hong Kong | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
tony draper
Member
Member # 519

posted 06-09-2000 03:54 PM     Profile for tony draper   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
he ruben next to the Tornado IDS the mig 21 is my favorite airframe. neat little killing machine , almost make a dedicated mud mover like me become a fighter jock, although i have heard the operation to remove half your brain is a bugger.. stay low ..tony d
Posts: 1280 | From: england | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Otto el piloto
Member
Member # 4865

posted 06-09-2000 05:43 PM     Profile for Otto el piloto   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
oh yes. A nice little Mig 21 will do for me. Very pretty, indeed.

The whole lot of soviet planes from the chilliest days of the cold war looks like a vast area still not covered properly by any sims (well... I suppose it's not the only one... Mirage anyone?)

A campaign set in a fictional red alert in the european borders on the NATO looks like open enough to develop a few sims just a bit more interesting than the usual F22/F18 released every monday... Yawn...

Something tasty with Mig21-23-27, Su-17, Mirage, F-104, and a few more birds IŽm sure you know better than I do mixed up nicely.

So simple, and before something close to that comes to life, I have the feeling that we'll see 2000 more F18 crappy sims and 20 more game studios closing doors of pure boredom.

Back to Flanker-1. The closest thing to a Mig21... and still so far away.

Otto
"abre los ojos"


Posts: 11 | From: UK - EU | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
tony draper
Member
Member # 519

posted 06-09-2000 06:47 PM     Profile for tony draper   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Right on otto, lets throw in a hawker hunter and an english eletric lightning that was one fast beast. no legs though, incidently you can download and fly all of them in ms combatsim...tony d
Posts: 1280 | From: england | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Ozias
Member
Member # 4579

posted 06-09-2000 09:39 PM     Profile for Ozias   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
If you really want to, somewhere out there is an attacker flying saucer from Independance Day, which can be flown in FS98+ and CFS

Posts: 334 | From: London,UK | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
Tracer
Member
Member # 259

posted 06-10-2000 10:24 AM     Profile for Tracer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Yep,and you can fly/fight a Fsaucer in F22 ADF put your name in as Alien i think? and go to custom combat-scroll it right down, and a couple of Alien ships are there at the bottom

Otto,i share your wishes as well.The reason why we get F this F that is purely for sales......and yet something like EF2000 was the worlds best selling fsim?

I *still* play Super EF along with Tornado,Overlord,Dawn Patrol,SU-27 amongst my "oldies" but i crave for a Tornado 2

Tracer

------------------
"Flying is the second greatest thing known to man!
The first is landing!!"


Posts: 681 | From: Edinburgh,Scotland | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Lucky_1
Member
Member # 352

posted 06-10-2000 11:02 AM     Profile for Lucky_1   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
A sim like Cammanche vs. Hokkum could be a Mig-21 vs. F-4 Phantom II.

To me, these two planes go hand in hand. No two planes have ever dominated so long and had as much combat time, for jets at least. Yeah, a Mig-21 sim would be cool, but I'd rather have it in Vietnam instead of a North Korea scenario.

------------------
Two beers, or not two beers. There is no question.


Posts: 635 | From: Knoxville, TN. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
RubenJames
Member
Member # 2645

posted 06-10-2000 01:08 PM     Profile for RubenJames   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
It really sooths me after hearing so much positive response to my little suggestion. What about Tornado Vs MiG-21 ? Chaps, have you ever watched 'Ice Station Zebra' ? During the cold war, a few MiG-21 squadrons were stationed in Polyarnny primarily for first strike intercept missions. This bird which survives the new millenium must have some special qualities in itself. A campaign set in cold chilliest North Russia would be nice. Just like the forthcoming Red Alert 2 which should be released fall this year.

I heard that MS FS and CFS are very flexible packages. Is that really ? I was thinking FS2000 Pro this afternoon but insetad I bought "Age of the Empires II" (I want to play the Celts), Nocturne (quite a chilly RPG), Rogue Spear with Urban Operation (will try it out tomorrow, some scenes set in Hong Kong) and StarLancer (just to check out the brilliant graphics).

