Author Topic: IRGC SU-25 (Read 14624 times)

the8march · « **Reply #50 on:** April 26, 2012, 01:04:46 PM »

Quote from: kaman on April 26, 2012, 10:05:22 AM

The only massive engagements that involved F-fGs against SAM sites in the 70s was during the Vietnam war. Now if you have record of F-4Gs engaging Soviet Sites or any S-300 sites in the late 70S then provide us with facts and figures.

In the 1973 war, Israel lost 32 F-4s

Salamis480 · « **Reply #51 on:** April 26, 2012, 01:55:05 PM »

Quote from: the8march on April 26, 2012, 01:04:46 PM

In the 1973 war, Israel lost 32 F-4s

The Isareli losses to SAM's during the 1973 war coupled with increasing losses by the US in Vietnam motivated the USAF to establish "Red Flag" excersises at Nellis AFB in 1975 to provide real life (as opposed to simulators in use at the time) air combat expierience. These excersise included simulated SAM evasion against state of the art Soviet systems as well as Air to Air Combat against US pilots trained in Soviet tactics and flying dissimilar aircraft. (F5e)

The excersises were duplicated at the "Crow Valley" Range near Clark AFB in the Phillipines.

The US Navy had previously established the United States Navy Fighter Weapons School NAS Mirramr in 1969 and that training allowed Navy pilots to more than triple their Kill ratio over Vietnam. The USAF actually declined during the same time.

From the establishment of Red Flag through the late seveties the priority was to rotate at least 1 squadron from each TFW through Red Flag. That did not allow Allied participation. I do know that several Pacific Allied AF's ( Royal Thai, Singapore etc..) were particapating in Cope Thunder excersises at Clark in 1979 and behond. I would imagine Israeli pilots were participating by the early 1980's.

I don't know the breakdown by aircraft by the Israeli Air to Air kill record was 334 - 5 during the Yom kippur war. They lost 99 aircraft to ground fire. (AA & SAM's)

the8march · « **Reply #52 on:** April 26, 2012, 02:05:14 PM »

Salamis,
Its good when you always reply like here in an informative and logical way that we can discuss... not as you wrote in some other threads to provoke people

Salamis480 · « **Reply #53 on:** April 26, 2012, 02:23:50 PM »

Quote from: the8march on April 26, 2012, 02:05:14 PM

Salamis,
Its good when you always reply like here in an informative and logical way that we can discuss... not as you wrote in some other threads to provoke people

Thank you, I will extend the same degree of respect that I am shown.

shocktec · « **Reply #54 on:** April 26, 2012, 05:53:44 PM »

Quote from:
Just look at this damage an A-10 got in 2003 over Iraq...all this damage and the plane flew back to base without much trouble:
[/quote

That has taken alot of damage. Are those bits and pieces of shrapnel from AA guns that did that or was it just light machine gun fire ?

Salamis480 · « **Reply #55 on:** April 26, 2012, 08:10:45 PM »

Quote from: shocktec on April 26, 2012, 05:53:44 PM

[quote author=
Just look at this damage an A-10 got in 2003 over Iraq...all this damage and the plane flew back to base without much trouble:

That has taken alot of damage. Are those bits and pieces of shrapnel from AA guns that did that or was it just light machine gun fire ?

The A10 is an incredible aircraft. I know of one case where an A10 lost both engines over Kuwait and was able to glide back to it's Saudi Base. Try that in a Phantom!

mustavaris · « **Reply #56 on:** April 26, 2012, 08:19:57 PM »

On some Western experiences with the S-300:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070610012817/http://www.janes.com/press/articles/pc050317_1.shtml

kaman · « **Reply #57 on:** April 27, 2012, 08:14:17 AM »

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 26, 2012, 10:14:06 AM

Does that mean you give up? (Hint) the aircraft pictured is an F4 G 90TFS, 3rd TFW Clark AB, RPI

Salamis defintely have a problem reading and typing. What are you talking about? Give up on what? you make fake statements and pollute the forum by propagating nonsense. Still, where are those S-300 platforms against which, accroding to your claims the F-4Gs were engaged against in the late 70s, come on. You stick an F4-G picture as a response? Is that all you have?

kaman · « **Reply #58 on:** April 27, 2012, 08:15:30 AM »

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 26, 2012, 11:08:14 AM

Can't find an Image of the 3rd site. I don't believe Weasels were ever stationed there permanently.

Is that your S-300 site? you visibly have a problem.

