What's new

US CAS AIRCRAFT - SIX OF THE BEST

so you are saying that harrier have a capability to beat F 16 and F 15 it can take both these but harrier will only get death by facing them harrier is not that agile as F 16 is and its radar
 
.
so you are saying that harrier have a capability to beat F 16 and F 15 it can take both these but harrier will only get death by facing them harrier is not that agile as F 16 is and its radar

who?
i am not saying anything - just ranking the US CAS aircraft.
 
.
^^^^ I think Super Falcon was referring to one of my posts Fatman Sahib

Certainly accounts I have read seem to show the Sea Harrier or SHAR to be capable of taking on and beating F15 Eagles I'll post a couple.

(BTW I start my exams on the 26th of January I took a hiatus whilst visting my family during my christmas break from uni)
 
.
This is an account of the early sea harrier FRS1 only in service now with India taking on the F15 around the 1980s:

Myself, Morts and a legendary character called Dave Braithwaite, flew our shiny new jets to the Aggressor base to do battle. There we were warmly welcomed by the Aggressors and three days of intensive fighter combat training began. USAF Aggressor Squadrons consist of specially selected USAF fighter pilots and were formed specifically to give the best possible fighter combat training to USAF squadrons throughout the world, and to NATO squadrons in Europe. They are highly regarded for their professionalism and expertise. They avow no bullshit in their post-flight debriefs and their simple aim is to improve the fighting capability of the squadrons that they work with.

On the first day, the two teams briefed each other about their own aircraft characteristics (the Aggressors flew the F5E) and then got airborne for 1-v-1 fighter combat. The F5E is even smaller than the SHAR, turns much better and can accelerate to supersonic speed extremely quickly in a nose low situation. Its armament is the same as that of the SHAR. Sidewinder missiles and guns. The results of the first three 1-v-1 combat sessions were: I had four kills and none against; Morts had three kills and one against; Dave scored two against two. The Aggressor pilots were astonished. Later that day, One of their staff pilots approached Mortimer. "Jesus Christ. Morts! Who are you guys? What's going on? Have you been sent here to evaluate us?"

Morts assured him that that was not the case. The Aggressors were intrigued that a fresh-from-formation squadron team could do so well against them. and so we agreed to try some special combat evaluation sorties with them to give them a better chance of understanding the SHAR. "What I suggest we do," I briefed, "is set up each combat with your F5s in a position of clear advantage over us. That is to say you can take up the "perch'. at about 2000 feet above us, about 800 yards on the beam and 2000 yards back. We shall commence each combat when you turn in On us. We'll be watching you and when you turn in we'll counter [turn] hard in towards you. At this point you will be able to track us and attempt to get an acquisition with your missiles. As you come into missile range we shall deny you a shot by hiding our jet exhaust from your missile.

In the SHAR that is relatively easy to do: we just drop about 30 degress of nozzle. This will pitch our nose up instantaneously about 20 degrees, diffuse the hot gases of our exhausts and hide the exhaust from you by placing our wing between your missile and the source of heat. You will still be able to track us with your nose and by this time you should have a lot of overtake, that is you will be closing in rapidly towards guns range. Before you get to guns range we will commence a high-G braking stop barrel roll which you won't be able to follow. This will allow us to roll over you and decelerate to a position behind you where you will be in our gunsights. That's the aim of the game, gentlemen; let's go and see if it works, and see whether you can come up with an answer to our moves."

The combats went as planned with about the same ratio of kills as on the first sortie. Missile shots were denied to the F5s and as my own opponent closed in towards guns range I pulled the joystick fully back in my midriff and used a combination of aileron and then full rudder to corkscrew the jet into the vertical. Breathing hard from the excitement, I relaxed the flight controls and swung the nozzles down and forward into the full braking stop position. Suddenly the F5 was no longer pointing at me but was being sucked and pulled down below me. Nozzles aft again and full rudder, aileron and elevator to pass through the inverted and then roll down behind the F5. The fight was over. Either with missile or gun, the Freedom Fighter was finished.

