USAF Fighter downs Iranian UAV

Discussions about F-16.net news articles. A topic is created automatically whenever someone posts a comment in the F-16 News section.
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 808
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 11:38

by akruse21 » 13 Mar 2009, 20:18

Guess this will quiet all the bitching about still carrying AtA loadouts in the AOR :)
Ababil03 An American fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone as it was flying over Iraq, U.S. military sources in Baghdad tell Danger Room.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,509153,00.html


F-16.net Moderator
F-16.net Moderator
 
Posts: 3997
Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

by TC » 13 Mar 2009, 20:44

Excellent! 4 more and that guy's an...Oh never mind. :lol:


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 808
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 11:38

by akruse21 » 13 Mar 2009, 20:47

I wonder if it was guns or a missile shot?


Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 272
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 20:23
Location: Texas

by tjodalv43 » 13 Mar 2009, 22:45

Too bad we probably won't get a UAV's eye view like that one from Georgia!


User avatar
Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2322
Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
Location: Under an engine somewhere.

by That_Engine_Guy » 14 Mar 2009, 02:01

Fox cites wired.com which had this to say...

"wouldn't confirm the shoot-down. Nor would he deny it."

U.S. Jet Shoots Down Iranian Drone Over Iraq (Updated)
By Noah Shachtman March 12, 2009

An American fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone as it was flying over Iraq, U.S. military sources in Baghdad tell Danger Room.

Details of the previously-unreported shoot-down, which occurred last month, are still sketchy. But we do know that American commanders have long accused Tehran of supplying weapons and training to all sorts of Iraqi militant groups. Shi'ite militias fired Iranian rockets at U.S. troops in Iraq, according to the American military; Sunni militias allegedly used Iranian armor-piercing bombs to reduce U.S. vehicles to ribbons.

In early 2008, however, the torrent of Iranian weapons into Iraq slowed to a trickle, the U.S. said. And now, the new Obama administration is looking for ways to reach out to the Tehran regime -- dangling invitations to international conferences, and offering promises of renewed relations.

Which means the drone incident comes at a particularly sensitive time.

Iran has built an array of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. The pneumatically launched Ababil ("Swallow") has a wingspan of more than 10 feet, and cruises at 160 knots, according to Globalsecurity.org. The Mohajer or Misrad ("Migrant") drone is a bit smaller, and slower-flying.

Iran has supplied Hezbollah, the Lebanese terror group, with both models. Misrad drones flew reconnaissance missions in both November 2004 and April 2005. Then, in 2006, during Hezbollah's war with Israel, the group operated both Misrads and Ababils over Israel's skies. At least one was shot down by Israeli fighter jets.

Since then, Tehran claims to have radically upgraded its unmanned fleet. In 2007, Iran said it built a drone with a range of 420 miles. In February, Iran's deputy defense minister claimed its latest UAV could now fly as far as 600 miles -- a huge improvement over crude drones like the Misrad, if true. Iran often exaggerates what its weapons can do. But, if this drone really can stay in the air for for that long, the Washington Times notes, "it could soar over every U.S. military installation, diplomatic mission or country of interest in the Middle East." Including those in Iraq.

UPDATE: So I finally got a hold of a spokesman for Multi-National Corps - Iraq. His response: "I believe MNF-I [Multi-National Forces - Iraq -- Corps' bosses, basically] is taking the lead on this incident." So then I reached out to MNF-I. A spokesman there wouldn't confirm the shoot-down. Nor would he deny it. "We've got nothing for you, Noah," the spokesman said.


TEG
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: 31 Jan 2005, 22:32

by Redvan » 14 Mar 2009, 15:28

akruse21 wrote:I wonder if it was guns or a missile shot?


he probably didn't waste a bullet or missile on it... he probably just turned his engine wash on the Iranian hunk of junk... ;)


Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 110
Joined: 21 Jun 2008, 05:37
Location: Larnaca, Cyprus

by Butcher » 14 Mar 2009, 15:56

We should be looking for aircraft with a UAV kill mark :)


F-16.net Moderator
F-16.net Moderator
 
Posts: 1892
Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:47

by Scorpion1alpha » 14 Mar 2009, 16:32

akruse21 wrote:I wonder if it was guns or a missile shot?


