I have fired a AIM-9M and a AIM-7M, and watched an AIM-120 launched. The Sidewinder’s flight does indeed look like the path of a snake. The AMRAAM comes off the rail so fast it is startling. The Sparrow has the biggest warhead of all three missiles - it looks like a 500 lbs bomb has exploded in flight. The AIM-9X and helmet-mounted sight provide a new huge leap in capability. Thank you for another excellent video.
The Super Snake is the crowning achievement China Lake has made to this day. I am absolutely stunned by how the little fellow has come along. From being launched from a trapeeze from under a Hellcat, to being a tank-killer, to a laser-guided Swedish fish, and now loaded in a 8 pack MLRS launcher (Take that, Iron Dome!), it's quite the versitaile kit. Ukrane tried to rig up a FrankenSAM using AIM-9Ms with their own radar-guided network. They wound up loading them up like the old Chaparral tracked SAM buggies and have been giving the Russians a hard time.
Wow, I'm really impressed that this channel is able to put out so much content of this quality with such regularity. Usually channels with this level of content only post a video once a month; if you're lucky. So major Thumbs Up to the creator. Just wanted to make this known and wanted to post for the All Powerful Algorithm. I can see this channel easily passing 100k subs within year.
As an aside, the biggest problem of the AIM-4 was that it was useless outside of the envelope. The F-102 and F-106, that had actual fire control computers capable of giving the pilot a proper firing solution, or at least telling him if he's gonna fucking miss, had MASSIVELY better times of it using the thing, even capable of hitting supersonic cruise missiles. The F-4, lacking any such capability AT ALL, or even any fire control computation outside the lead computing gunsights on later models, had a mugch harder go of it and gave the AIM-4 the reputation it had.
Well that would be because the F-102 and F-106 were designed to be used with the AIM-4 from the start, while the F-4 just had the basic capacity added later. They would have to redesign the entire fire control system to make it work. And any nissu is useless outside the envelope, that's why it's an envelope. It's the parameters it will work under. And the AIM-4s were pretty limited, which is part of the problem. An AIM-9 and AIM-7 also won't work outside of their design envelope, did the F-4 automatically warn the pilots of that? I doubt it. But they were trained to know what those limits were and why it was important to stay inside them (although they still didn't always, which is part of why they failed to work all the time). So you could argue that the main problem with the AIM-4 was that the envelope was too limited and geared towards shooting down bombers, not dogfighting, and the pilots weren't properly trained to use them correctly. The 102 and 106 pilots were.
The problem in Vietnam wasn’t that the phantoms couldn’t maneuver. But the pilots wasn’t trained to maneuver the phantoms and the missiles failed 90% of the time. However Dan Pedersen the founder of Too Gun and other Too Gun phantom pilots took the ratio from 2:1 to 24:1 with the phantoms in Vietnam
"Nine and a half feet in old money". I absolutely love your writing! Another 10 out of 10 video! And, of course, best title ever 😂. I look forward to your content, it's got to be some of the best aviation history content on the Internet today 😮
The Soviet Engineers were indeed highly shocked by the US electronic technology developments once they got their hands on the AIM-9B. Then some 17 years later, they received another bombshell after acquired the South Vietnamese F-5E's fire control systems from the North Vietnamese.
I wish I remembered the channel I saw it on, but I remember watching a video that basically outlined how the Soviets were unable to keep pace with the US in the development and miniaturization of electronics utilizing semiconductors. Apparently the Soviets went all in on tech which required vacuums tubes. The incident with the Sidewinder lodged in the MiG whose tech surprised Soviet scientists was mentioned. In any case, I am certainly not expert on such things but I found the video quite fascinating.
@@Jon.A.Scholt Semiconductors are an important strategic resource, currently both Mainland China and Taiwan produce better military graded chips than Russia since late 1980s. You should checkout Asianometry channel for more info about the history of Taiwan's electronic industries.
@@crispy_338 As the result, they have to retreat to the easier defensible position to deal with the ongoing Ukrainian counter offensives which actually works but the Russian economy and military prestige was damaged in the long run.
Pound, I know early missile air combat is interesting (I am aviation enthusiast) but your delivery just makes it cool. Your channel is quality, and is growing in quantity. Glad to be here from the start of the aviation period (maybe a week late, just a bit).
