Military Hardware Thread [Split]

**mbt** · October 2nd, 2005 11:40 PM

walang dogfighting at supersonic speed hehehe. syempre yung dogfighting at low speed yun

although ngayon, hindi na uso yung dogfighting masyado. ang style ng air combat ngayon ay lock-on ng missile sa target at maximum range, fire, then run away. hehe.

yung supersonic speed, if im not mistaken, that's desirable for quick interception and deployment... not for dogfighting.

**oldblue** · October 2nd, 2005 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by mbt

malabo yang invasion. malabong mangyari yan.

and besides, even if they weren't going to be junked, i sincerely doubt that five or ten of those F-5s would make any difference when something like China would invade. hehehe.

regarding armed insurgencies like the Abu Sayyaf, ginagamit ba yung F-5s na yan dun? parang hindi yata. and besides, sa tingin ko may mga "ibang dahilan" kung bakit hindi masugpu-sugpo yang mga NPA at abu sayyaf na yan even after the "full might" of the AFP is deployed against them. hehe (but that's a topic for another day).

so the decision to mothball the planes makes good sense, imo.

speaking of pinoy pilots, d'ba mayroon tayo isang hero noon WW2, si Villamor ba yun, nakipag-dogfight sa 50 Japanese Bombers, with him on a Tora tora. natalo daw niya. this guys can even fly under bridges.

is this real story ba or myth?

**empy** · October 3rd, 2005 01:45 AM

pwede bang humingi ng isa?

**StraightSix** · October 3rd, 2005 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by yebo

wag mo ismolin ang F-5A. if you watched the movie Top Gun (and an earlier movie "Red Eye"??? forgot the title), the fighters that were ranged against the F14's and F4's (in the earlier movie) were either A4's or F-5A's. sabi nga sa Top Gun, they have the same dog fighting capabilities as the MIG28.

Sir yebo, don't believe too much in movies ... The MIG-28 aircraft is fictional, just like the movie.

The F-5A/B, the first variants and also the same as the PAF's, has limited dogfighting capabilities because it isn't equipped with a fire-control radar. Flight characteristics is similar to that of the MIG-21, which was then its main opponent.

Originally Posted by yebo

proven na ng F117-A, subsonic pero kahit isa wala pa na-shoot down.

This is quite debatable (not by us

) ... an F-117 came down over Yugoslavia. The allegation was that it was shot down by a SA-6 Kub SAM which operates on a lower frequency than current systems.

Mojo, you're right that the F-5 never became a frontline USAF fighter, although it was tested by a US wing in Vietnam before entering service with the South Vietnamese. It did however, equipped American training units.

**StraightSix** · October 3rd, 2005 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by oldblue

speaking of pinoy pilots, d'ba mayroon tayo isang hero noon WW2, si Villamor ba yun, nakipag-dogfight sa 50 Japanese Bombers, with him on a Tora tora. natalo daw niya. this guys can even fly under bridges.

is this real story ba or myth?

Yep, that was (then) Maj. Jesus Villamor of the Philippine Army Air Corps (PAAC). During the start of WWII, Japanese aircrafts wiped out the US P-36 and P-40 units on the ground (the P-36 and P-40 were America's frontline fighters then). The few remaining that managed to take off were simply brushed aside by the enemy. History, as it is known but currently being challenged by sceptics, shows that Villamor shot down a Zero fighter and a twin-engined bomber (possibly a Betty). Two other Filipino pilots, Gozar and Kare, claimed to have downed a Zero each.

What's embarassing (hence, the sceptics) was that the PAAC was equipped with obsolete hand-me-down P-26 fighters, in contrast to what the USAAC had and their lack of aerial sucess in the Philippines. If you don't know what a P-26 looks like, imagine a WWI biplane ... take away it's upper wing and that's what a P-26 looks like. It was, after all, a transitional aircraft for the US from WWI biplanes to modern monoplanes. That would be like F-5's faring better in combat than F-15's and F-16's.

Or it may indeed be a myth. There are authors around that present valid arguments. If I'll have dounbts, it would be the victory claims over the type of aircraft. The attackers came from Taiwan with twin-engined bombers, hence air units from the Japanese Army. Only the Imperial Japanese Navy had used the Mitsubishi Zero-Sen, while the Army used Nakajima's ang Nakamichi's ... Unless they were Naval units stationed in a land base in Taiwan.

Btw, Basa was the first PAAC casualty of WWII. The base at Floridablanca was named after him. After the last PAAC aircraft was destroyed on the ground, the remaining personel joined as infantry the doomed defenders of Bataan and Corregidor.

**oldblue** · October 3rd, 2005 04:42 AM

* Straightsix,

nalilito pa din ako sa mga alias ng F series

F1 - Mirage or Tiger
F5 - Mirage or Tiger
F14 - ???
F15 - meron ba nito? parang meron?
F16 - Falcon
F18 - Hornet

alin dyan ang pang navy - pang army.

**Mojo** · October 3rd, 2005 06:18 AM

balik to basics dapat ang PAF, what they need is slow propeller planes against insurgents, slow speed, heavy arnaments/armoured , like yung Hellfire ng USAF nun WWII, ground support aircraft, tas gawa tayo paraan, makagawa ng napalm like bombs, kagaya ng present day USAF. total legal naman ang Napalm sa military targets.

cost effective ang napalm, then its a really terrifying psychological weapon.

sana gumawa tayo paraan ma copya or maka gawa locally ng OV10 na planes as a heavy ground support aircraft capable of dropping napalms

heheheh.

meager budgets call for cost effective aircraft, if only naka gawa ang PAF ng paraan para makagawa ng parts for their Tora tora aircrafts baka maging cost effective parin gamitin mga yung against insurgents

**Mojo** · October 3rd, 2005 06:20 AM

btw

di ba uso ang decommissioning ng Jet fighter squadrons dahil sa mahal ng maintaining a jet squadron?

like this year, New zealand became also a paper airforce like ng philippines, decommissioned din nila ang mga jet fighter wings

**StraightSix** · October 3rd, 2005 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by oldblue

* Straightsix,

nalilito pa din ako sa mga alias ng F series

F1 - Mirage or Tiger
F5 - Mirage or Tiger
F14 - ???
F15 - meron ba nito? parang meron?
F16 - Falcon
F18 - Hornet

alin dyan ang pang navy - pang army.

Of those you listed ...

US Air Force:
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Fighting Falcon or simply Falcon.

US Navy:
F-14 Tomcat
F-18 Hornet

Notes:
F-5A/B Freedom Fighter, or Tiger II for later variants, served with allied countries, while the F-14 Tomcat (a Navy plane), served in the Iranian Air Force. The US Navy and the US Air Force often have different fighters, save for a few types they had in common like the F-4 Phantom II, though the USAF certainly didn't use the FH-1 Phantom I

The F1 you refered to is a variant of the French aircraft, the Dassault Mirage, where F1 is a variant designation (Mirage I, II, IIIc, F1, etc.) versus the American type designator, F being for fighters.

The first air units of the US was under the Army, hence US Army Air Corps. This later changed to US Army Air Force in 1941, and then to the present distinct branch US Air Force since 1947. At present, I am not aware of any fixed-wing fighter under the US Army, the Harrier/Super Harrier and F/A-18's being under the US Marine Corps.

**StraightSix** · October 3rd, 2005 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by Mojo

... if only naka gawa ang PAF ng paraan para makagawa ng parts for their Tora tora aircrafts baka maging cost effective parin gamitin mga yung against insurgents

Too late ... the T-28D Nomads have been retired nung 1992 pa yata. OV-10 Bronco at SF.260 Warrior na lang gamit sa ground attack (re: fixed-wing aircarft/prop-driven) ... parehong hindi radial engine yan kaya hindi mapapagkamalang "Tora-tora"