On day two of the detachment I flew against the Aggressor Boss and was beaten in one of the four combats that took place. The fight had progressed until both jets were near to base height, and slow. It was almost stalemate and in that situation I should have walked it. But one of the F5's specialities is being moderately capable in the slow-speed regime, and although it can't fly as slow as the SHAR it can manoeuvre more freely at a slightly higher speed. Our two jets were crossing over each other in our attempts to point at the other aircraft and shoot (a manoeuvre known as horizontal scissors) when I momentarily let my jet's nose drop below the horizon. I had briefed my team that on no account must they let this happen against the F5 or that fight would be lost. I was furious with myself as I had wanted to return to Yeovilton with a clean sheet. Nevertheless, it was a highly successful first look at dissimilar combat, with the team kill ratios against one of the best outfits around being 12:I, 9:3 and 6:6. making an aggregate kill rate of 27 to 10 in the SHAR's favour.

All the lads on the IFTU were delighted and I submitted a short paper to the MOD to report the detail of the Aggressor visit. It was an honest report. and it complimented the Aggressors on their professionalism and integrity But it pulled no punches on the score-line, or the capabilities of the Sea Jet. As a matter of internal MOD courtesy, a copy of the report was passed to the appropriate RAF Harrier desk and from there it was passed on up the line to the hierarchy. It was apparent that the courtesy was neither welcomed nor honoured at higher level because within days of the initial report being submitted, an Air Vice-Marshal stormed into the Aggressor Squadron Commander's office at Alconbury, threw a copy of my report down on the table, and asked, "Have you seen this. Colonel?" Obviously, the Crabs didn't relish the idea of the SHAR being a successful fighter and were presumably trying to question the validity of the report. This rather underhand intrusion caused unnecessary embarrassment all round and was a most unwelcome gesture.

The Boss of the Aggressors was rather upset by the incident, but his staff did get in touch with me by phone to say that the report was a good one, and valid. A few days later, the telephone on my desk at Yeovilton rang "Good morning, Sir. This is the F15 Eagle Squadron at Bitburg in Germany. Could I speak with Commander Sharkey, please?" "Certainly! Speaking!"

"Sir, I hear you had a good experience against the Aggressor Squadron at Alconbury, recently. Is that correct?" "Yes. that's right." "Well, Sir, if you"re happy with the idea we'd be delighted to come across to Somerset to do some combat with you. We'd bring over four F15s to see how you get on against Our jet. We hear you did pretty good against the Aggressors." "That would be splendid!" I replied. "We would love to see you here at Yeovilton and to fly with you. Just let us know when you expect to arrive and we'll be at your pleasure for the duration." p>Word had got around fast and the elite of the USAF in Europe couldn't resist the chance to see how good the SHAR was - and whether Alconbury was just a flash in the pan. True to their word, the Bitburg boy, arrived at Yeovilton with four of their magnificent fighters for a day's Air Combat Manoeuvring. It was agreed that the aircraft should operate in pairs against each other , which brought fighter tactics really into play (as opposed to just matching aircraft for aircraft, pilot for pilot. in a 1-v-1 fight). The visitors were fully equipped with their radar and were simulating Sparrow AIM-7E missiles, Sidewinders and guns. The SHARS were without radar but were fitted with their radar warning receivers and were simulating Sidewinders and guns.

The two combat sessions were set up over North Devon and the Bristol Channel, with the dissimilar pairs running in towards each other from a distance of about 40 nautical miles. My team were given radar direction from ground radar by a brilliant Direction Officer of many years' experience named Harry O'Grady Having spent years flying the Phantom and using the Sparrow missile, which has an excellent head-on firing capability, I knew how to deny the F15 a valid Sparrow shot from head-on and had briefed my pilots accordingly. The tactic worked well. There were no head-on claims from the F-l5s as they ran in and, as the two aircraft types entered the same airspace, fully developed combat began.