If he wanted bonus points, guns man, guns!

Redvan wrote:he probably didn't waste a bullet or missile on it... he probably just turned his engine wash on the Iranian hunk of junk... ;)


They should automatically make him ace if that were the case. LOL!


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 736
Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
Location: Titletown, USA

by ptplauthor » 14 Mar 2009, 17:28

he probably didn't waste a bullet or missile on it... he probably just turned his engine wash on the Iranian hunk of junk... Wink


How do you like your UAV?
Extra Crispy.
You Got it

It was probably a Sparrow or a gun Kill--I don't think the pilot would waste a Slammer on a UAV, and (I'm speculating) the heat signature probably wasn't enough for a Sidewinder.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 08 Jul 2004, 19:22
Location: Norway

by Boman » 14 Mar 2009, 17:39

Isn't the Sparrow out of use??
Best regards
Niels


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 736
Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
Location: Titletown, USA

by ptplauthor » 14 Mar 2009, 18:46

Isn't the Sparrow out of use??


It's getting phased out, but it's still a good weapon nonetheless--the AIM-7 of today is nothing like what it was in Vietnam, when a good percentage of the missiles that were "fired" just fell off the airframe of our fighters thanks to the humidity of Southeast Asia.

As late as FY1997 there was a new variant (-7R) in the works that would have included a terminal-guidance IR seeker in case the SARH seeker failed--it could have been fire-and-forget to an extent, but I'd bet that the success of the Slammer made a new Sparrow obsolete, Slammers don't need to have the firing jet aimed at the target after all.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 808
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 11:38

by akruse21 » 14 Mar 2009, 20:30

ptplauthor wrote:
Isn't the Sparrow out of use??


It's getting phased out, but it's still a good weapon nonetheless--the AIM-7 of today is nothing like what it was in Vietnam, when a good percentage of the missiles that were "fired" just fell off the airframe of our fighters thanks to the humidity of Southeast Asia.

As late as FY1997 there was a new variant (-7R) in the works that would have included a terminal-guidance IR seeker in case the SARH seeker failed--it could have been fire-and-forget to an extent, but I'd bet that the success of the Slammer made a new Sparrow obsolete, Slammers don't need to have the firing jet aimed at the target after all.


Haven't seen the sparrow in about 8 years. I would venture to say that there isn't a combat loaded jet anywhere in US military with a 7 loaded.


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 736
Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
Location: Titletown, USA

by ptplauthor » 14 Mar 2009, 20:52

Haven't seen the sparrow in about 8 years. I would venture to say that there isn't a combat loaded jet anywhere in US military with a 7 loaded.


It's stated on www.af.mil that Sparrow is still operational as of November 2007:
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=77

I've heard that they're rare, seeing as the AMRAAM is more capable, but the cheaper AIM-7 would have some points going for it in some missions where the target isn't maneuvering.

As long as the missiles aren't malfunctioning, use 'em. The exact number of missiles is classified, but I'm guessing it's a good-size number. It's best not to toss the missiles to the junkyard. Here's an alternative: use the Sparrow bodies to make more AMRAAMs--they seem to be of similar dimensions, and that would cut down on the number of new missile bodies Raytheon would have to make from scratch.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 808
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 11:38

by akruse21 » 14 Mar 2009, 20:57

Not going to say anymore. Your logic is flawed.


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: 08 Jul 2004, 19:22
Location: Norway

by Boman » 14 Mar 2009, 21:20

Well now boys, no need to argue.

I do however remember seeing the -7 carried on F-18E/F's, but most have been inert training rounds.
Best regards
Niels


Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 3 guests