Page 10 of 10

Re: F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 08:00
by knowan
So the AIM-9X hit, but failed to fuse because it was fired from within minimum range.

Operator error, not a weapon malfunction or being decoyed by flares.

The pilot recognised his mistake and backed off before firing a second missile, which scored the kill.

Re: F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

Unread postPosted: 13 Sep 2018, 11:41
by hornetfinn
That explains the situation. Interesting that the pilot didn't use the M61 Vulcan for such a close target. Maybe he didn't consider it safe or quick enough for the situation. It might take a few hits to bring down Su-22 as they are fairly tough aircraft.

Re: F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2018, 14:24
by spazsinbad
I'm not sure what is going on here - seems to me to be deliberate confusion by some - but who and why. Dunno meself….
Story rereported from 'The War Zone' so perhaps the WARZONE is at fault - NOPE - it is not. I dunno - but whatever.... I guess it is a problem with the b/s memes on the internet just being repeated by numnuts such as CLARK - harsh? - YES.

My opinion? I think the numnut writing this first story referenced from TAILHOOK speech with story URL as shown: ... n-reunion/

To be clear the VCNO probably did not provide the URL seen BUT whomever wrote up the speech did so IN ERROR.

To be clear THE DRIVE WARZONE story seems to back up the NO FLARE account already agreed upon a zillion times. ... themselves
Navy Pilot: Here’s How I Got The US’s First Air-To-Air Kill In 18 Years
15 Sep 2018 JAMES CLARK[is a dikwad]

"...Repeated radio calls to the Su-22, a Cold War-era attack jet designed to strike targets on the ground, went unheeded. According to The War Zone ( ... ittershare ), even after Tremel “thumped” the aircraft three times — which means flying over the jet and popping flares — the warnings were ignored. As the Su-22 came within striking distance and began to dive, it released its ordnance, which landed near U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces. Tremel — cleared under the rules of engagement — locked onto the Su-22 with an AIM-9X Sidewinder and fired, but the Sukhoi popped flares [THIS IS THE MADE UP BIT - TREMEL DID NOT SAY THIS]. “I lose the smoke trail and I have no idea what happened at that time,” Tremel said at the symposium ( ... /162478715 ). [see my video excerpt below - HE DID NOT SAY] Despite the venerable Sidewinder’s rep as a highly advanced piece of ordnance ( ... idewinder/ ), the infrared-guided missile was drawn away by flares. [the author cites BULLDUSTcrap from PopMech]

The enemy bird was still in the air and still a threat to friendly forces on the ground, so it was time to “try something different,” Tremel recounted. He switched to the slightly slower-to-arm, radar-guided AIM-120 AMRAAM, and cut loose with one. “It’ll do its job,” Tremel said. And it did. The AMRAAM struck the rear of the Su-22 and exploded. As the aircraft pitched and then plummeted to the earth, the pilot ejected. Tremel quickly rolled away from the explosion to avoid flying through it, adding that by the end of the sortie “I know I was just operating on brainstem power.”..."

Source: ... -18-years/

OK in this video excerpt at minute five hear MOB describe shooting the AIM-9X with NO MENTION OF Su-22 flare pops.

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

Re: F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2018, 14:40
by spazsinbad
I'll start another post with the 2017 The DRIVE WAR ZONE article because IF anyone is confused - I am..... but no flares.
Here's The Definitive Account Of The Syrian Su-22 Shoot Down From The Pilots Themselves
14 Sep 2017 Tyler Rogoway

"...Based on the rules of engagement that were briefed to the naval aviators, Mob locked the Su-22 up from behind with an AIM-9X Sidewinder and fired. The missile zipped off the Hornet's wing rail trailing smoke but quickly disappeared. It wasn't clear why the missile failed to track the Su-22 or where it had gone. Mob quickly selected an AIM-120 AMRAAM and fired once again. He noted how long it took for the missile to fire off the Super Hornet's "cheek" station located along the outer edges of its air intakes.

Regardless, the missile tracked the Fitter flying just a short distance away and exploded on its backside, pitching it violently to the right and downward. The pilot was clearly seen ejecting from the doomed swing-wing attack jet. The ejection seat passed very close down the right sight of Mob's canopy. He noted how live-fire training helped him during the engagement because he knew what to expect and quickly rolled away from the explosion instead of flying through it. The Syrian pilot's chute blossomed, it was white, green, and orange in color and his emergency transmitter beacon began going off over the radio....

...What's also worth discussing is the conjecture surrounding the AIM-9X's failure in this engagement. By the panel's account it sounded as if the AIM-9X just went stupid/malfunctioned on its own. There was no talk of the Su-22 launching flares, and even if it had, the fact that many military pundits are definitively claiming that the unique infrared signature of Russian-built low-end decoy flares threw the AIM-9X off course is just silly. Missiles fail, especially air-to-air ones. They are complex devices that get battered around under high gravitational forces and slammed down onto carrier decks and runways throughout their lifetime. And yes, it's possible that under certain parameters weaknesses could exist when it comes to the AIM-9X's ability to track certain targets that use certain decoys under certain conditions. Then again maybe they don't. Regardless, that doesn't mean that is what happened in this instance or that the AIM-9X is somehow a lousy missile because of it.

The amount of research and development that has gone into the Sidewinder family of air-to-air missiles is unrivaled. And testing goes far beyond live fire shoots or lab-like settings. Entire soundstage like testing facilities are built for refining American air-to-air missile seekers' abilities to prosecute a successful kill. Additionally, they are tested against all types of decoys, including non-traditional expendables like BOL IR decoys as well as various types of flares. So while anything is possible, there is no evidence that supports this theory that old Russian "dirty flares" defeat the AIM-9X's highly sensitive imaging infrared seeker and programming logic.

Now the real question is what happened to that errant AIM-9X that was fired, or at least what was left of it? Russian would probably love to take a good look at it...."

Source: ... themselves

Re: F-18E Downes Syrian Warplane

Unread postPosted: 15 Sep 2018, 14:51
by spazsinbad
This is the recent TAILHOOK 2018 VCNO speech that set me off on a wild goose chase for Su-22 flares NOT FIRED EVER!
VCNO Adm. Moran’s Keynote Remarks at Tailhook Association Reunion
09 Sep 2018 VCNO staff probably

"The following are Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Bill Moran’s prepared remarks for his keynote address at the Tailhook Association Reunion on Sept. 8, 2018....

...People, like Lt. Cmdr. Michael “MOB” Tremel, [ ... -18-years/ ] who have had the power of a precision guided weapon at their fingertips and been empowered to use it...."

Source: ... n-reunion/