Bittersweet video with the ending you gave it, but absolutely appropriate. Love your videos and the information on it, I'd seen some more brief recounts of the development of the sidewinder, but nothing this complete, nor nothing that mentioned the use of some captured German information regarding seeker heads. I love the fairness and tone of your videos, other documentaries the algorithm suggest sometimes seem less like a documentary and more propaganda than a useful historical take. Happy to see your subscriber count continuing to climb, but please work out a work life balance that is sustainable for you. Lastly, gotta love the B-17, hit with a missile (granted, sans explosives) in a critical area but still got home.
I've always loved the simplicity of the mechanically revolving infrared camera in the nose of the Sidewinder. At least that is how I've always understood it. Now I shall watch the video to learn new stuff!
Complimenting your video on the comparison of the F4C and the F104C it would be interesting to speculate on the performance of the Starfighter and the Sidewinder in the potential air to air confrontation between Cuban and Russian interceptors and an F104 Migcap if the USAF would have carried out planned strikes on SAM sites and IRBM sites in Cuba. Your videos are incredible and are a true evaluation on what sometimes is a rah rah type discussion on us vs. them.
I have a real interest in the Vietnam air war. Emerging high tech air combat mixed against old school maneuver dogfighting. Bizarre tactical choices across the board. Thanks for this.
The information could be totally wrong, but my brain is like, "this guy sounds legit." Maybe that's why infomercials use a guy with a British accent sometimes.
Great channel. I like the scene development and story delivery. I was confused about what kind of camera footage we were looking at at the 15:19 spot. You can see the pilot's legs reflected on the canopy as he rolls in to deliver ordinance in the Vietnam jungle. The A-1 in the previous scene was setting up to do some landscaping. A Skyraider did have a Mig kill, most impressive bird...
Fascinating stuff - You just plugged a hole in my knowledge which I never really knew I had 'til I watched that. Now About these new 'beyond visual range' thingies ........... [Great channel BTW]
Thanks for the comment and the positive vibes. I’ve got together some material on the early Sparrow and the Soviet Alkali and Apex. Oddly the latter is easier to find than the former. I suspect the Sparrow video might be quite a long one by the time I’ve finished. It’s a fascinating weapon when all of the innovations in the missile and the aircraft are put together. The Falcon is the same way.
If always seriously doubted the story that the Russians were able reverse engineer the Sidewinder from one that impacted a MiG-17. Think about it. The Sidewinder is traveling at approximately Mach 1.5-2.5 depending on acceleration time. The Sidewinder is basically an aluminum tube with a glass nose cap, that weighs 190 pounds (20 pounds of which is the warhead). This aluminum tube strikes the airframe of the MiG with sufficient force to embed itself, yet miraculously the seeker head, which remember has a glass cap, survives the impact sufficiently for the Russians to be able to make an exact copy for themselves.🙄 With those impact parameters, the Russians would be luck to figure out the paint color! No, in my opinion, the Russians did inspect the wreckage of that Sidewinder, and were suitably intrigued that they had Swedish Air Force Colonel Stig Wennerström pirate them a copy of the Sidewinder manual. The whole MiG-17 explanation was a cover story by the Soviets to protect Wennerström.
Interesting comment. You could well be right - I hadn’t really considered the impact forces. Possible that the shot was at long range and the missile was slowing at the point it hit? I’ve got some more information on the Atoll and am planning a separate video. I’ll see what I can do on the origin story.
First, the missile slows down as soon as the motor stops burning. The faster you go, the more drag. The nosecone of the Sidewinder had to resist supersonic drag heating on the outside and cryogenic cooling on the inside. Not exactly flimsy. Second, relative speed/closure rate. The aircraft is running away from the missile as the missile progressively gets slower. If you are in an open train car at 900 ft/s and someone shoots a 9mm bullet travelling at 1100 ft/s at you, the bullet hits you at 200 ft/s. Enough to break the skin but hardly fatal. Third, aircraft are even more flimsy than missiles! A round tube is a very solid shape all things considered. An aircraft is like a car, you can completely dent the body panels at parking speeds. Well, cars don't have to fly, so aircraft have to save even more weight. To the point hitting a bird can mangle a wing's skin and expose the spars underneath. A missile gliding on inertia and losing speed, an aircraft running away, and a tube acting like a spear versus a coke can of an aircraft... easy to believe.
Heartwarming end to the video! Always inspiring to be reminded that determined self-defense is enough to overcome the technological prowess of self-assured aggressors!
Absolutely EXCELLENT!!! I've got to watch a few more times to really soak it in - especially the flight envelope graphics. Especially impressive is the research done regarding technology and how that drove tactics. I had no idea that missiles had such seemingly low success ratios. (Note: In American aviation circles, the Voodoo is known as the "F-One-Oh-One"). It's interesting, too, how the Chinese got their Sidewinder. At most, we call that a blessing for the Chinese, and at least we call it providence for all involved. Proof that even if you have something to directly copy, it doesn't mean you can make a weapon equal to the original. I wonder how new systems like the Raytheon Peregrine will fair in success ratios. Thank you for an excellent new instalment to Not A Pound For Air To Ground.
Russia too, has long had a habit of copying western designs (weapons, radios, all sorts of stuff) right down to the location and style of the instructions screen printed on the side of the unit... yet the vast majority were lousy copies.
A great deep dive. Cant wait to hear more about the family. I do really like this early stuff though. Makes a change from the usual stealth fanboy stuff 😀
The Snake was developed on a shoestring by the Navy at China Lake in the 40's. It was not until 1952 when the Navy BuOrd took notice and gave it a little more money to operate the coffee pot. Later, they had to shut the damned thing off for the Snake was taking a liking to the heat it was giving off. The first hard kills were in 1953 and things really started to take off. In 1954 51 flights were performed, and 1953 serial production was authorized with Rayethon-General Electric as the major contractors. Then the fun really started. The variants of the little fellow included radar-seeking Sidearm, a cheaper variant of the SHRIKE and HARM. The air-to-ground FOCUS, IR seeker. The Swedish fish, which was laser guided. The Germans got into that one and they had fun. It didn't get outside of testing. The Chaparral SAM system, where the gunner is sitting in the middle of four of the crazies and gets a ringside seat of them being touched off. The last of them was the scary DIAMONDBACK, a nuclear-tipped (.75KT) version. It was a bulked-up version, made bigger to accommodate the motor and warhead. Instead of solid propellants, it used hypergolics, which made it even more scarier. It used both passive radar/active IR for guidance. it tipped the scales at nearly 900bs. Fortunately it never made it past the planning stages.
Keep up the good work, your work is appreciated. Simple well researched narrative, lacking the exciting music, the erroneous or misleading images which characterize so many channels. Well done!
Thanks for this entertaining and informative article on the Sidewinder AAM. The Sidewinder was an embarrassment to the Military-Industrial Complex--a simple, cheap and EFFECTIVE guided missile that was cobbled together as a workbench project in someone's spare time under the cover story of being a "fuze" this missile continues to be the most effective missile inside of its kill envelope. Longer range missiles don't have the track record and at longer range there is time for more countermeasures. Within five miles that reaction time is mere seconds IF the victim detects the attack. Equally embarrassing is that the reverse-engineered Atol missile family is the second most-effective AAM. Not bad for a few sailors fooling around in a workshop!
The Phoenix has a good track record in Iran. There's no countermeasures from long range when Iraqi aviation is grounded from the suspicion that traitors or covert saboteurs are sticking timed explosives inside aircraft because nobody can see the F-14 Tomcat or the AIM-54 diving on its prey. Just one of the fighters in formation turning into a fireball with no warning.
I remember an interview with Olds telling about deploying with F-4Ds that were only rigged for Falcons instead sidewinders. They were missing so many shots that he found some one to jerry rig sidewinder rails and swap out the avionics. All these years he was still passed.😂
Aim9b was first use in kinmen . According to official plaaf archieves it created a panic among plaaf pilot,according to report.pilot will suddently notice there wing man suddently erupt into fireball.they has no idea they being attack by aim9b 14:58
Why did they elect to use a growl tone for lock-on? Is it because it's a unique sound so they don't confuse it with other alarms/buzzers that may be going off?
The sound is the electronic pulses generated by the seeker itself, not processed to sound a particular way. It was just the simplest method to give the pilot feedback whether they were locked on or not.
@@MrWillNeedham Yesss this seemed rather primitive for such a capable system... If I'm not mistaken, they still use this same method even with modern platforms? If it isn't broke I suppose
@@shainemaine1268 The human brain is remarkably good at interpreting sounds, and it doesn't require the pilot to look anywhere in particular (like an indicator light would). Sometimes simple is best. Though I'm sure it is a bit more advanced in the later models of sidewinder.
Always kind of amuses me how people say "the AIM-9 has been in service for 60 years" when it really hasn't. What we have had is a series of different missiles that only share the same basic concept, overall dimensions, and mounting hardware. And I'm not even sure those are all true. They call them all the "AIM-9" because it's basically marketing at this point. The AIM-9 today doesn't share any parts with the original AIM-9, i don't think they even carried over much between "generations" in several cases. They totally cheese changed the seeker, the fuse, the warhead, the motor, the guidance system, the control surfaces, pretty sure they even changed the layout, went to front control surfaces, swapped the location of the sections around, etc. So in what what is the AIM-9X "the same missile" as the one they adopted in the 1950s? Aside from the fact that they look similar, are both IR missiles, and she both called "AIM-9"? However you want to look at it, they definitely have not used the same missile for 60 years, the newest ones are far more modern and better in every way. It's sort of like calling a 2020 Mustang and an 1968 Mustang "the same car" because they are both called the same name. Okay, but they really aren't, at all. They have the same role and layout, sure, but so do other cars that aren't called "Ford Mustang". A Camaro isn't a Mustang. A Magic isn't a Sidewinder. Even though it's an IR guided short range missile that is even compatible with the same hardware. So what's the actual difference? It's not called the AIM-9, thats only difference. At least when we say we have used the M2HB for 100 years, we have literally used the same exact gun for 109 years. Sometimes literally used a specific gun for 100 years.
The horrifically bad kill rates show why it was a bad idea to not have a gun on a fighter. Of course given the 30% fired out of envelope rate was the pilot's fault, then the rates should have been a fair amount higher had they used it effectively.
When aerial gunnery is harder than firing a missile within parameters kind of devalues your point. Putting a gun on a fighter does nothing when pilots aren't sufficiently trained to use it.
@@shannonkohl68 However, Phantom pilots were sufficiently trained to score over a hundred missile kills in Vietnam. There were like 6 gunpod kills and 5 kills with the E variant nose gun. Or the other way around. Missiles won.
Check out War Thunder - they seem to have modeled A2A missiles fantastically well - apart from gross differences between IR, SARH and Active Radar Homing (and beam, laser and MCLOS missiles !), they also show the difference between caged and uncaged seekers, radar slaving, helmet mounted targeting and heaps of other features. As you would expect the AIM-9B is not a great missile, but against 1950s and 60s era aircraft it sure beats the alternatives eg guns, rocket pods etc.
That's *exactly* when you *should* be developing weapons, so you can work out most of the bugs *before* failure costs the lives of your own people. And we *did* have an enemy, even if we weren't in active combat at the time. By the time we actually had official funding for it, US pilots were dying in Korea to the new MiG-15.
Can you please get rid of the funky video game graphics? It really sucks to see hollow aircraft (they're full of fuel, engines, avionics, environmental systems, etc. Just show real aircraft, PLEASE!
Thanks for the comment. Are you referring to the tactical plots? If so, they are from the Red Baron report - I used what the USAF used to explain engagements in Vietnam.
@@notapound No, I am talking about the game videos of take-offs, MiG-17s flying through clouds, all of that. I'm a former military Sr Aviator, and like your subjects, but... The recent Robin Olds v Boots. Blesse was very good. I had the privilege of working for (a few layers below) Robin in the 1970s.
Two million people died for China and the Soviets only for Vietnam to them grow closer to the US. Seems like the "good guys" sent people into a mass ritualistic sacrifice to appease the Marxist Blood God then gave up.
This is so good dude, thank you for continuing to put out quality content. @strategyfromtherightbrain In multiple videos you’ve used illustrations of ACM engagements, what’s the source material?
I have fired a AIM-9M and a AIM-7M, and watched an AIM-120 launched. The Sidewinder’s flight does indeed look like the path of a snake. The AMRAAM comes off the rail so fast it is startling. The Sparrow has the biggest warhead of all three missiles - it looks like a 500 lbs bomb has exploded in flight.
The AIM-9X and helmet-mounted sight provide a new huge leap in capability.
Thank you for another excellent video.
The Super Snake is the crowning achievement China Lake has made to this day. I am absolutely stunned by how the little fellow has come along. From being launched from a trapeeze from under a Hellcat, to being a tank-killer, to a laser-guided Swedish fish, and now loaded in a 8 pack MLRS launcher (Take that, Iron Dome!), it's quite the versitaile kit.
Ukrane tried to rig up a FrankenSAM using AIM-9Ms with their own radar-guided network. They wound up loading them up like the old Chaparral tracked SAM buggies and have been giving the Russians a hard time.
Wow, I'm really impressed that this channel is able to put out so much content of this quality with such regularity. Usually channels with this level of content only post a video once a month; if you're lucky. So major Thumbs Up to the creator.
Just wanted to make this known and wanted to post for the All Powerful Algorithm. I can see this channel easily passing 100k subs within year.
That is a cool picture of the F3H Demon and the F3D Skyknight launching a Sidewinder.
