NK MiG-29s intercept US RC-135

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-05 08:50pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
This was more recent than the Falklands, I saw a clip someplace about the newest remodel of the Nimrod and they showed a sidewinder. It could very well have just been for testing and not general practice to arm it so.

I never said the capability was removed, merely that its unlikely to be used in combat.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-03-05 08:51pm

Says here they can carry Sidewinder AAM's for self defense. Not sure how commonly they would though.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/airpower/nimrodmr2.html

Forgive me, but is the Sidewinder much use for a big guy like this when a fighter is gonna approach from behind?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-05 08:54pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:Says here they can carry Sidewinder AAM's for self defense. Not sure how commonly they would though.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/airpower/nimrodmr2.html

Forgive me, but is the Sidewinder much use for a big guy like this when a fighter is gonna approach from behind?

I already said [1] yes they could [2] the capability remains. I also already said that they're of limit usage because of limited supporting avionics and the likeliness of a stern attack

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-03-05 08:56pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:Says here they can carry Sidewinder AAM's for self defense. Not sure how commonly they would though.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/airpower/nimrodmr2.html

Forgive me, but is the Sidewinder much use for a big guy like this when a fighter is gonna approach from behind?

They are a last stand effort, if a fighter has broken through your escort cover then those missiles are the only things you have to fight back with until back up arrives.

I personally would not like to be the first to see if this would intimidate an aggressor, try flying a passenger jet and use it to fend off interceptors.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-03-05 08:57pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
TrailerParkJawa wrote:Says here they can carry Sidewinder AAM's for self defense. Not sure how commonly they would though.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/airpower/nimrodmr2.html

Forgive me, but is the Sidewinder much use for a big guy like this when a fighter is gonna approach from behind?
I already said [1] yes they could [2] the capability remains. I also already said that they're of limit usage because of limited supporting avionics and the likeliness of a stern attack

Calm down, I didnt see the previous post you made, I was busy eating and reading other posts.

As for the Falklands, sorry I misunderstood and thought it was a one time thing.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-03-05 08:57pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote: Those where thrown on as a emergency measure during the Falklands out of a fear Argentina would find a way to fly fighters out of Port Stanley. As it turned out, they could never sufficently extend the runway. Without a HUD or radar, its questionable how effective they would be even if an attacker could be gotten into the missile field of view. Its more likely the points would be used for Harpoons in combat.

I'm not aware of any other patrol aircraft with AAM's, though the Bear's and Badger bombers the Soviets converted for the task retained there 23mm guns.
I'm sure the P-3 Orion could carry some AAMs if need be like the Nimrod, just in case. The E-3 Sentry/AWACS also carries AAMs on the RAF and UN model.
You'd need to rewire the wings. You can mount and use a Sidewinder on a P-51 easily. However the fact remains that the capacbility doesnt currently exist.

If British or NATO E-3's have ever flown with Sidewinders, I've never heard of it. Waste of weapon life, since the aircraft turns like a cow and would be heading away from any attacker.

Hah, NATO, yeah, must be getting late, I thought UN for a second.

But, I have seen diagrams with such aircraft packing these weapons, it really is quite futile in the end though.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-05 09:05pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:
Hah, NATO, yeah, must be getting late, I thought UN for a second.

But, I have seen diagrams with such aircraft packing these weapons, it really is quite futile in the end though.

Unless you've seen an actually photo, its more likely it was just a proposal

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-03-05 09:22pm

Lonestar wrote: Met a few people like that in my lifetime. Got kicked outta Gods and Generals for screaming "Traitor!Traitor!" whenever Stonewall Jackson was on screen.

Hey, did they give you a curbie and break a few limbs while they were
at it? If there's anything I hate, it's some asshole who has to scream
outloud during the movie that we all PAID MONEY FOR.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-03-05 09:26pm

ben wrote: Not even funny Shepp i've got family in that area and i live well withn the fall out zone of a LA directed nuke.

So? I live 20 miles from the biggest fucking Primary Target of them all:

Washington, DC.

No matter which way I run, I'm dead in 30 minutes.

And besides, if you eliminated Los Angeles from California, or sliced it
off into it's own state, California would then swing right to republicanism...

ben · Post by **ben** » 2003-03-05 11:07pm

Not LA try San Francisco besides of wich the destruction of LA would screw over Orange County and San Bernardino those places are major Republican strong holds in California.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-05 11:13pm

MKSheppard wrote:So? I live 20 miles from the biggest fucking Primary Target of them all:

Washington, DC.

If you are worried about that you can move up here in Quebec you`ll be safe.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-03-05 11:21pm

And besides, if you eliminated Los Angeles from California, or sliced it
off into it's own state, California would then swing right to republicanism..