FS2000 Pro falls into next month's budget I think. Hope we can fly a MiG-21 some day in either FS or CFS.

How do I jump into other fighters' cockpit and fly them in Falcon 4.0, any clue ?

RJ


Posts: 1093 | From: Hong Kong | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
tony draper
Member
Member # 519

posted 06-10-2000 04:28 PM     Profile for tony draper   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
hi ruben, i have about 120 different aircraft in my combatsim folder. their are hundreds to download virtualy any aircraft ever made, they vary in quality and some are excelent. flying the german tornado , phantom or the little red ba hawk thru the interlaken scenery is magic.
i know a lot of simmers say combatsim is rubbish but it is ok for a bit of light relief, re fs 2000 got it the day it was released, gave it away about a week later, did not seem much different from fs98
i believe a new version of combatsim is going to be released i think it is worth having.. tony d

Posts: 1280 | From: england | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 06-10-2000 05:53 PM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I think you would have to have several models, all of them available in each theatre-level so that everybody could 'play along'.

I would personally pick Indi-Pak as my starting theatre because that gives me F-104 and MiG-21 /with guns/ before the all-missile version in early Nam.

I would not want to be the Fishbed in later '70-'72 actions as this gets you into high-zoom engagements on multiple radar-tailed bombers and between the fuel problem and the jamming, it would suck buttermilk to be Vietnamese. It /might/ be 'neat' to replay the Tomb vs. Cunningham scenario though, especially if I get a couple flares.

Cuba or even later Nicaragua/ElSalvadore (hunting OA-37 amongst mile-deep canyons and rifts, yum!:-) would be neato and again you've got some really wild planes to look at (U-2 silverbird, RF-101 and B-57 etc.)

Over the Bekaa with the late-Bis would be my next choice, you don't have radar GCI which is a beach of burning sands but you do have numbers (plane jump) and the late-21 is actually a very powerful, low-end, energy ship with one of the first 1:1 T/Wrs.

I would skip the Germany deal, simply because so much of the timeframe I want to do has the Fishbed doing battlefield sweeps with rockets and bombs and recce pods right in the teeth of radar guided threats and that's about as 'much fun' sounding as having Mengele pull your wisdom teeth with eyebrow tweezers.

The one I'd like /most/ to see is the latest 'Lancer' upgrade to the Rumanian design. At last gives you a decent (Israeli) radar/missile capability to include AA-10/11/12 and Python/Magic, plus some nifty air to mud options like Opher and Griffin. I figure we're about due to get our teeth kicked again and mucking about in the Blackbeard Balkans on Russias very door is as likely a place as any as well as more 'topical' to todays Post-Cold-But-Still-
Chilly environment.

Speaking of which, no offense but if I have to do another 'Simulated Rudolph Impression' up in the high whitey's I think I'm going to puke.

It would certainly be a challenging aircraft.
You can't fly below about 270-290 without getting losers returns on the airfoil (compared to a 17 or F-86 anyway) and you can't go above 350-370 without major snagging and eventual lockup in the roll. Something like 1.2Klbs worth of gas is always 'balance ballasted' in the fin and especially in the early, skinny-spine, drywingpylon, models your sweating /taxitime/ lest you lose some major 'persistence' (parachute to base).

But in it's sweet spot, it was the F-16 of it's age, able to turn and turn and /turn/ without bleeding off and with a fair weapons suite if rather lousy vision/sighting to use it.


Kurt Plummer


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
SuperGroove
Member
Member # 771

posted 06-10-2000 06:27 PM     Profile for SuperGroove   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Kurt,

I'm dying to know what a J-35 Drakan and J-37 Viggen can do. Can you please tell me? The Swedes make some very hot airplanes, and it'd be nice to see a sim based on a swedish aircraft. OH...and before I forget, what are the handling characteristics of the Tornado IDS and Mirage2000 C5

Paul


Posts: 800 | From: Colorado | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
RubenJames
Member
Member # 2645

posted 06-10-2000 11:50 PM     Profile for RubenJames   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Kurt Plummer:
...The one I'd like /most/ to see is the latest 'Lancer' upgrade to the Rumanian design. At last gives you a decent (Israeli) radar/missile capability to include AA-10/11/12 and Python/Magic,...

