Forum: Air Power

I think the magazine from the US is still made, I was referring to the big soft covered books that were a quarterly issue. I had a subscription that my mother used to order for my birthday every year. They even had it in hard cover if you wanted to pay bigger bucks for them!

F-16.net Sponsor

FlightDreamz wrote:

the Iranians did have a downgraded version of the AIM-54 Phoenix.

They've tried using MIM-24 Hawks as a "poor man's Phoenix". AFAIK, they've also tried mounting Tomcats to pedestals with armament, and using the radar and the missiles as a jury-rigged SAM site.

Quote:

they've also tried mounting Tomcats to pedestals with armament, and using the radar and the missiles as a jury-rigged SAM site.

That has got to be the most a$$anine thing I've ever heard, innovative but a$$anine.
Its truly amazing what desperation can make people do.

It really makes me wonder how much longer the Iranians can operate their Tomcats. I mean, you can only reapply duct tape so many times...

From what I've read, all US Air-to-Air missiles are solid-fueled, and over time can develop cracks in the fuel bodies. The Phoenix was a good missile, and should not be slighted, it can go waaaay faster than any non-ICB Missile I know of.

I think they should have transitioned the Cat into an Air Defense role after 9/11 if nothing but to use up the missiles. Like some have said, the -54 works best against slow, plodding targets, last I checked, airliners were slow and plodding.

By the way, I realize that territorial defense is an AF/AFR/ANG role, but the Slammer's warhead is a third the size of the Phoenix's. I don't mean to offend, just stating facts.

Works Cited: Globalsecurity.org. Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising

ptplauthor wrote:

From what I've read, all US Air-to-Air missiles are solid-fueled, and over time can develop cracks in the fuel bodies.

True statement. This is why munitions are periodically taken down for maintenance.

ptplauthor wrote:

I think they should have transitioned the Cat into an Air Defense role after 9/11

And do what then? How many AA engagements have we had since OAF (Kosovo)? That would have been a waste of money and resources as well, since the F-14 was at that time already configured for both an AA and AG role. When OEF kicked off, the Tomcats were putting LGBs on targets in Afghanistan.

ptplauthor wrote:

if nothing but to use up the missiles.

Just because you have them, doesn't mean you will either use them, or even have an available target. Remember, all U.S. Tomcat AA kills came with Sparrows and Sidewinders. The Navy was, however, periodically using them against drones, so it's not as though they went completely unused.

ptplauthor wrote:

the Slammer's warhead is a third the size of the Phoenix's.

How many kills do we have with the AIM-54? How many kills do we have with the AMRAAM? Size really doesn't matter. How it is employed, however, does.

The Phoenix was really a weapon that was great on paper, but never had the opportunity to really live up to its potential. Had we gone into a major war sometime between the late 70s to the mid 80s, I think it would have.

However, the Phoenix complicated itself out of the business. It couldn't be used on any other aircraft than the F-14, and required the Tomcat's weapons system, along with the additional crewmember just to operate it.

The AMRAAM is a much more practical missile. Had the Tomcat been mod'ed to carry it, it might've stayed around a little longer.

Against an airliner, you don't need a missile that can turn with the best top-of-the-line fighters. Using the Phoenix against an airliner that gets too close to Washington could save lives.

With the warhead size, I was just relaying speculation about how the newer, lighter missiles may not have been effective against the airliners, that they may have needed the extra weight.

All in all, its a moot point, the Cat's gone Sad

and the Air Defense role belongs to the Air Force anyway.

If you put a 'winder up a GE CF6's bunghole, you will render it completely useless. Laughing

Start taking the thrust away, and it gets harder to keep it in the air. I'd rather know that I was able to force the plane down, somewhere where it wouldn't be a threat, than turn it, and the innocents on board into a fireball, which would be hard to do with any type of AA missile anyway.

Yeah, I concede, besides who would be dumb enough to try something like 9/11 again. If he's that desperate to meet Allah, there are faster ways>

[quote="TC"]They've tried using MIM-24 Hawks as a "poor man's Phoenix".

Yeah, I remember that. I used to have a grainy photo/jpeg of that loadout somewhere, gotta see if I can dig that up. Never heard of mounting the Tomcats to pedestals to use as "SAM sites" before. Seems truly pointless to me, they hard THAT hard of a time maintaining the HAWK surface to air batteries?
WTF

FlightDreamz wrote:

they hard THAT hard of a time maintaining the HAWK surface to air batteries?

Well, when you're dealing with equipment that hasn't been produced since the 1980s, but has been barred from sale to the Iranians since 1979, things tend to wear out and break in almost 30 years. They reportedly only have a few Tomcats left in flying condition as well (4 or so Question

), and they won't last much longer either.

And they have SA-10 and SA-5 to provide their Air Defense, I'd imagine either could do as much damage as a jerry-rigged F-14, and the reloads are a hell of a lot more available, barring a reverse-engineer of the Phoenix, but we all know how well those turn out 'cough' Tu-4 'cough'

Irainian F-14 Vids:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TQM1MSByWg

Pictures:
http://uploaded.fresh.co.il/3fb75ed1315e6417.jpg
http://f-14tomcat.persiangig.com/phpNwVmt5AM.jpg

The http://uploaded.fresh.co.il/3fb75ed1315e6417.jpg link didn't work for me but the second picture link DID (and was exactly what I remember from that long lost pic - THANKS Applause

Just do a Google Image Search to find many of them.

Forum: Air Power

AIM-54 Phoenix....why was it retired?