No, you want to cut out the Greater Bay Area and you might turn the state. LA is more conservative than we are.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2003-03-06 07:50am

MKSheppard wrote:
ben wrote: Not even funny Shepp i've got family in that area and i live well withn the fall out zone of a LA directed nuke.
So? I live 20 miles from the biggest fucking Primary Target of them all:

Washington, DC.

No matter which way I run, I'm dead in 30 minutes.

And besides, if you eliminated Los Angeles from California, or sliced it
off into it's own state, California would then swing right to republicanism...

I live less than 10 miles from DC. I'll be dead before you. By like about 10 seconds.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-03-06 09:26am

Speaking of nuclear targets, CENTCOM (@MacDill AFB)is fairly close by and would be hit by a groundburst strike, meaning that if I don't die from the blast, I'll be dead from the fallout.

There's also a shipyard which produces quite a few minesweepers, the old DOE plant that made nuclear bomb triggers (most of it is now used as a research/industry park - but there are still hordes of Hummers in the back)...

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-06 09:39am

How did they know what targets the Soviets would strike?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-03-06 10:00am

Vympel wrote:How did they know what targets the Soviets would strike?

Probably a reasonable guess. The Soviets did have a lot of nukes.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-03-06 12:20pm

Ground zero for me in a large exchange is Onizuka Air Station about 12 miles as the crow flies to the southwest. Then there are all the refineries in Benicia 40 miles to the North. Travis AFB is up there too. But all the other targets were closed in the 90's.

RadiO · Post by **RadiO** » 2003-03-06 03:35pm

Our local aerospace factory was conventionally bombed by Soviet Backfires during a 1982 British government Command Post Exercise. IIRC Birmingham then got fried and, being 15 miles away, I'm pretty sure that would have been Goodnight Vienna. If I did survive this notional attack irradiated beyond any reasonable chance of recovery, I would be shot (as a "zombie") by the Territorial Army if I attempted to take water and food from those more fortunate than myself. Swell.

Well, that's alledgedly the decision the "surviving" government bods made in the exercise. I have this vague memory that the TA units "involved" would be moved around the country so they could be more, er, objective (i.e avoiding the situation where they're not shooting that radioactive looter because it's their Dad). But how true that is I'm not sure.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-03-06 03:50pm

RadiO wrote:Our local aerospace factory was conventionally bombed by Soviet Backfires during a 1982 British government Command Post Exercise. IIRC Birmingham then got fried and, being 15 miles away, I'm pretty sure that would have been Goodnight Vienna. If I did survive this notional attack irradiated beyond any reasonable chance of recovery, I would be shot (as a "zombie") by the Territorial Army if I attempted to take water and food from those more fortunate than myself. Swell.
Well, that's alledgedly the decision the "surviving" government bods made in the exercise. I have this vague memory that the TA units "involved" would be moved around the country so they could be more, er, objective (i.e avoiding the situation where they're not shooting that radioactive looter because it's their Dad). But how true that is I'm not sure.

Like 28 Days Later only without the virus.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2003-03-06 03:52pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Hey, did they give you a curbie and break a few limbs while they were
at it? If there's anything I hate, it's some asshole who has to scream
outloud during the movie that we all PAID MONEY FOR.

:: Shrugs :: I have a low tolerance for people who don't seem to hold value on HUman life. A Pro-slavery nutjob-traitor in a movie that was very different from the book qualifies.

So would someone who seems almost eager for LA to be nuked.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-06 06:09pm

I've got a number of targets upwind, some of the time, among them Raven Rock. However the distance might protect me from the multi megaton ground burst that would destroy that bunker. But I'm in defilade and upwind from the closest targets, naval yard, airport and other targets around Philadelphia.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-03-06 06:49pm

The only time I think Hobart would be directly threatened is if we had an American carrier in port at the time. Even then I know of a full-on nuclear bunker up in the central highlands...

If you're going to be safe, you might as well be DAMN safe...

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-03-06 08:41pm

weemadando wrote:The only time I think Hobart would be directly threatened is if we had an American carrier in port at the time. Even then I know of a full-on nuclear bunker up in the central highlands...

If you're going to be safe, you might as well be DAMN safe...

In a major nuclear war it might be hit anyways because it's capable of handling an American carrier.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-03-06 11:19pm

phongn wrote:
weemadando wrote:The only time I think Hobart would be directly threatened is if we had an American carrier in port at the time. Even then I know of a full-on nuclear bunker up in the central highlands...

If you're going to be safe, you might as well be DAMN safe...
In a major nuclear war it might be hit anyways because it's capable of handling an American carrier.

Its not capable of handling an American carrier. They park about 10-20km down river and take a ferry inshore for leave... Its not like we do re-fits or anything.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-06 11:53pm

weemadando wrote:
Its not capable of handling an American carrier. They park about 10-20km down river and take a ferry inshore for leave... Its not like we do re-fits or anything.

In that case, they'd aim for the carrier. The bomb would be big and a ground burst, but you'd probably stand a high chance of survival. Though the fallout could cut years off you life at the least.