Kurt,

The Lancer perhaps is the what I call Version 2000 of the original Fishbed. It has 2 big MFDs on each side of the cockpit. A very western style on a Russian origin aircraft. Don't you think it's cute ?

Peter Tsang
P.S. And soon, we may be able to mark our flags onto their ICBMs.


Posts: 1093 | From: Hong Kong | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 06-11-2000 04:09 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Paul,

I can't truly tell you what the Viggen and Draken 'do' better as raw numbers of turn rate and so forth but I can make some fairly vague inferences based on rep.

Dragon.
The Draken was, for it's age and thrustloading, an outstanding quick-climb point defender. However it was also a good deal like an F-16XL without the FBW in that it was 'twitchy' and as unit-experience developed, only the best pilots were assigned to it and then never first-tour.

It had a pretty lousy weapons system, largely dictated by the airframes tiny size and the relatively few available radar-missile choices.

And though the Swedes supposedly improved the RB.27/28 it would not be somethign you would want to take up against even a Gen-II (F-4/MiG-23) threat at altitude.

Fortunately, at least at the time it was doing primary service, there were parts of the Bothnian Gulf which were without radar and this allowed snapups and diveaways which both 'sides' supposedly exploited in combats whose results are only known to the fishes. Against a MiG-17/19 (fifties, which is what makes the Draken so 'wow') threat it should be both angles and energy dominant and against a MiG-21F/PF it should be at least competitive.

Any later and I just don't know (it's going to start to lose on fuel and thrust very rapidly but so much of what they do over there is based on sudden-ambush and datalink quiet vector such that this may not matter).

TBolt.
The Viggen is something of a myth to be truthful. It has a lot of base drag and when you start to push those big (flapped, not all moving) canards around in a turn it gets even worse riding a fairly stable CG margin and a huge deltawing.

It is very stable and has good thrust loading (for the era) however which means you can do tricks with it at low level that can pitch-and- spitout a MiG-21/23 type threat and it is known that the Viggen pilots frequently stalled at least their WARPAC dancing partners right on into the drink this way.

Part of this may be pilot quality, the Flygvappen put in a lot of hours for a nation their size and until recently they kept their experience levels pretty high in-wing (no ladder climb BS) too.

The AJ's lack of a fixed gun and the early reliance on Falcon again makes life more difficult than it should have been however and this gets particularly iffy when you're doing strike and have to make choices on EW/guns/AAM/bombload.

The Jakt Viggen is a whole 'nother can of worms and though it comes up short on combat persistence (the RM.8b sucks gas even worse than the 8a I'm told and you've only got two short-pol BVR shots) it was, for a time, the only jet with Eagle-equivalent LDSD in Europe. It likely even had a better seeker: clutter pullout (Skyflash i-monopulse).

However; in a 1:1+, 17Klb GWE world, it's 40K 'low slow all day' style of MiG-eater combat could not overcome it's conventional CG design limits and the physical performance shortcomings of STOL-specific optimization on lift.

This became clear in the first 'Eurofighter' (Deal of the Century) competition against the Mirage F-1E and F-16 prototypes where it was consistently beaten down in visual-range performances by both the other players (the JA-37 BVR-radar capability debuted after this IIRC, the Saab-37X being a hodgepodge of AJ ground attack avionics/weapons and JA airframe features) as well as on range ayload ones.

The neato things about the Swedes (for a game) are the way they take things so /seriously/ in terms of total-system-of-systems approach. And have, for a long time.

The STRIL-60 is a /literal/ term in that it has been around since the 1960's and gives you a SAGE+ type datalinked ground environment that, coupled to automated navigation aid (maps and later digital maps) around their own countryside makes it easy to get into and out of the combat areas using multiple overlapped, shortradius coveraged bases and gun-SAM defenses.

Speaking of which, the Swedes are also into EW and were among the first to put BIG podloads of both ECM and EXCM on a fighter, probably because of their 'exposed' neutrality maintenance tactical bias and subsequent overwater needs.