As an aside, the biggest problem of the AIM-4 was that it was useless outside of the envelope. The F-102 and F-106, that had actual fire control computers capable of giving the pilot a proper firing solution, or at least telling him if he's gonna fucking miss, had MASSIVELY better times of it using the thing, even capable of hitting supersonic cruise missiles. The F-4, lacking any such capability AT ALL, or even any fire control computation outside the lead computing gunsights on later models, had a mugch harder go of it and gave the AIM-4 the reputation it had.
Well that would be because the F-102 and F-106 were designed to be used with the AIM-4 from the start, while the F-4 just had the basic capacity added later. They would have to redesign the entire fire control system to make it work. And any nissu is useless outside the envelope, that's why it's an envelope. It's the parameters it will work under. And the AIM-4s were pretty limited, which is part of the problem. An AIM-9 and AIM-7 also won't work outside of their design envelope, did the F-4 automatically warn the pilots of that? I doubt it. But they were trained to know what those limits were and why it was important to stay inside them (although they still didn't always, which is part of why they failed to work all the time). So you could argue that the main problem with the AIM-4 was that the envelope was too limited and geared towards shooting down bombers, not dogfighting, and the pilots weren't properly trained to use them correctly. The 102 and 106 pilots were.
The problem in Vietnam wasn’t that the phantoms couldn’t maneuver. But the pilots wasn’t trained to maneuver the phantoms and the missiles failed 90% of the time. However Dan Pedersen the founder of Too Gun and other Too Gun phantom pilots took the ratio from 2:1 to 24:1 with the phantoms in Vietnam
"Nine and a half feet in old money". I absolutely love your writing! Another 10 out of 10 video! And, of course, best title ever 😂. I look forward to your content, it's got to be some of the best aviation history content on the Internet today 😮
The Soviet Engineers were indeed highly shocked by the US electronic technology developments once they got their hands on the AIM-9B. Then some 17 years later, they received another bombshell after acquired the South Vietnamese F-5E's fire control systems from the North Vietnamese.
I wish I remembered the channel I saw it on, but I remember watching a video that basically outlined how the Soviets were unable to keep pace with the US in the development and miniaturization of electronics utilizing semiconductors. Apparently the Soviets went all in on tech which required vacuums tubes. The incident with the Sidewinder lodged in the MiG whose tech surprised Soviet scientists was mentioned.
In any case, I am certainly not expert on such things but I found the video quite fascinating.
@@Jon.A.Scholt Semiconductors are an important strategic resource, currently both Mainland China and Taiwan produce better military graded chips than Russia since late 1980s. You should checkout Asianometry channel for more info about the history of Taiwan's electronic industries.
The soviet engineer was surprised by miniture gyros inside the missile.
Russians have always been 20-25yrs behind the west in terms of technology, especially in aircraft.
@@crispy_338 As the result, they have to retreat to the easier defensible position to deal with the ongoing Ukrainian counter offensives which actually works but the Russian economy and military prestige was damaged in the long run.
Pound, I know early missile air combat is interesting (I am aviation enthusiast) but your delivery just makes it cool.
Your channel is quality, and is growing in quantity. Glad to be here from the start of the aviation period (maybe a week late, just a bit).
Refuses Western Calls for Elections
ruclips.net/video/vzSn2Nvs4-Q/видео.html
Bittersweet video with the ending you gave it, but absolutely appropriate.
Love your videos and the information on it, I'd seen some more brief recounts of the development of the sidewinder, but nothing this complete, nor nothing that mentioned the use of some captured German information regarding seeker heads. I love the fairness and tone of your videos, other documentaries the algorithm suggest sometimes seem less like a documentary and more propaganda than a useful historical take. Happy to see your subscriber count continuing to climb, but please work out a work life balance that is sustainable for you.
Lastly, gotta love the B-17, hit with a missile (granted, sans explosives) in a critical area but still got home.
I've always loved the simplicity of the mechanically revolving infrared camera in the nose of the Sidewinder. At least that is how I've always understood it.
Now I shall watch the video to learn new stuff!
Someone did a video on the rollerons. So cool. ruclips.net/video/gYMC0VhhAqw/видео.htmlsi=gF-98bSGKorHtL7i
@@StromBugSlayer Thanks!
I had no idea of the effective kill rate of the AIM-9. Very interesting. Great videos! Thanks!
Complimenting your video on the comparison of the F4C and the F104C it would be interesting to speculate on the performance of the Starfighter and the Sidewinder in the potential air to air confrontation between Cuban and Russian interceptors and an F104 Migcap if the USAF would have carried out planned strikes on SAM sites and IRBM sites in Cuba. Your videos are incredible and are a true evaluation on what sometimes is a rah rah type discussion on us vs. them.
I have a real interest in the Vietnam air war. Emerging high tech air combat mixed against old school maneuver dogfighting. Bizarre tactical choices across the board. Thanks for this.
There's something about someone with a British accent narrating documentaries that make them so much more entertaining
The information could be totally wrong, but my brain is like, "this guy sounds legit." Maybe that's why infomercials use a guy with a British accent sometimes.
Another superb video, first thing I look for now on a Friday morning, excellent work..!
Best title ever
Great channel. I like the scene development and story delivery. I was confused about what kind of camera footage we were looking at at the 15:19 spot. You can see the pilot's legs reflected on the canopy as he rolls in to deliver ordinance in the Vietnam jungle. The A-1 in the previous scene was setting up to do some landscaping. A Skyraider did have a Mig kill, most impressive bird...
Fascinating stuff - You just plugged a hole in my knowledge which I never really knew I had 'til I watched that.
Now
About these new 'beyond visual range' thingies ...........
[Great channel BTW]
Thanks for the comment and the positive vibes. I’ve got together some material on the early Sparrow and the Soviet Alkali and Apex. Oddly the latter is easier to find than the former.
I suspect the Sparrow video might be quite a long one by the time I’ve finished. It’s a fascinating weapon when all of the innovations in the missile and the aircraft are put together. The Falcon is the same way.
If always seriously doubted the story that the Russians were able reverse engineer the Sidewinder from one that impacted a MiG-17.
Think about it.
The Sidewinder is traveling at approximately Mach 1.5-2.5 depending on acceleration time. The Sidewinder is basically an aluminum tube with a glass nose cap, that weighs 190 pounds (20 pounds of which is the warhead). This aluminum tube strikes the airframe of the MiG with sufficient force to embed itself, yet miraculously the seeker head, which remember has a glass cap, survives the impact sufficiently for the Russians to be able to make an exact copy for themselves.🙄 With those impact parameters, the Russians would be luck to figure out the paint color!
No, in my opinion, the Russians did inspect the wreckage of that Sidewinder, and were suitably intrigued that they had Swedish Air Force Colonel Stig Wennerström pirate them a copy of the Sidewinder manual. The whole MiG-17 explanation was a cover story by the Soviets to protect Wennerström.
Interesting comment. You could well be right - I hadn’t really considered the impact forces. Possible that the shot was at long range and the missile was slowing at the point it hit?
I’ve got some more information on the Atoll and am planning a separate video. I’ll see what I can do on the origin story.
First, the missile slows down as soon as the motor stops burning. The faster you go, the more drag. The nosecone of the Sidewinder had to resist supersonic drag heating on the outside and cryogenic cooling on the inside. Not exactly flimsy. Second, relative speed/closure rate. The aircraft is running away from the missile as the missile progressively gets slower. If you are in an open train car at 900 ft/s and someone shoots a 9mm bullet travelling at 1100 ft/s at you, the bullet hits you at 200 ft/s. Enough to break the skin but hardly fatal. Third, aircraft are even more flimsy than missiles! A round tube is a very solid shape all things considered. An aircraft is like a car, you can completely dent the body panels at parking speeds. Well, cars don't have to fly, so aircraft have to save even more weight. To the point hitting a bird can mangle a wing's skin and expose the spars underneath.
A missile gliding on inertia and losing speed, an aircraft running away, and a tube acting like a spear versus a coke can of an aircraft... easy to believe.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD yeah, or……………Stiggy simply sent them the maintenance docs
@@TR4Ajim We have a proven instance of it happening on a missile dud, and an allegation.
Why would Sweden have production blueprints?
Swedecvcks holding back western civilisation as usual
Great episode loved it and very interesting! Love all the old footage too! 🫡👍
What a great video. Especially enjoyed the archival film of the early prototype missiles. Also appreciate your mention of the human casualties.
Another outstanding work, keep it up.
Heartwarming end to the video! Always inspiring to be reminded that determined self-defense is enough to overcome the technological prowess of self-assured aggressors!
I'm guessing you're a turd-worldist?
That was really beautiful. What you did at the end of your video. It really shows a lot of honor.
This channel is growing to become one of my top favorites!
Great content, again and again!
Absolutely EXCELLENT!!! I've got to watch a few more times to really soak it in - especially the flight envelope graphics. Especially impressive is the research done regarding technology and how that drove tactics. I had no idea that missiles had such seemingly low success ratios. (Note: In American aviation circles, the Voodoo is known as the "F-One-Oh-One"). It's interesting, too, how the Chinese got their Sidewinder. At most, we call that a blessing for the Chinese, and at least we call it providence for all involved. Proof that even if you have something to directly copy, it doesn't mean you can make a weapon equal to the original. I wonder how new systems like the Raytheon Peregrine will fair in success ratios. Thank you for an excellent new instalment to Not A Pound For Air To Ground.
Russia too, has long had a habit of copying western designs (weapons, radios, all sorts of stuff) right down to the location and style of the instructions screen printed on the side of the unit... yet the vast majority were lousy copies.
A great deep dive. Cant wait to hear more about the family. I do really like this early stuff though. Makes a change from the usual stealth fanboy stuff 😀
Thanks for another fabulous episode
The Snake was developed on a shoestring by the Navy at China Lake in the 40's. It was not until 1952 when the Navy BuOrd took notice and gave it a little more money to operate the coffee pot. Later, they had to shut the damned thing off for the Snake was taking a liking to the heat it was giving off.
The first hard kills were in 1953 and things really started to take off. In 1954 51 flights were performed, and 1953 serial production was authorized with Rayethon-General Electric as the major contractors. Then the fun really started.
The variants of the little fellow included radar-seeking Sidearm, a cheaper variant of the SHRIKE and HARM. The air-to-ground FOCUS, IR seeker. The Swedish fish, which was laser guided. The Germans got into that one and they had fun. It didn't get outside of testing. The Chaparral SAM system, where the gunner is sitting in the middle of four of the crazies and gets a ringside seat of them being touched off.
The last of them was the scary DIAMONDBACK, a nuclear-tipped (.75KT) version. It was a bulked-up version, made bigger to accommodate the motor and warhead. Instead of solid propellants, it used hypergolics, which made it even more scarier. It used both passive radar/active IR for guidance. it tipped the scales at nearly 900bs. Fortunately it never made it past the planning stages.
Keep up the good work, your work is appreciated. Simple well researched narrative, lacking the exciting music, the erroneous or misleading images which characterize so many channels. Well done!
Thanks for this entertaining and informative article on the Sidewinder AAM. The Sidewinder was an embarrassment to the Military-Industrial Complex--a simple, cheap and EFFECTIVE guided missile that was cobbled together as a workbench project in someone's spare time under the cover story of being a "fuze" this missile continues to be the most effective missile inside of its kill envelope. Longer range missiles don't have the track record and at longer range there is time for more countermeasures. Within five miles that reaction time is mere seconds IF the victim detects the attack.
Equally embarrassing is that the reverse-engineered Atol missile family is the second most-effective AAM. Not bad for a few sailors fooling around in a workshop!
The Phoenix has a good track record in Iran.
There's no countermeasures from long range when Iraqi aviation is grounded from the suspicion that traitors or covert saboteurs are sticking timed explosives inside aircraft because nobody can see the F-14 Tomcat or the AIM-54 diving on its prey. Just one of the fighters in formation turning into a fireball with no warning.
Excellent story telling.
I remember an interview with Olds telling about deploying with F-4Ds that were only rigged for Falcons instead sidewinders. They were missing so many shots that he found some one to jerry rig sidewinder rails and swap out the avionics. All these years he was still passed.😂
Pissed
Great video...👍
Brilliant title! 👍
I'm pretty sure that the lead-pursuit mode wasn't a thing on the B-model, and that that one used pure-pursuit?
Love the title
Safe to say this kicks a**.
Aim9b was first use in kinmen .
According to official plaaf archieves it created a panic among plaaf pilot,according to report.pilot will suddently notice there wing man suddently erupt into fireball.they has no idea they being attack by aim9b 14:58
Why did they elect to use a growl tone for lock-on? Is it because it's a unique sound so they don't confuse it with other alarms/buzzers that may be going off?
The sound is the electronic pulses generated by the seeker itself, not processed to sound a particular way. It was just the simplest method to give the pilot feedback whether they were locked on or not.
@@MrWillNeedham Yesss this seemed rather primitive for such a capable system... If I'm not mistaken, they still use this same method even with modern platforms? If it isn't broke I suppose
@@shainemaine1268 The human brain is remarkably good at interpreting sounds, and it doesn't require the pilot to look anywhere in particular (like an indicator light would). Sometimes simple is best. Though I'm sure it is a bit more advanced in the later models of sidewinder.
7:05
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isnt...
