F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

ruderamronbo · by **ruderamronbo** » 17 Sep 2017, 05:36

spazsinbad wrote:Already posted on another thread and mentioned above the ORIGINAL Tailhook 2017 video however this video will become unavailable at some future point whilst these two videos (one only excerpt of shoot down) are 'originals' of that video. It seems to me that the Hornets released flares in front of the Su-22 as a warning several times - no flares from it though.

Su-22 Shoot Down 4 USN Pilots Explain TAILHOOK 2017 Excerpt (7 minutes0

Su-22 Shoot Down 4 USN Pilots Explain ALL at TAILHOOK 2017 (47 minutes)

That video is a great view. For someone without some tactical, fighter, background though it's probably unintelligible because of the audience they were speaking to. The comment about returning with just 1 AIM-9X was interesting because almost every video I've seen of any Hornet launching during Inherent Resolve only had 1 loaded...

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 17 Sep 2017, 09:42

I agree the difficulty following the HOOK17 jargon used however if one watches at least the excerpt video again or twice you get the sense of what they are saying. Meanwhile I think it is clear that the multiple passes with flares was the Hornet and NOT the Su-22. I can see how someone listening to an earlier pilot story could have mistaken 'who fired the flares' or it is just more 'fake news/misinformation'. I'm not going to follow it up because I believe the pilot stories as I understand them anyway. They have video to back them up as well - reporters I read are really stoopid mostly or they have an agenda like the 'fake news' websites that promulgate bad fake news about US Military Aviation in particular - just their guesswork.

Much as I despise the ethics of Tidier RogerAway this account by him on his website seems to be an accurate rendition of the HOOK'17 pilot accounts: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14 ... themselves SOME more discussion here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=53422&p=376440&hilit=rogoway#p376440

Dragon029 · by **Dragon029** » 17 Sep 2017, 11:13

Meanwhile I think it is clear that the multiple passes with flares was the Hornet and NOT the Su-22. I can see how someone listening to an earlier pilot story could have mistaken 'who fired the flares' or it is just more 'fake news/misinformation'.

I don't know if that was directed towards my previous comment, but if so, I know the Super Hornet pilots deployed flares to warn off the Syrian pilot, I'm just curious as to whether the Su-22 itself was deploying flares when Mob fired his AIM-9X at it, because if it didn't, that would increase the probability that the AIM-9X just had a random failure, not that it was 'defeated by special flare patterns', etc as suggested by some journalists.

hythelday · by **hythelday** » 17 Sep 2017, 11:24

Dragon029 wrote:
Meanwhile I think it is clear that the multiple passes with flares was the Hornet and NOT the Su-22. I can see how someone listening to an earlier pilot story could have mistaken 'who fired the flares' or it is just more 'fake news/misinformation'.

I don't know if that was directed towards my previous comment, but if so, I know the Super Hornet pilots deployed flares to warn off the Syrian pilot, I'm just curious as to whether the Su-22 itself was deploying flares when Mob fired his AIM-9X at it, because if it didn't, that would increase the probability that the AIM-9X just had a random failure, not that it was 'defeated by special flare patterns', etc as suggested by some journalists.

I too, wondered about that. Pilots described the engagement down to every detail, even mentioning which direction the wrecked plane pitched and what the parachute looked like, seems strange he would omit such important detail - unless - they were instructed not to expand on that. Nobody asked "why did it miss?" in the questions either, for the same reason I believe.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 17 Sep 2017, 11:27

Dragon029 wrote:
Meanwhile I think it is clear that the multiple passes with flares was the Hornet and NOT the Su-22. I can see how someone listening to an earlier pilot story could have mistaken 'who fired the flares' or it is just more 'fake news/misinformation'.

I don't know if that was directed towards my previous comment, but if so, I know the Super Hornet pilots deployed flares to warn off the Syrian pilot, I'm just curious as to whether the Su-22 itself was deploying flares when Mob fired his AIM-9X at it, because if it didn't, that would increase the probability that the AIM-9X just had a random failure, not that it was 'defeated by special flare patterns', etc as suggested by some journalists.

My comment was general but I agree with you. My comment was about early stories naysaying AIMs F-35s the whole shebang is shite and stuff of that nature - I should have made that clear. Yes it seems the AIM-9X was a dud and we may never know what happened to that missile but luckily the pilot could try something different and the AIM-120 did the job.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 17 Sep 2017, 11:29

hythelday wrote:
Dragon029 wrote:
Meanwhile I think it is clear that the multiple passes with flares was the Hornet and NOT the Su-22. I can see how someone listening to an earlier pilot story could have mistaken 'who fired the flares' or it is just more 'fake news/misinformation'.

I don't know if that was directed towards my previous comment, but if so, I know the Super Hornet pilots deployed flares to warn off the Syrian pilot, I'm just curious as to whether the Su-22 itself was deploying flares when Mob fired his AIM-9X at it, because if it didn't, that would increase the probability that the AIM-9X just had a random failure, not that it was 'defeated by special flare patterns', etc as suggested by some journalists.