Salamis480 · « **Reply #59 on:** April 27, 2012, 10:32:38 AM »

Quote from: kaman on April 27, 2012, 08:14:17 AM

Salamis defintely have a problem reading and typing. What are you talking about? Give up on what? you make fake statements and pollute the forum by propagating nonsense. Still, where are those S-300 platforms against which, accroding to your claims the F-4Gs were engaged against in the late 70s, come on. You stick an F4-G picture as a response? Is that all you have?

I gave you two F4g's to help you identify the test ranges I spoke of. I have already given two of the ranges, in a previous post. Here they are...

1. Crow Valley Range, Clark AB, Phillipines (Tail Marking PN)
2. Tonopah Test Range, (Area 52) Nellis AFB, Nevada, US (Tail Marking WA)
3. Special Operations Center, Eglin AFB, Florida, US

As I stated in previous posts the first 2 ranges were established in the mid 70's to provide real life training to USAF fighter pilots. Both of these ranges included squadron of "Agressor" aircraft who flew against US aircraft using Soviet Style tactics and equipment of the period. They included simulated SAM sites. No, they did not actually launch Soviet S-300 missiles at friendly aircraft, just as the F5e's did not actually launch Air to Air during dogfights. Results of each engagement were scored based on numerous sensory data located throughout the range and carried aboard participating aircraft. Un-guided missiles (GTR-18) were sometimes used to simulate SAM launch's but they were harmless.

They key inovation (for the Soviets at the time) was the phased array radar which guided the S-300 missile. This technology was installed in the test ranges above on or before 1979. The point of the post was that USAF pilots were flying against this technology for 30 years.

The S-300 has ben modified much in the last 30 years and current versions are far superior to the original system. They can switch frequencies quickly to prevent jamming ( but not even close to the US MIM - 104) The Tonopah test range is still in operation, The Crow valley range was largely consumed by the erruption of Mt Pinatubo in the 90's and subsequently moved to Alaska. Eglin continues to be home of much of USAF Special Ops training,

kaman · « **Reply #60 on:** April 27, 2012, 01:36:43 PM »

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 27, 2012, 10:32:38 AM

I gave you two F4g's to help you identify the test ranges I spoke of. I have already given two of the ranges, in a previous post. Here they are...

1. Crow Valley Range, Clark AB, Phillipines (Tail Marking PN)
2. Tonopah Test Range, (Area 52) Nellis AFB, Nevada, US (Tail Marking WA)
3. Special Operations Center, Eglin AFB, Florida, US

As I stated in previous posts the first 2 ranges were established in the mid 70's to provide real life training to USAF fighter pilots. Both of these ranges included squadron of "Agressor" aircraft who flew against US aircraft using Soviet Style tactics and equipment of the period. They included simulated SAM sites. No, they did not actually launch Soviet S-300 missiles at friendly aircraft, just as the F5e's did not actually launch Air to Air during dogfights. Results of each engagement were scored based on numerous sensory data located throughout the range and carried aboard participating aircraft. Un-guided missiles (GTR-18) were sometimes used to simulate SAM launch's but they were harmless.

They key inovation (for the Soviets at the time) was the phased array radar which guided the S-300 missile. This technology was installed in the test ranges above on or before 1979. The point of the post was that USAF pilots were flying against this technology for 30 years.

The S-300 has ben modified much in the last 30 years and current versions are far superior to the original system. They can switch frequencies quickly to prevent jamming ( but not even close to the US MIM - 104) The Tonopah test range is still in operation, The Crow valley range was largely consumed by the erruption of Mt Pinatubo in the 90's and subsequently moved to Alaska. Eglin continues to be home of much of USAF Special Ops training,

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 26, 2012, 08:03:51 AM

The US was flying against S-300 SAM sites with F4-G's in the 1970's. I think the Weasels all have been used as drones by now.

The Tonopah Test Range (area 52) maintains a S-300PS SAM site for training, every current USAF aircraft in inventory ( and most of the pilots) has trained against this system for years.

Do you only realize you are typing nonsense? Where are those S-300 SAM sites you claim the US was flying against at the end of the 70s? Your claims or nothing but irrelevant "Speculations". Also I don't care much about the history of the US based F-4Gs.

Salamis480 · « **Reply #61 on:** April 27, 2012, 02:03:55 PM »

Quote from: kaman on April 27, 2012, 01:36:43 PM

Do you only realize you are typing nonsense? Where are those S-300 SAM sites you claim the US was flying against at the end of the 70s? Your claims or nothing but irrelevant "Speculations". Also I don't care much about the history of the US based F-4Gs.

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 27, 2012, 10:32:38 AM

1. Crow Valley Range, Clark AB, Phillipines (Tail Marking PN) GE 15°14′20.27″N 120°22′2.03″E
2. Tonopah Test Range, (Area 52) Nellis AFB, Nevada, US (Tail Marking WA) GE 37.78°N 116.77°W
3. Special Operations Center, Eglin AFB, Florida, US GE 30°28'1.76"N 86°30'31.59"W

II added GE coordinates to the previous locations I gave you. Don't know what else you want.

The history I provided was not limitted to F4G's. Every aircraft trained against those systems, F4E's from Clark, F15's ftom Kadina, I believe the Thais were flying A7's. The Iraians may have trained at Tonopah with Tomcats prior to the revolution.

Not speculation, I was there!

the8march · « **Reply #62 on:** April 27, 2012, 02:42:38 PM »

Salamis,
So you mean the jets were tested on radars that the US believe they similar to S300 radars? Not on actual S300 .. right?

Salamis480 · « **Reply #63 on:** April 27, 2012, 03:03:17 PM »

Quote from: the8march on April 27, 2012, 02:42:38 PM

Salamis,
So you mean the jets were tested on radars that the US believe they similar to S300 radars? Not on actual S300 .. right?

OK, Now this is all speculation.... Do I believe the US somehow got their hands on S-300 sytems, through the Soviets or a proxy? I doubt it, More likely the plans or an actual system was compromised (the system was in development for many years prior to deployment in 1978) and copies were built by the US. Phased array technology existed in the US then, the targeting system, frequency shuffle, etc... all would have required some knowledge of the Soviet System to copy.

kaman · « **Reply #64 on:** April 28, 2012, 11:33:46 AM »

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 27, 2012, 02:03:55 PM

II added GE coordinates to the previous locations I gave you. Don't know what else you want.

The history I provided was not limitted to F4G's. Every aircraft trained against those systems, F4E's from Clark, F15's ftom Kadina, I believe the Thais were flying A7's. The Iraians may have trained at Tonopah with Tomcats prior to the revolution.

Not speculation, I was there!

It's very simple. First I would like you to stop polluting us with nonsense. Also if you have problems reading your own posts and stick to the fact then you have a problem. The fact of the matter is that during the 70s no US aircraft flew against S-300 sites as you mention, end of the story. I don't see what all that has to do with US training bases and their GPS coordinates.

Salamis480 · « **Reply #65 on:** April 28, 2012, 05:04:20 PM »

Quote from: kaman on April 28, 2012, 11:33:46 AM

It's very simple. First I would like you to stop polluting us with nonsense. Also if you have problems reading your own posts and stick to the fact then you have a problem. The fact of the matter is that during the 70s no US aircraft flew against S-300 sites as you mention, end of the story. I don't see what all that has to do with US training bases and their GPS coordinates.

I can tell you for certain the aircraft pictured to the left of this post did! I was in the back seat!

Simple Bubba · « **Reply #66 on:** April 29, 2012, 07:02:54 AM »

Dudes...
Excellent information, but the topic is SU-25.
S-300 has its own thread under Air Defense...

great info ... thanks for sharing.

kaman · « **Reply #67 on:** April 29, 2012, 09:47:19 AM »

Quote from: Salamis480 on April 28, 2012, 05:04:20 PM

I can tell you for certain the aircraft pictured to the left of this post did! I was in the back seat!

.... Maybe you were flying this ..

Catsoo · « **Reply #68 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:19:27 AM »

Catsoo

Salamis480 · « **Reply #69 on:** July 31, 2012, 07:35:11 AM »

K-Man didnt hit you on my intro..... but hey i appreciate the Humour! For the record though, that GIB is doing to much work!

Peace

GIB = ( Guy in Back )

Andimeshk City · « **Reply #70 on:** October 12, 2012, 08:42:07 PM »

IRGC SU-25

Andimeshk City · « **Reply #71 on:** October 12, 2012, 09:02:30 PM »

IRGC SU-25 FROGFOOT.

3

4

5

6

7

kaman · « **Reply #72 on:** October 12, 2012, 09:22:42 PM »


Wings of the Red Star: SU-25 Frogfoot!	Small \| Large

kaman · « **Reply #73 on:** October 12, 2012, 09:32:21 PM »

Usually model kit manufacturers don't release standard kits with Iranian markings. However there's an exception with the release of the SU-25 UBK from the Czech manufacturer (Kopro). The box art represents an IRGC and comes with Iranian markings + resin and photo etched parts.

El Baba · « **Reply #74 on:** October 13, 2012, 03:00:11 AM »

Iranian SU-25's