Lastly, they take roadbasing and rapid-turn capabilities to heart. It probably doesn't make much difference in an era of AWACS and Cruise but in the days when a _man_ bombed and 'look down shoot down' was rocket pods and rolling the airplane to look out your canopy, it was a pretty-deep insight.

To a player all of this can be wrapped up into three basic 'kewl!'s

1. Sophisticated A/G sensors and Nav.
Datalink, good Ground Mapping, dedicated Recce tools and both AShM 'beach killer' and pseudo-TFR badweather laydown strike options.

2. Shortfield Recovery.
Into and out of 2,000-2,500ft fields. Even the Draken was pretty good with the tail bumper wheels and two drag chutes almost as big as it was. The Viggen was KING however with the semiautomatic MLS autopilot linked flaps and wheels-on reverser modes (predating Tornado by a long ways).

Imagine landing in a short-strip between rows of 70ft tall conifers from a 100ft ceiling with a 30 knot crosswind and blowing snow as your only 'guide'.

As soon as you touch down, the reverser kicks (so go around is minimally optional) and then about 4 seconds of 4G later, there are the blinking lights of a follow-me truck/motorcycle to get you to your hardstand.

Turn around, fold the tail and kick the reverser to back into the net coverred revetment where a team of four-six conscripts are /all over/ your jet doing a hot turn to get back out to that damnable Soviet Marine landing force totally ruining your X-Mas...

3. Unique Progressions/Weapons/Campaigns.
You start primitive (tail chase/hot metal) and gradually build up to some pretty unique (RB-04/05, Baron pods, IRST, FQ radar-Falcon and almost every AIM-9 model ever made) capabilities. Especially later in life it should also be noted that the SweAF had an ever increasing number of 'friendly but still foreign' intrusions by everything from RF-84s to RF-4 to Nimrod and of course the notorious 'Bodo Express' SR-71's to deal with. In the mid-late 80's this peaked out to about 70-80% NATO advantaged intrusions. The Russians actually did more 'show off' type work with first-peak on a lot of new platforms coming via Swedish formation-flyby-foto. MiG-25, Tu-26, Il-18 (thousand variations) and MiG-29 all come to mind. And of course there was the 'secret NATO' agreement to stand by us if the push really came to shove. That could mean everything from recovering (sunk) carrier aircraft off the Kola to 'ignoring' certain overflights into the Leningrad/Byelo district railyards and cooperative interdiction/mining escort of Soviet Marine units trying to start a naval front in Denmark or North Germany.

OTHERS
The Mir-2K05 I can't say much about. I don't have the data. MICA is cool (if only because it gives you back the wingtanks) and their EW is pretty good I hear (largely because ICMS is based on Spectra tech). But overall the 2000 is still short of a lot of the 'necessaries' in my mind to make a useful weapons platform, fuel/SFC and thrustloading for one, and weapons-mix alternatives (particularly SEAD and point-strike smaller than ARMAT/AS.30) for another.

Tornado is another post-subject...;-)

I can recommend Bill Gunston's 'Early Supersonic Fighters of the Fifties' (or close) as a good idea of what the Draken was when it first came online and the FTA:
http://www.saunalahti.fi/~fta/index.htm

though largely Finnish-AF related, could likely give you some good backdoors into both Draken and Viggen SweAF 'operational' wingsites. Jarmo Lindberg is somehow linked to this bunch as well as RAM newsgroup and he is a very technically knowledgeable source on Swedish doctrine.

Urban Friedrickson's Draken/Viggen/Gripen sites are fairly well updated tech sources at-
http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/35draken.htm
http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/aviation/text/37viggen.htm http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/aviation/text/39gripen.htm


And Lastly this one- http://www.f10.mil.se/35/j35a.html

Covers most of the Draken models with good photos and sideview paintings.

Swedish Armed Forces http://www.mil.se/index_e.shtml

Kurt Plummer


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 06-11-2000 04:40 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey RJ,

Don't know if 'cute' is quite applicable to any killing machine but the 21-93/Lancer-2000 or whatever the heck it's now called is pretty much the /minimum/ you'd want to take into battle these days. It is effectively, IMO, a Gripen with a little more power and a little less aerosophistication and weapons versatility.

Indeed, in terms of the latter it's got a good combination of SRM options and radar and the HUD/HMS linkage is also pretty decent (I hear they're working hard at giving it a head-steer FLIR option via the LITENING pod which may translate into a pseudo-IRST as well, what this does to external gas/AAM mixing being anyone's guess).

Lancer is still short a truly universal-useful BVRAAM however.

I've seen text but never pics claiming the AA-12 is 'available' to the RuAF birds and yet would not want to fight Russian or even ex-WARPAC nations with a Russian-coded seeker/CM vulnerability.

And it doesn't have an ARM to help it get close enough to use the other optional PGM stuff. Or an AShM to help control the seaways. Lancer has so few pylons it's likely not much of a real option for fueled-radius-X anyway.

In many ways the campaign I see for the Rumanians is a lot like the Swedish problem with a bunch of (albeit currently deactivated) 'dispersal bases' becoming emergency-necessary as both NATO and Russia try to argue over port-and-rail access through to a Balkan Debate (either via Macedonia or Rumania itself).

This could lead to a fairly large bruhaha covering most of the Black Sea region with additional modifiers depending on how the Ukraine tumbled in terms of through->West airspace useage.

But for either side to achieve 'air dominance' and the right to strike into base-in or navlanes on either the Italo-Grecian or Germano-Polish axes, (against or from the Crimean AVMF/SA counterforce bases) using strategic-ranged platforms (the ony ones with even the cruise-launch reach into Serbia); would mean a first-fight with TacAir right over Rumanian soil for at least recovery-escort airspace useage. 'Neutrality' be hanged.

Even with Turkey nominally on the 'NATO'-U.S. side (something far from certain with the Russkis so politically/trade 'close' and our condemning their Khurdish Control Efforts), you would likely see the MIG-21 performing, at last, in it's primary bomber zoom-kill/snapdown role against some very high tech threat forces including B-1's in TERFLEW, B-2s above 50KAGL and Tu-22m/160's 'somewhere in-between' going very fast and firing from Very Long Range (overwater, both CAP and nominally surface unit SAM protected).

The key thing for the 'plot' would be the inevitable acknowledgement that it was time to pick sides after a 'valiant but vain' initial struggle.

This, depending on player mission success ratios and axes (west or east) force concentration as well as quite possibly landed troops in-country, would leave the player the option of then 'flying for' (guide and passthrough) either sides Air Forces.

Moral Justifications and Ethnic/National 'brotherhoods of man' are so mixed and murky over there that neither side would necessarily be the 'good guy' but there would be noteable followon missions supporting/fighting some pretty 'varied' opfors.

Greek F-16's and Mir-F1, Turkish F-16/F-4E,
Russian Backfire/Blackjack/Bear/Mainstay. Su-24/27KUB/39. Maybe even WIGs.

U.S. BUFF-H, BONE-Bf, F-15E, F-15CAESA, F-22 and maybe even JSF or F-16C.60.

It would be...'different'. And frighteningly topical.


Kurt Plummer


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Billzilla
Member
Member # 34

posted 06-11-2000 05:11 AM     Profile for Billzilla   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Yup, I was about to say all that.
Thanks, Kurt.

Posts: 244 | From: Australia | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
SuperGroove
Member
Member # 771

posted 06-11-2000 09:39 AM     Profile for SuperGroove   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thanks Kurt! I really appreciated that. I'm going to print it out too. It's nothing, short of an article from a reknowned magazine GJ kurt!
Posts: 800 | From: Colorado | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
RubenJames
Member
Member # 2645

posted 06-11-2000 12:11 PM     Profile for RubenJames   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Kurt,

I really admire your knowledge base being so huge . I wish I could be as knowledgeable as you are. Then I could be the Air Arsenals 'Jack Ryan'!

RJ
P.S. I really want to be a military analyst. It demands a lots of knowledge on hardware on the one hand, on the other, you need to catch and express your opinion about the current world situations co-related to all these arsenals.


Posts: 1093 | From: Hong Kong | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
LeadHead
Member
Member # 184

posted 06-11-2000 03:43 PM     Profile for LeadHead   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
quote:
Especially later in life it should also be noted that the SweAF had an ever increasing number of 'friendly but still foreign' intrusions by everything from RF-84s to RF-4 to Nimrod and of course the notorious 'Bodo Express' SR-71's to deal with.

Hey Kurt, I read a quite cool story about our airforce trying to deal with the SR-71 "problem".
When the AF started to wodner how on earth they were supposed to bring down an SR-71 (I don't know why they figured that would have to be necessary...) they though that they could possibly use the above mentioned climbing capabilities of the J-35 "Draken" to get close enough to lock the Blackbird up and fire if needed.
One problem was that nobody had a clue as to what would happen to a human if cabin pressure dropped at 16000 meters. So, the pilot whoose book is the source of this story was chosen to enter a pressure chamber and try it out.
It went all fine but when he came out he felt some itching in his eyes. The doctor simply told him that the boiling point of water at 16000 meters is just about 37 degrees centigrade.
Thus he would be one of the few men in the world with cooked eyes.

Later on they had the tough job of getting close to the SR-71s. The were simply waiting in standby for the Swedish GCI radars to detect an overflying SR-71 and up they went.
If I recall correctly they once got close enough to lock it up on the fairly limited radar suite of the J-35 but they never got close enough to fire.


Finally, one question for Kurt:
Are you unemployed? You must be the one with the longest average posts on this forum.

------------------
Lead-Head's Simulation Site:
http://fly.to/lead-head


Posts: 775 | From: Piteć, Norrbotten, Sweden. | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
RubenJames
Member
Member # 2645

posted 06-12-2000 04:55 AM     Profile for RubenJames   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Maybe he is the Jack Ryan from "The Hunt for the Red October".

RJ


Posts: 1093 | From: Hong Kong | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member
Member # 358

posted 06-13-2000 12:15 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Leadhead,

First, if we're thinking of the same thing, it looks like I screwed up, it may have been the 'Alconbury Express' if it was indeed into the Baltic/Bothnian area.

Though there are few who will agree, to me the SR-71 has /always/ been 'vulnerable', to the direct-undertrack threats of some powers.
It's the 300-400nm standoff margin (what's 20nm of evasion offtrack when you've got 120 of 'margin') with the SLAR and ELINT packages 'looking in', from 80-85K, that makes the difference to it's survivability.

If nothing else, at these kinds of range:heights you've likely got _minutes_ worth of through-the-conlayer and then across-the-vector cutoff warning on both SAM and Fighter intercept.

The Baltic basically prevents using this lateral-parallel option as you are effectively 'surrounded' by unfriendly/neutral states.

The North Corner of the Leningrad run is always tight and the SR crews tended to skid-left rather than 'overlap' Soviet airspace in-line with the strategic bases on the Kola. Don't need any Russian complaints to the IAAC about a mission that never happened etc. etc.

Seems the Swedes got a little tired of this 'second-best offense' crap and snap-upped a JA-37 traffic cop with such precision and surprise that apparently it was able to hold the nose-on interval for a SARH envelope shot (duhhh, did they have actual Skyflash aboard? That's another 500lbs+drag) and the SR crew just sat there and let it happen. Didn't even try to jam the Ps-46 AFAIK.

About a month or so later, the Flygflottille in question got a picture postcard of an SR-71 signed something like "Giving You The Bird, John Doe and Joe Smith" from the detachment crew in question and the 'incidental' overflights stopped.

Later on in the 80's, the Soviets expanded on this with new tech and tactics to the point where they were able to use MiG-25PD/PDS in hunting pack ambush and active-to-passive 'snakeherding' coordinated tactics that basically pushed the Habu into a no-overflight, no-escape, killsack in which it /had to/ slow down and take a 'simulated' AA-6 salvo. 1-2 years later we retired the mission.

At any rate that's my story, I'm 'recollecting' this from RAM discussions which seem to come up every other month or so
Perhaps a Dejanews Power Search might be in order for all the details.


Kurt Plummer


Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

© COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
© 2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved