radiosilence
jints
it was reported on tv, never claimed it was from a written souce. i could care less as to what you think is assanine or what is not.
Where's the American Pilot?
- Thread starter LancerMc
- Start date
- Status
I'm not going to let you spread your baseless propoganda. USAF Viper drivers aren't so dumb as you try and lead us to believe, neither are the forces of Al Queda as superior as you hope. Go spread your falsities elsewhere.
USNavySEAL3310
New Member
Whoever released that statement, DoD, media, etc., just said something to fill the gaps. It makes sense since 'RPG' is what you hear about on the news all the time.
RPGs are unguided, have a max range of 250m or so, and... are unguided. The -16 would have had to have been flying directly toward the shooter, less than 200 knts, and not willing to maneuver when he saw a smoke streak.
Probably a guided missile like Stinger or Soviet SA-7 if it was indeed targeted. I still believe it was an in-flight failure, especially if the report said it was flying erratically.
RPGs are unguided, have a max range of 250m or so, and... are unguided. The -16 would have had to have been flying directly toward the shooter, less than 200 knts, and not willing to maneuver when he saw a smoke streak.
Probably a guided missile like Stinger or Soviet SA-7 if it was indeed targeted. I still believe it was an in-flight failure, especially if the report said it was flying erratically.
radiosilence
jints
i never claimed thats what happen. it was reported on 2 american tv networks . if you have problem with their reporting, take it up with them. In case you haven't noticed i am also american so cut bullshit about me spreading al queada/iraqi insurgent propoganda. i know our pilots are second to none. i dont need you or anyone else to tell me that. you seem to have a comprehension problem, where i did say our pilots are dumb?:nutkickI'm not going to let you spread your baseless propoganda. USAF Viper drivers aren't so dumb as you try and lead us to believe, neither are the forces of Al Queda as superior as you hope. Go spread your falsities elsewhere.
Last edited:
Where did you get this picture, is it not asking to much from some of you not to show images like this, please respect this pilot and his family.
I have being doing a few sums.
I took the basic numbers from here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-7
First the RPG
The grenade is propelled from the launcher by a charge and very soon the main rocket motor fires. I have ignored this small time. From the link below (and other sources) the maximum velocity is 295m/s. I have assumed that this occurs just before the rocket motor shuts off.
Aerodynamically this is a complex situation. After boost the projectile is continuously slowing down due to drag, but the drag is proportional the square of the velocity.
I will not bore you with the sums but I have considered three basic scenarios each assuming a different motor burn time 2s, 1s & 0.5s. (The projectile would pull 15g, 30g & 60g respectively). I have assumed representative levels of drag resulting in retarding forces from 10m/s2 down to 3m/s2 depending on velocity.
The 1s & 0.5s cases give the best results predicting a maximum horizontal range of about 1,200m, which is cut short by the self-detonation of the warhead by the fuse after 4.5s at around 920m. At 500m the projectile is still travelling at 210-220m/s, but slowing quickly. (2.25 – 2.5s after launch).
When fired vertically gravity will slow the acceleration and the missile will not attain the maximum speed achievable in horizontal flight. (Max velocity in vertical flight 285m/s [1 sec burn], 290m/s [0.5s burn]). At 500m the projectile is travelling about 20m/s slower than in the horizontal case. After 4.5s the warhead self-distructs at an altitude of about 800m, but the velocity has fallen to 100-120m/s (40m/s slower than the horizontal case).
F-16 Straight & Level Flying over firing position
A F-16 flying at an altitude of 300m at a speed 300kts (155m/s) would be an extremely difficult target to hit. At this relatively close range the angular rates would be extremely high and calculating the required lead angle would be almost impossible.
However, if the warhead is allowed to self-detonate, a hit may not be necessary to hit the target to kill it.
In addition to the anti-tank warheads the OG-7V version has a small fragmentation warhead (2kg) designed as an anti-personnel weapon, which has a maximum effective area against people wearing body armour of 150m. The TBG-7V version has a thermobaric warhead and a kill range of 10m and like the other AT varients should be considered as a hit to kill weapon.
So we have the F-16 flying at 300m and a missile with a maximum range of 800m. If the aircraft flew straight and level it would be exposed for 740m each side of the overhead, about 1,500m, so at 155m/s about 10s. In the head on case in order to hit the target the weapon would have to be launched with the target at about 12deg elevation and the weapon pointed at 21deg elevation giving a lead angle of 9deg. Allowing the target to fly past the overhead by 10deg hence an elevation of 80deg the weapon would have to be launched at about 20 deg elevation, a massive 60deg lead angle.
Launcher offset from F-16 Track
Rather than sit underneath the flight path it is better to set-up about 600m off track. This would allow a sector about 435m either side of the direct overhead to be covered. The weapon would be pointed within the +30/-30deg sector with an elevation of about 20deg. As before the approaching target would require less lead than the departing target, but as before can be calculated form the point where the target will be 4.5s prior to launch. However the sightline rate would be huge.
Assuming the OG-7V is being used and that an F-16 can be brought down with the small fragmentation warhead at 150m, this would extend the exposure to a line about 1,200m long leaving the fighter exposed for about 7.5s. Of course then we have to consider the vertical dimension as well, the volume of exposure would a horizontal cylinder 830m long with hemispherical caps.
F-16 not straight & level
But no pilot is going to fly straight and level in combat at low level.
So we will assume that the aircraft is pulling a 3g loop, velocity constant with a low point at 300m. The safe height at each end is 800m. (If you wan to do the sums remember that the acceleration along the radius of the circle a = the velocity at a tangent to the circle squared divided by the radius of the circle).
It turns out that the horizontal distance travelled is 737m before and after the low point. The exposure time is 9.7s.
A real strafing pass would not follow the path of a loop; the dive in would be steeper, with a pull up prior to firing, a level section during the burst 1-3s and a steeper pull-up.
If we repeat the above with a vertical dive entry a 9g pull level aiming and firing 3s, and 9g pull-up the results are very similar. Time below 800m slant range, 9.5s, distance along track 1,000m. (This would be reduced pro-rata by reducing the burst length).
I would be surprised if the duration and length of the portion below 800m is much different from the above rough calculations.
So What?
A F-16 engaged in a staffing run, it would be within range of an RPG with a maximum range of 800m for a considerable period of time, much longer than most pilots would expect about 10s.
Many factors make an attack on such a target a difficult proposition: - the short period of notice, high angle rates and the large lead angles required etc.
However, if the anti-personnel fragmentation warhead were used and allowed to self detonate at around 800m, within the 150m radius body armour penetration zone it is likely that an aircraft would be damaged. To destroy an aircraft normally would require a 10kg warhead to detonate within 50m for a high probability of a kill.
The odds of a kill would be increased if multiple RPGs were fired.
In my opinion a very lucky shot with an RPG could have brought down the F-16, but it is extremely improbable.
The most likely cause of the loss of this aircraft is mechanical failure or an attack by a MANPADS missile.
So way say a luck shot with an RPG?
Again in my opinion, because currently the fast movers only defence against MANPDS is flares, at present no DIRCM, so why admit a vulnerability?
Chris
I took the basic numbers from here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-7
First the RPG
The grenade is propelled from the launcher by a charge and very soon the main rocket motor fires. I have ignored this small time. From the link below (and other sources) the maximum velocity is 295m/s. I have assumed that this occurs just before the rocket motor shuts off.
Aerodynamically this is a complex situation. After boost the projectile is continuously slowing down due to drag, but the drag is proportional the square of the velocity.
I will not bore you with the sums but I have considered three basic scenarios each assuming a different motor burn time 2s, 1s & 0.5s. (The projectile would pull 15g, 30g & 60g respectively). I have assumed representative levels of drag resulting in retarding forces from 10m/s2 down to 3m/s2 depending on velocity.
The 1s & 0.5s cases give the best results predicting a maximum horizontal range of about 1,200m, which is cut short by the self-detonation of the warhead by the fuse after 4.5s at around 920m. At 500m the projectile is still travelling at 210-220m/s, but slowing quickly. (2.25 – 2.5s after launch).
When fired vertically gravity will slow the acceleration and the missile will not attain the maximum speed achievable in horizontal flight. (Max velocity in vertical flight 285m/s [1 sec burn], 290m/s [0.5s burn]). At 500m the projectile is travelling about 20m/s slower than in the horizontal case. After 4.5s the warhead self-distructs at an altitude of about 800m, but the velocity has fallen to 100-120m/s (40m/s slower than the horizontal case).
F-16 Straight & Level Flying over firing position
A F-16 flying at an altitude of 300m at a speed 300kts (155m/s) would be an extremely difficult target to hit. At this relatively close range the angular rates would be extremely high and calculating the required lead angle would be almost impossible.
However, if the warhead is allowed to self-detonate, a hit may not be necessary to hit the target to kill it.
In addition to the anti-tank warheads the OG-7V version has a small fragmentation warhead (2kg) designed as an anti-personnel weapon, which has a maximum effective area against people wearing body armour of 150m. The TBG-7V version has a thermobaric warhead and a kill range of 10m and like the other AT varients should be considered as a hit to kill weapon.
So we have the F-16 flying at 300m and a missile with a maximum range of 800m. If the aircraft flew straight and level it would be exposed for 740m each side of the overhead, about 1,500m, so at 155m/s about 10s. In the head on case in order to hit the target the weapon would have to be launched with the target at about 12deg elevation and the weapon pointed at 21deg elevation giving a lead angle of 9deg. Allowing the target to fly past the overhead by 10deg hence an elevation of 80deg the weapon would have to be launched at about 20 deg elevation, a massive 60deg lead angle.
Launcher offset from F-16 Track
Rather than sit underneath the flight path it is better to set-up about 600m off track. This would allow a sector about 435m either side of the direct overhead to be covered. The weapon would be pointed within the +30/-30deg sector with an elevation of about 20deg. As before the approaching target would require less lead than the departing target, but as before can be calculated form the point where the target will be 4.5s prior to launch. However the sightline rate would be huge.
Assuming the OG-7V is being used and that an F-16 can be brought down with the small fragmentation warhead at 150m, this would extend the exposure to a line about 1,200m long leaving the fighter exposed for about 7.5s. Of course then we have to consider the vertical dimension as well, the volume of exposure would a horizontal cylinder 830m long with hemispherical caps.
F-16 not straight & level
But no pilot is going to fly straight and level in combat at low level.
So we will assume that the aircraft is pulling a 3g loop, velocity constant with a low point at 300m. The safe height at each end is 800m. (If you wan to do the sums remember that the acceleration along the radius of the circle a = the velocity at a tangent to the circle squared divided by the radius of the circle).
It turns out that the horizontal distance travelled is 737m before and after the low point. The exposure time is 9.7s.
A real strafing pass would not follow the path of a loop; the dive in would be steeper, with a pull up prior to firing, a level section during the burst 1-3s and a steeper pull-up.
If we repeat the above with a vertical dive entry a 9g pull level aiming and firing 3s, and 9g pull-up the results are very similar. Time below 800m slant range, 9.5s, distance along track 1,000m. (This would be reduced pro-rata by reducing the burst length).
I would be surprised if the duration and length of the portion below 800m is much different from the above rough calculations.
So What?
A F-16 engaged in a staffing run, it would be within range of an RPG with a maximum range of 800m for a considerable period of time, much longer than most pilots would expect about 10s.
Many factors make an attack on such a target a difficult proposition: - the short period of notice, high angle rates and the large lead angles required etc.
However, if the anti-personnel fragmentation warhead were used and allowed to self detonate at around 800m, within the 150m radius body armour penetration zone it is likely that an aircraft would be damaged. To destroy an aircraft normally would require a 10kg warhead to detonate within 50m for a high probability of a kill.
The odds of a kill would be increased if multiple RPGs were fired.
In my opinion a very lucky shot with an RPG could have brought down the F-16, but it is extremely improbable.
The most likely cause of the loss of this aircraft is mechanical failure or an attack by a MANPADS missile.
So way say a luck shot with an RPG?
Again in my opinion, because currently the fast movers only defence against MANPDS is flares, at present no DIRCM, so why admit a vulnerability?
Chris
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #28
Eckherl, is correct please don't show those kinds of pictures on this site, especially now since the family is mourning. I know we are discussing the topic, but if I was part of his family, I wouldn't want pictures going around the internet.
I have doubts thats even the American pilot, since the flight suit is type I have never seen a USAF pilot ever use. The suit looks to me more like a Russian camo flight suit.
I have doubts thats even the American pilot, since the flight suit is type I have never seen a USAF pilot ever use. The suit looks to me more like a Russian camo flight suit.
Your the one who comes on here with a pro-Hezbollah attitude. The first time I paid attention to it was when you suggested Chuck Hagel for SECDEF. I wondered why anyone would suggest him then his pro-Lebanese stance against Israel and his disdain of the Patriot Act put it into perspective. Then you make the blatent accusation that Israel intentionally targeted UN personel in a militous act of homicide. To top it off you ignore key points in my statement to make your argument seem plausible when it was stated clearly that it wasn't. Your insunuation that an RPG could hit an F-16 says you beleive the pilot was stupid enough to strafe below 250m and fly slow enough to take arms fire. It also says you beleive that the RPG holder was skilled enough to get a direct hit with an unguided shoulder fired weapon. BTW I watch CNN all day, I never saw talking heads saying it could plausibly be hit with an RPG but they said it was most likely a MANPAD. You were either mistaken or spreading false propoganda. If your an American patriot who needs enemies?
Settle down fellas, take it offline rather than get excited with each other in public...
radiosilence
jints
Sorry i don't drink the cool aid you are serving. listen to chuck hagel speak and look at his military record maybe you can pick up a few pointers from him.
Proves my point, you have a comprehension problem.
The great thing about our country is i don't have prove my patriotism to nutcases like you who advocated war with "all of islam" in an earlier thread.
The rest of your post is even worth responding to.
radiosilence and Big-E.
I appreciate that you have a difference of opinion about each others references and claims.
but, from this point on you both need to stay on topic and not get distracted with each other.
Any off topic comments or swipes at each other will be deleted.
I appreciate that you have a difference of opinion about each others references and claims.
but, from this point on you both need to stay on topic and not get distracted with each other.
Any off topic comments or swipes at each other will be deleted.
radiosilence
jints
Maybe because he is respected senator and a fair-minded person with an excellent military record.
For the record I did not advocate a war against Islam. I said if we are nuked that is what it will be. If your going to quote anything do it in context or not at all.
Back on topic:
That pilot was taken and most likely mutilated by Al Queda. The reports say he was there the 15 minutes that journalist was there but from the time he left and US forces got to the area the body was gone. They know how important retreiving the remains of fallen comrads are to our forces and society.
I think it is interesting to note that several helicopters were also shot down in the same area that week and not by RPGs but by MANPADs.
Sorry I made an error transferring data from my spreadsheet, the retardation should have been 10g down to 3g about 100m/s2 down to 30m/s.
(Note that the RPG projectile has sufficient energy to fly out to about 1,100 – 1,200m horizontally and about 1,000m vertically. In the AT role the effective range is about 300m (as mention by another poster), because the rocket motor has not long ceased burning and the projectile is still travelling at over 200m/s. This kinetic energy adds to the energy of the warhead, increasing the probability of a kill.)
I could not find out how to edit the post after it was submitted, hence I post a correction.
Is possible for me to edit after posting?
Admin: Thanks for removing the inappropriate image.
I agree with Big-E that if the aircraft did not suffer mechanical failure then most likely cause of the loss is MANPADS, the other faint possibility is a Beamrider AT Missile (i.e. Kornet AT-14), although such systems are more likely to pose a treat to helicopters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M133_Kornet
Any more news of the fate of the pilot?
Chris
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #36
Nope I haven't heard anything new yet.
Radiosilence I appreciate your passion on talking about this subject, but Big E is an officer in the Navy. He's been in combat, and has years of experience. I trust his opinion, as do others on this website. Feel free to disagree with him, but be open minded enough to listen since he knows a lot more about this kind of stuff then you and me.
I know the media reported an RPG, and yes you maybe correct. Though the media is normally wrong about these important details. I have seen CNN call an F-15 an F-14. To use that stupid, but those people don't pay attention to details like that. It is also true the RPG is a hot media term right now, many Americans are familiar with it, but not with terms like MANPAD or SA-7. The media uses the terms people know to sell the story, not to tell the story accurately.
Radiosilence I appreciate your passion on talking about this subject, but Big E is an officer in the Navy. He's been in combat, and has years of experience. I trust his opinion, as do others on this website. Feel free to disagree with him, but be open minded enough to listen since he knows a lot more about this kind of stuff then you and me.
I know the media reported an RPG, and yes you maybe correct. Though the media is normally wrong about these important details. I have seen CNN call an F-15 an F-14. To use that stupid, but those people don't pay attention to details like that. It is also true the RPG is a hot media term right now, many Americans are familiar with it, but not with terms like MANPAD or SA-7. The media uses the terms people know to sell the story, not to tell the story accurately.
USNavySEAL3310
New Member
Major Troy Gilbert, the downed pilot, was announced dead today as DNA from his remains was tested. My deepest condolences to his family.
Officials are saying that it was highly unlikely the plane was brought down by enemy fire, hence most likely a mechanical problem, what most of us have been saying.
Officials are saying that it was highly unlikely the plane was brought down by enemy fire, hence most likely a mechanical problem, what most of us have been saying.
ok, sorry my bad.
it's from a newspaper. should be a public picture? anyhow, it's not an US newspaper.
thats ok, just remember in future.
It doesn't matter if it was in a public newspaper - from our perspective it is disrespectful and unnecessary.
thanks for understanding
Not a problem - thank you for understanding.
- Status