Always kind of amuses me how people say "the AIM-9 has been in service for 60 years" when it really hasn't. What we have had is a series of different missiles that only share the same basic concept, overall dimensions, and mounting hardware. And I'm not even sure those are all true. They call them all the "AIM-9" because it's basically marketing at this point. The AIM-9 today doesn't share any parts with the original AIM-9, i don't think they even carried over much between "generations" in several cases. They totally cheese changed the seeker, the fuse, the warhead, the motor, the guidance system, the control surfaces, pretty sure they even changed the layout, went to front control surfaces, swapped the location of the sections around, etc. So in what what is the AIM-9X "the same missile" as the one they adopted in the 1950s? Aside from the fact that they look similar, are both IR missiles, and she both called "AIM-9"? However you want to look at it, they definitely have not used the same missile for 60 years, the newest ones are far more modern and better in every way. It's sort of like calling a 2020 Mustang and an 1968 Mustang "the same car" because they are both called the same name. Okay, but they really aren't, at all. They have the same role and layout, sure, but so do other cars that aren't called "Ford Mustang". A Camaro isn't a Mustang. A Magic isn't a Sidewinder. Even though it's an IR guided short range missile that is even compatible with the same hardware. So what's the actual difference? It's not called the AIM-9, thats only difference.
At least when we say we have used the M2HB for 100 years, we have literally used the same exact gun for 109 years. Sometimes literally used a specific gun for 100 years.
Will the sraams be covered at some point?
Give me more!!!
Remember this Sidewinder was hardly reliable. In “Janes USNF 97” it’s easy to see why it’s frustrating to get a lock.
Huron
Not yuron
The horrifically bad kill rates show why it was a bad idea to not have a gun on a fighter. Of course given the 30% fired out of envelope rate was the pilot's fault, then the rates should have been a fair amount higher had they used it effectively.
Yeah, those stupid pilots, right?
When aerial gunnery is harder than firing a missile within parameters kind of devalues your point. Putting a gun on a fighter does nothing when pilots aren't sufficiently trained to use it.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Building a plane does nothing if the pilot isn't sufficiently trained to use it. Thanks for your wisdom, Mr. Obvious.
@@shannonkohl68 However, Phantom pilots were sufficiently trained to score over a hundred missile kills in Vietnam. There were like 6 gunpod kills and 5 kills with the E variant nose gun. Or the other way around.
Missiles won.
Check out War Thunder - they seem to have modeled A2A missiles fantastically well - apart from gross differences between IR, SARH and Active Radar Homing (and beam, laser and MCLOS missiles !), they also show the difference between caged and uncaged seekers, radar slaving, helmet mounted targeting and heaps of other features.
As you would expect the AIM-9B is not a great missile, but against 1950s and 60s era aircraft it sure beats the alternatives eg guns, rocket pods etc.
it's not a good think when the enemy pilot survives a strike. He'll educate his gang about the experience and make the next encounter harder.
Thanks Cpt Obvious
"RF One Hundred-and-One C"??? In the US it would be "RF One-Oh-One C", just like you said "F One-Oh-Five".
Such a shame to develop such an item when there is no enemy.
So much better to wait until you actually need it to start development.
That's *exactly* when you *should* be developing weapons, so you can work out most of the bugs *before* failure costs the lives of your own people.
And we *did* have an enemy, even if we weren't in active combat at the time. By the time we actually had official funding for it, US pilots were dying in Korea to the new MiG-15.
Can you please get rid of the funky video game graphics? It really sucks to see hollow aircraft (they're full of fuel, engines, avionics, environmental systems, etc. Just show real aircraft, PLEASE!
Thanks for the comment. Are you referring to the tactical plots? If so, they are from the Red Baron report - I used what the USAF used to explain engagements in Vietnam.
@@notapound No, I am talking about the game videos of take-offs, MiG-17s flying through clouds, all of that. I'm a former military Sr Aviator, and like your subjects, but... The recent Robin Olds v Boots. Blesse was very good. I had the privilege of working for (a few layers below) Robin in the 1970s.
The important thing is, the good guys won. 🇻🇳
The Baby Killers lost... 🇺🇸
Two million people died for China and the Soviets only for Vietnam to them grow closer to the US. Seems like the "good guys" sent people into a mass ritualistic sacrifice to appease the Marxist Blood God then gave up.
NPC say what
Interesting footage of early heatseekers tested on a Corsair. Where is the footage taken from?
This is so good dude, thank you for continuing to put out quality content.
@strategyfromtherightbrain
In multiple videos you’ve used illustrations of ACM engagements, what’s the source material?