So you are flying around in an F14, F15, F16 or F18

[notfred]

<< SAMs are radar guided. Flares do not have any impact on them. >>



SAM stands for Surface to Air Missle. It has nothing to do with the guidance systems of that missle. Some are rader guided, some are heat-seeking.

Right off the top of my head - the Stinger Shoulder launched SAM is heat seeking.

 

[toant103]

cry for my mommy

 

[Keego]

Well, I'd most likely eject.

1) I am not in any armed forces
2) If I'm in a fighter, that means I'm loaded with $$$
3) I'll just buy another jet

 

[JellyBaby]

My gigantic ECM pod would never have allowed the SAM to lock on in the first place.

 

[RedRooster]

Going from notfred's definition of a stall, I'm wondering how long it would take for a jet to reach stall speed after cutting the engines while flying horizontally, or even downward?
Would cutting the engines after a brief stint with the afterburners(to get the most speed), be feasable? Or would stall speed be reached so quickly that the engines would have to be restarted hence not long enough for an IR SAM to lose the heat signature?

 

[dawheat]

well most battlefield SAM launchers are IR guided, so that ECM pod wouldn't help you out. I don't think Stingers are a real problems unless you 're in the mud as they have a very low maximum ceiling, 10,000ft maybe?

 

[Keego]

<< Going from notfred's definition of a stall, I'm wondering how long it would take for a jet to reach stall speed after cutting the engines while flying horizontally, or even downward?
Would cutting the engines after a brief stint with the afterburners(to get the most speed), be feasable? Or would stall speed be reached so quickly that the engines would have to be restarted hence not long enough for an IR SAM to lose the heat signature? >>



My aircraft knowledge is very rudimentary, but let me try to justify in my own words (plane no workie!111) no really..
If a plane cuts it's engines, it still has enough speed to keep gliding, but depending on the lift provided by the wings (the stall limit will be higher w/ better lifting, worse with heavier planes) then the plane will reach stall speed faster/slower (see previous (comment)). If you cut the engines, it will not immediately start stalling unless you pulled the plane so it was pointing vertical and then let all of your airspeed bleed off to 0, then you'd most likely go into a spin and you'll die (which sucks).

 

[RedRooster]

<<

<< Going from notfred's definition of a stall, I'm wondering how long it would take for a jet to reach stall speed after cutting the engines while flying horizontally, or even downward?
Would cutting the engines after a brief stint with the afterburners(to get the most speed), be feasable? Or would stall speed be reached so quickly that the engines would have to be restarted hence not long enough for an IR SAM to lose the heat signature? >>



My aircraft knowledge is very rudimentary, but let me try to justify in my own words (plane no workie!111) no really..
If a plane cuts it's engines, it still has enough speed to keep gliding, but depending on the lift provided by the wings (the stall limit will be higher w/ better lifting, worse with heavier planes) then the plane will reach stall speed faster/slower (see previous (comment)). If you cut the engines, it will not immediately start stalling unless you pulled the plane so it was pointing vertical and then let all of your airspeed bleed off to 0, then you'd most likely go into a spin and you'll die (which sucks). >>



I guess what I'm asking though, is how far/long can a fighter jet typically "glide" either horizontally or downwards? Would cutting the engines entirely be an option to elude IR based weapons?

 

[Keego]

well since it's never protrayed in movies as cutting the engines to get away, or in any of the many books that I've read upon the subject (all fiction though) I'd say it's not the first option that comes to a pilot's mind when they hear that bingbingbing!!

 

[RedRooster]

<< well since it's never protrayed in movies as cutting the engines to get away, or in any of the many books that I've read upon the subject (all fiction though) I'd say it's not the first option that comes to a pilot's mind when they hear that bingbingbing!! >>



Haha, ya I suppose it would take a pair of brass ones to actually turn OFF the engines during pursuit.

 

[yoda291]

It depends on the missile and how close I am to it.

Something like a small IR missile, if I'm far enough, I'd run.
Something larger or at closer range...flares...lots of flares.

Radar guided. Chaff. If I was too close(like real close), I'd risk it being an older, active trace missile and try and get behind it before it got it acquires its lock.

In either case, If I can't out run it and it isnt gonna run outta fuel, I'd skim the ground as fast as I could. Coming from overhead, it's a crappy pull up at mach 3, even for a missile.

As for the plane, I'd pick an f14 or f18, since they're mostly carrier based and I imagine I'd rather swim than be captured. Besides, the ranges on them aren't all that impressive anyways, not like the f15 where I could be stranded 4 bagillion miles from base. f16'd be a close second, simply because I trust the electronics more than I trust hydraulics. I'm techie to the core.

As for the immelman, I can just imagine trying to pull it up, and then the SAM thinking, wow, what a target. Can you picture the kind of image you'd present to a radar guided head?

 

[ATLien247]

Well, first of all, I'd choose the F-16 because it is more agile than the other aircraft listed. Then, since I would have no clue as to how to distinguish an incoming heat-seeking missile versus that of a radar-guided missile, I would drop both flares and chaff, minimize airspeed, bank hard, and pray for my life. Of course, the timing for all of this would be dependent on the distance between me and the missile. The only time I would ever eject was after I had taken a hit, and still was capable of ejecting.

 

[FuZoR]

hmm, a bunch of fighter jet sim nuts?

anyways... i have no idea. I guess i will eject

 

[Damage]

I wouldn't think you would want to "cut" your engines. It's like a compressor stall or flamout, then you have to try re-starting the thing(s) to get any thrust, providing you have enough altitude so that you can reach your optimum glide speed and try to stay airborne long enough to pull off this proceedure.

As people have said, SAM's can be both radar guided or heat seeking however when the radar guided models lock on, you should hopefully have your threat detection tell you. Heat seekers are harder to deal with because you never really know if you are being shot at until it's in your lap.

Your response would also be tempered by the type of SAM comming at you, meaning small shoulder launched or a solidified missile emplacement. The smaller ones are slower with less range and less manouverable, whereas the larger ones have more gas (for returning on target) and larger and different types of warheads.

 

[AndrewR]

WHat the hell are you supposed to do and what should you not do? For fighters, there are several manuevers to perform.

This question was inspired by the sequence in the movie, Behind Enemy Lines. Which was technically flawed to an extreme. In any event, I'll address your questions.

Should you light up the afterburners and try to outrun it? Or will the increase heat signature make you a better target? Depends on the missile. For radar guided ones, that is something to consider. For IR ones, as you mention, that makes you a juicy target.

How fast do sams fly at and how high can they hit you? ... How many G's can a sam pull?

It's not so much the speed (though that does help) but the manueverability. A very fast but unmanuevering missile is easily defeated. A relatively slow missile that can turn on a dime is a serious threat. SAM heights are generally too high to even consider attempting to defeat that way. G forces vary considerably and will degrade at the longer ranges for a missile after the rocket motor runs out of fuel.

Does dropping fuel tanks and/or firing a missle at a mountain for example - causing a large fire - fool the tracking of a SAM? Depends on the missile, but probably not. If flares don't work, a silly trick like that certainly won't.

Out of the 4 planes mentioned, what plane would you want to be in if a sam was chasing you. That would depend on the SAM.

Do chafes and flares work, and what is a chafe? Depends on employment method and the missile involved. Chaff is a countermeasure to radar which produces a radar signal because of EM reflection off of strips of metal, intending to produce a false target.

The limiting factor isn't the plane... It's the person in the plane.

Not true -- wings can and will rip off of a plane at high G. That's not to say that all people can withstand higher G forces than the airframes, only that airframe capability does factor in to the equation to a large degree, with particular emphasis under a combat load with external stores.

most SAM are heat seaking i think. It depends on how you are looking at it. The vast majority of short range SAMs are IR guided, but the deadlier ones are radar guided.

SAMs are radar guided.

*BUZZER* Thanks for playing. There are three general types of guidance for SAMs -- IR, radar, and Command to Line of Sight.

I'd say it's not the first option that comes to a pilot's mind when they hear that bingbingbing!!

Since RADAR Warning Receivers do not make any noise when the aircraft is targeted with an IR guided missile, the "bingbingbing" never even sounds for those weapons. If there is a warning noise, it's a radar SAM. That's one of the HUGE technical mistakes from Behind Enemy Lines.

hmm, a bunch of fighter jet sim nuts?

Nope, this is my job.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Andrew

Thanks for clearing up the IR issue.

Hand held IR SAMs did not really exist when I was with the Eagle.

Did you get the railroad tracks below the zone?

 

[Keego]

AndrewR, I want your job

 

[AndrewR]

Thanks for clearing up the IR issue.

Hand held IR SAMs did not really exist when I was with the Eagle.

Hand held IR SAMs have been around since 1964 with the Redeye in the US inventory. The Stinger entered active service with the US Army in 1981. How old are you?? Maybe you didn't know about them, but they were there.

Did you get the railroad tracks below the zone?

I have to wait for an SSB since there was a problem between AETC and AFPC, and my name wasn't submitted to the LAF Captain's board. Should pin on next month. I wish they would just frock me, but that doesn't happen. BTZ promotion doesn't apply since I was on Reserve for several years which is where the time in grade came from (and wasn't promoted in the Reserves, I was inactive).

AndrewR, I want your job

See your local Air Force recruiter. Ask about Intelligence.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Andrew

Was with the F15 in early 70s at Robins

 

[eLiu]

<< And a sam locks onto you and is homing in. WHat the hell are you supposed to do and what should you not do?.
This question was inspired by the sequence in the movie, Behind Enemy Lines.

-- Should you light up the afterburners and try to outrun it? Or will the increase heat signature make you a better target?
-- How fast do sams fly at and how high can they hit you?
-- How many G's can a sam pull?
-- Does dropping fuel tanks and/or firing a missle at a mountain for example - causing a large fire - fool the tracking of a SAM?
-- Out of the 4 planes mentioned, what plane would you want to be in if a sam was chasing you.
-- Do chafes and flares work, and what is a chafe?

My pick: F15 because of the thrust/weight...... Am I wrong? >>



Gs? SAM? ur kidding, right? A SAM can pull FAR more Gs than a human can sustain...in other words, it's a non issue. Now, an F-16B (specially modified with thrust vectoring/larger wing) can pull nearly 30...that'd kill the human, but still. So I imagine SAMS can pull massive G...BUT, they are not incredibly manuverable--short stubby wings, flying at mach2-3

Speed/Height: Depends...REALLY depends. They have SAMS that can reach into 70,000 feet up. They have SAMS that can barely reach past 5000ft up. Speeds? Mach 2-3 from what I remember.

And it's chaff, not chafe. Chaff is just a big clutter of metal pieces, used to clutter the tracking radar, so it will lose the lock. Flares generate a LOT more heat than burners; i think they're usually something similar to white phosphorus. And yes, they do work, although modern missiles are becomin more and more adept at detecting what's a decoy, and what's a real target. Beyond that, if the missile is guided from the ground, then it's success depends on the operator's ability to decide what to fly at.

Go ahead and punch burners if a SAM locks on--there's no way in hell you can cool down enuf to break a heat seeker, so u might as well try to slow the closure rate whilst dropping flares. Also, you don't just drop flares...you jink (manuver randomly), and drop flares/chaff right before executing a sharp turn--suceed in confusing the missile for a second, and then quickly get out of its scanning area.

Dropping tanks, bombs, or missiles CAN fool a heat seeking SAM...an earlier one...the most modern heat seekers can avoid that.

Other thoughts: F-15's weight:thrust is NOTHING compared to the F18. and the F16 can out turn them all hands down. F14 is good because of the phoenix missile, and it's supremely powerful radar system. The variable-geometry wings allow it to act as an interceptor and a fighter, (mutlirole) which is vital as carriers have very limited space. Other than that, it is not very manuverable (u seen how large that thing is?), compared to say, MIG-29 or Su-35...F18/16 can out turn it too...I think the F15C can as well.

And, an F-18 would probably be a 'best' choice--it's decoy system is far more advanced than the other 3 planes. It is equipped with a decoy that it can release on a cable--this is to fool the missiles' targeting systems; it has the same radar signature as the F-18.

 

[KK]

Depending on what light lights up on your reciever will I believe tell the pilot what type of threat is out there. If it's a radar guided missile, well he could chaff and use his jamming pod to either cloud the whole screen up with an barrage type effect or with a false image. If it's a heatseeking, and it daytime, head toward the sun and throw some flares, sun may catch the missile off guard.

KK

 

[EagleKeeper]

eLiu

The Eagle has a greater thrust/weight ratio than the Hornet and a higher top speed.

 

[GoSharks]

well, based on what fight sims that i've played, i would punch the appropriate countermeasures and burners, and put the missle on my 3 or 9 o'clock position ASAP. then, i'll try and get down really low.

but then, what do i know

 

[sandorski]

Wait for it to reach the correct distance(say 3-4 seconds from intercept). Drop appropriate counter-measures, then dive and bank into it as much as I can. The trick is into making the appropriate move that the missile can't adjust to, so if the missile is in an upward trajectory, banking and diving is appropriate, Downard--climb and bank...etc.

Of course, like others in this thread, my flight time has been limited to F19 Stealth Fighter, Falcon 4.0, Janes WW2...etc..

 

[eLiu]

<< eLiu

The Eagle has a greater thrust/weight ratio than the Hornet and a higher top speed. >>



Not the latest model of the hornet...methinks it's less than 1:1...fairly sure of that.

And yeah, Eagle does go faster (never said it didn't), but speed doesnt amount to a whole lot a against a SAM; it's not like u can out run the thing.