Initially, the F-15s had the advantage. Their radars pinpointed the SHARs and directed their pilots' eyes on to the smaller jets. The SHARs flew at about 12,000 feet, which was where we wanted to meet the opposition, and so the F-15s came in from very high level (30.000 feet plus). rolling over and looping down towards the stem of our Sea Jet formation This was when the SHAR was most vulnerable. It was essential that visual contact was made. Morts came to the rescue.

"High in the 6 o'clock, Boss! Break port and up! They are about 3 miles and closing fast!" The aircraft shuddered in the hard turn with the nose rising to meet the threat. "Tallyho! On both! I'm flying through the right-hand man and reversing on him. Your tail is clear." The nose of the SeaJet passed through the vertical` with my head strained round as far as it would go to keep tabs on the F-15 which, feeling threatened. had engaged burners and had also pulled vertically upwards and over the top (about 5000 feet above me) As the F-15 came down the other side of the vertical manoeuvre he found me still pointing at him all the way. Trying the same move twice was not a good idea` but that's what he did. I predicted the move, sliced my nose early through the vertical and found myself sitting astern the two white-hot plumes at the back of the US fighter. "Fox Two away!" I called, simulating the release of the Sidewinder missile. Morts fared just as well. The detailed post-flight debriefs showed a 7 to 1 valid kill claim by the SHARs. The Alconbury experience had been no flash in the pan. The Sea Harrier had really arrived on the fighter combat scene.

Excerpt from Commander Ward's book "Sea Harrier over the Falklands"

Source: CombatSim: SHAR
 
.
This is a more recent account involving the now retired FA2:

A last gunfight

Gary Parsons reports from RAF Lakenheath as the Sea Harrier fights its last fight

One could debate at length the politics surrounding the premature retirement of the Sea Harrier fleet, but the hard fact is that the time has come - the end of March will see all airframes grounded and the Fleet Air Arm officially transition to the Harrier GR7/9 at RAF Cottesmore, with the reformation of 800 Squadron on 1 April. For its swansong, 801 Squadron wanted to go "out with a bang", so headed off to Suffolk for some last air combat training with the F-15Cs of the 493rd Fighter Squadron, USAFE.

Flying two missions each day, 801 brought six aircraft and seven pilots to Lakenheath, including the last pilot to qualify on the Sea Harrier, Lt Chris Roy. When asked how they were doing against the Americans, Chris replied "Pretty well, considering! We've got an old airframe, but what we've also got is a great radar and a great missile." Senior pilot Lt Cmdr Ian Tidball elaborated - "The airframe is limited compared to the modern threat - we are not very well placed in a turning-type environment, but of course we would always hope to engage Beyond Visual Range (BVR), which is what any pilot would hope to do."

Lt Phil Lee added "We do 1 v 1 dogfighting, that's when it gets really interesting - the F-15 should generally win, but we're about half the size and they often loose visual contact. We use viffing, but it's more of a last-ditch than a standard manoeuvre. The F-15 flies higher and faster, but our missile and radar is on a par - it's their airframe that's a lot better." The F-15 was simulating tactics employed by Su-27 Flankers in the 'red' adversary role, with the Sea Harriers operating as 'blue'.

Asked how they felt about transitioning from an air combat fighter pilot to a gound-attack role, to a man the response was unanimous - "It sucks!" Once a fighter pilot, always a fighter - the Fleet Air Arm pilots are progressing through the OCU at Wittering prior to Harrier GR7, and are ready for the challenge of a new discipline, but there's no denying they'd rather continue with the SHAR for as long as possible. Lt Cmdr Ian Tidball, who has 1,300 hours on the Sea Harrier, added "It's very much a pilot's aeroplane - it requires stick and rudder skills, unlike the more modern fly-by-wire F-18 types, which are much more forgiving aircraft, although that's a good thing - you don't want the pilot wasting capacity in simply flying the aeroplane, you want him to operate the missions systems. But, pilots do love to 'pure-fly' an aeroplane, and that's what so great about the Sea Harrier. The GR7 has a good stabilisation system, which makes it much more stable in the VSTOL regime - the Sea Harrier's a little more of a handful, requiring a little more skill and 'hands-on' approach."