I too, wondered about that. Pilots described the engagement down to every detail, even mentioning which direction the wrecked plane pitched and what the parachute looked like, seems strange he would omit such important detail - unless - they were instructed not to expand on that. Nobody asked "why did it miss?" in the questions either, for the same reason I believe.

YEP and I guess camera fillum does lie also. Who knows - my suggestion is believe what you heard in the video. All the rest without corroboration is just guesswork and leave it at that. OMG the internet can be stupid sometimes - all the time. :mrgreen:

Dragon029 · by **Dragon029** » 18 Sep 2017, 23:48

Apparently the F/A-18E / Su-22 footage is unclassified (though maybe still not yet for official public release - anyone want to file a FOIA?) - footage showing the end of the engagement (of the AMRAAM impacting), as well as the F-15E's shootdown of Iran's drone has made its way to Twitter:

https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/9 ... 2597679105

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 19 Sep 2017, 23:03

Now on the YOU of much TUBE:

Dragon029 · by **Dragon029** » 21 Sep 2017, 06:22

New footage of the Su-22 shootdown from multiple angles (it only appears to show the AIM-120 though):

Starts at 6:10:
https://youtu.be/LWtRjcLRQFk?t=371

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 23 Sep 2017, 23:47

Caça Su-22 da Síria sendo abatido por um F/A-18E Super Hornet dos EUA

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 25 Mar 2018, 21:29

Well Well Well. This NAN Naval Aviation News 21 Mar 2018 report on the shoot down says...

Super Hornet Pilots Recall Downing of Syrian Aircraft
21 Mar 2018 Naval Aviation News Staff

"...The Syrian Jet
The aircraft was many miles away, but northbound and approaching. A Boeing E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control aircraft used its more advanced radar to identify the inbound aircraft as a Syrian, Soviet-era Su-22 Fitter. Tremel descended to execute a visual identification. He offset his jet’s position and maneuvered to join up with the Syrian jet, about half a mile away. As the Syrian jet proceeded north toward the SDF, Krueger coordinated with the JTAC to keep Tremel updated on how close the aircraft was to the SDF’s position.

“Within 10 nautical miles of there [overhead the SDF’s position], the Syrian aircraft executed a dive,” Tremel said. “At the bottom of his dive, he was about seven nautical miles from the position.” With the aircraft fast approaching engagement range, Krueger advised executing a “head butt,” a maneuver in which a fighter jet passes close overhead another aircraft and shoots out flares, warning its pilot. Tremel executed three, but the Syrian jet was undeterred.

The Sentry issued warning calls over the aircraft emergency frequency, urging the Su-22 to reverse course, but the Syrian jet did not respond. Meanwhile, Krueger updated the JTAC. “I’m talking to the JTAC to let him know we got this situation going on,” he said. “So the guys on the ground can get their heads down.” After its dive, the Syrian jet executed a climb, from Tremel’s perspective turning right and then left, positioning itself over the SDF’s position. When Tremel observed the jet release its ordnance, he knew what he had to do next.

Following behind the Syrian jet, Tremel armed an AIM-9 Sidewinder short-range air-to-air missile, and fired. The Syrian jet’s defensive flares diverted the missile. “It came off the rails quick,” Tremel said. “I lost the smoke trail and I had no idea what happened to the missile after that.”

Next, Tremel fired an AIM-120, an advanced medium-range air-to-air missile. It struck the back of the Syrian jet, sending it pitching right and down. A cloud of metal debris flew from the jet as the force of the explosion tore it apart. The whole incident lasted only about eight minutes—from the time he spotted the jet on his radar, to the moment the missile struck...."

Source: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... ver-syria/

hythelday · by **hythelday** » 25 Mar 2018, 23:40

Well it's confirmed then, IIR seeker can be spoofed; even though it was a M4 version, still, quite an embarassment for the Raytheon.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 26 Mar 2018, 02:56

For my interest it is not clear what 'an M4 version' is. Is it an AIM-9M and how do you know the version of Sidewinder? TAH.

hythelday · by **hythelday** » 26 Mar 2018, 08:05

spazsinbad wrote:For my interest it is not clear what 'an M4 version' is. Is it an AIM-9M and how do you know the version of Sidewinder? TAH.

Su-22M4, one of a more recent updates of the venerable Fitter. IIRC it was confirmed by earlier reports AIM-9X was used.

Dragon029 · by **Dragon029** » 26 Mar 2018, 08:51

hythelday wrote::shock:
Well it's confirmed then, IIR seeker can be spoofed; even though it was a M4 version, still, quite an embarassment for the Raytheon.

I wouldn't say that; the statement that Spaz bolded isn't a quote from the pilot, and I'm not sure how anyone could be certain that it was the flares when the pilot himself said that he lost the smoke trail and had no idea what happened to the missile.