FAA pilots will spend about six months on a cross-over course at Wittering before continuing to their squadrons at Cottesmore. 801 Squadron will follow 800 later in 2006, the two naval squadrons operating alongside 1 and 4 Squadrons of the RAF, retaining as much of their individual service ethos as possible. Initially a couple of RAF pilots will be in each Navy squadron, primarily to ease the transition to the air-ground role and enable the FAA pilots to draw from their experience. The Harrier will have self-defence capability, but its lack of radar means its Sidewinders will be a last resort if caught up in a dogfight scenario - key to avoiding this will be situational awareness, provided by Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS).

801 Squadron officially disbands on 28 March at Yeovilton, where it will be marked with a flypast from the remaining five aircraft that will be on squadron strength on the last day. Its last official duty will be a two-ship flypast at the stand-up of 800 Squadron at Cottesmore on 31 March, the two Sea Harriers then flying direct to Shawbury for storage.

It won't quite be the end for the Sea Harrier's career, as six are being evaluated by the Indian Navy for training aircraft and six more are to be transferred to RNAS Culdrose and the School of Flight Deck Operations (SFDO), where they will be kept in taxiable condition for students to learn the fundamentals of aircraft launch and recovery procedures during simulated flying operations on the 'dummy deck', a life-size concrete replica of an aircraft carrier's deck. The aircraft being considered by the Indian Navy will be stripped of their radar, AMRAAM and chaff/flare capability, and would be used while the Navy's current fleet undergoes a mid-life upgrade.

Source: A last gunfight
 
.
From AFM-Jan-09.

SIX OF THE BEST BY ROBERT F. DORR, one of the most authoritative US writers.

NO 2: AH-1W SUPER COBRA

Claim to Fame:
The US Marines embraced the Cobra, the design of which dates back to the Vietnam era, long after the US Army retired its AH-1F on March 31,1999, to concentrate on the costlier, faster but less reliable AH-64 Apache.

Why
Retrofilled with a Kollsman-manufactured night targeting systen (NTS) but equally useful in daylight. todays AH-1W Super Cobra carries both BGM-71 TOW and AGM-114 Hellfire AT Missiles and is being certified for the AGM-68 Maverick. the AH-1Ws flexible 20mm turreted M-197 cannon packs 750 rounds and has a 110* field of fire.

Conflicts
The 1991 war with iraq where the USMC says it destroyed 97 tanks, 104 APC's.

Weaknesses
Critics claim the AH-1W needs the radar capability offered by the AH-64. USMC denies they need it. the AH-1Z replacement for the AH-1W has been dogged by technical, cost and scheduling problems and lacks the TOW capability.

First Flight
November 16, 1983 (AH-1W), December 7, 2000 (AH-1Z)
 
.
From AFM-Jan-09.

SIX OF THE BEST BY ROBERT F. DORR, one of the most authoritative US writers.

NO 1: A-10A-PLUS, A-10C THUNDERBOLT II

Claim to Fame:
Once deemed the ugly duckling in the cold war era, the relatively slow and somewhat vulnerable A-10, especially in its A-10C version, is now the undisputed ruler of the close air support mission. its original mission, killing tanks has been overtaken by its prowess at CAS.

Why
Protected in a single seat cockpit by a armoured bathtub, the A-10 pilot is directly behind the 30mm GAU-8 cannon, which carries 1,350 armour-piercing rounds and can fire 70 rounds per second.

Conflicts
1991 Operation Desert Storm - Iraq, 1999 Operation Allied Forces - Kosovo/Serbia - Operation Enduring Freedom - Afghanistan (2001-current) - Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-current).

Weaknesses
The A-10 is - face it - slow. the manufacturer of the A-10 and makers of its spare parts are now long out of business, leading to some logistics challenges.USAF plan to modify 375 A-10s to A-10C status has been modified for budgetary reasons. some will become the A-10A Plus with limited features of the precision management program of the A-10C. structural strengthening / re-winging program are taking longer than planned.

First Flight
May 10, 1971 (A-10A), January 20, 2005 (A-10C), April 4, 2006 (A-10A Plus)
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom