Of course this is a hypothetical now that we've seen how "well kept" Russian equipment is, but the R-37M will technically reach out and touch American aircraft long before the AMRAAM is in range.
Well, the R-37M is an absolute monster missile at 600kg, even bigger than the AIM-54 Phoenix at around 450kg. For comparison the AMRAAM is about 150kg. So even if, hypothetically, Russia could sort out their issues with actually producing their ostensibly high tech designs, I find it hard to imagine this would be a mass produced missile comparable to AMRAAM. More like a special missile to take out high value targets like AWACS planes.
Continuing wikipedia spelunking, AIM-120D has a range of >160km (and has apparently already entered service), AIM-260 200km, and R-37M 300-400km. However, as everyone who has played flight sims (or seen youtube videos of them) knows, the actual usable range is much lower than the quoted max ranges. And given stealth technology, one wonders whether the actual capability of the missile is more related to the radars, both of the launching platform and the radar in the missile seeker, than to how long burning rocket motors it has.
100% agreed on all points. Evading the Phoenix on its terminal guidance near max range should be a viable strategy for avoiding it due to the bleed of kinetic energy. Though like the HARM (which an F-16 Wild Weasel pilot _hated_ due to the huge plume of smoke it creates; listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EI2rYxMPHM), it should be launched at high altitude for the best probability of a kill at long range.
Worth noting the Phoenix was discontinued with the Tomcat. And the Tomcat was the only fighterbto ever use it, with the explicit goal of killing beyond visual range and make dogfights obsolete. Didn't really work out back then neither.
The AIM-54 Phoenix, and indeed the F-14 Tomcat, come from a background of needing a carrier-based aircraft that would be able to intercept the expected threat - massed Soviet bombers with cruise missiles - at maximum possible range.
Since that threat never occurred, it is difficult to say whether it worked out. The discontinuation of the platform has more to say about the change in the threat than it does in the merit of BVR missiles.
> And of course, the strike package would have been accompanied by the EA-18G Growler to jam SAM radar.
Well it should have been preceded by a Wild Weasel mission to take out the SAM radars and launchers. The Growler mission would just be extra SAM defense. There also should have been a counter-air element to deal with the enemy fighters flying CAP.
There was enough intelligence available for the mission every fixed SAM site should have eaten a couple Tomahawks in addition to the airfield. It's also a mystery why the whole facility wasn't just leveled by some B-2s loaded with GBU-37s.
There would have been fewer dog fights but that probably would have been ok.
Good point about the B-2. Does the Navy even perform Wild Weasel? That's usually the F-16's job and we can only "assume" that it was out of range of any USAF or collation airbase.
Of course, the country in question would have to be Iran due to the F-14... though the Felon hasn't been shipped outside (or inside of...heh) Russia.
I don't think the Navy calls their SEAD Wild Weasel. Their SEAD missions are similar to the Air Force's Wild Weasel missions but without the naming. They're both SEAD and use similar tactics and weapons.
But the movie's mission not including any SEAD was 100% suspenders of disbelief. The whole mission seemed to be planned by people that were the pilots' life insurance beneficiaries.
The machinery, ingenuity, and eventual incorporation of some of that technology into civilian life is important and possibly the only way to get funding for new technologies by the (US) government.
The NRO offered two spy satellites (I believe rumored to be Keyhole family satellites) to NASA back in 2011/2012 -- neither have launched yet, but they have the same sized mirror as the Hubble, but with a better focal length giving the satellites a 100 times wider field of view. The now-named Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope is scheduled to launch by Nov 2026 on a Falcon Heavy.
B-52 was the last USAF bomber to have a rear-ward facing guns. During the Gulf War, one of two theories that a rear-ward facing gunner turned on his defensive fire control system and was hit by friendly fire after an F4 released anti-radiation (HARM) missile in the blind. The AGM-88 locked on to the DFCS and blew off the rear section of the BUFF -- which was then nicknamed "In HARM's Way".
If you look closely at the moment of shoot down, you'll see the F-16 has its air breaks fully deployed (and I'd assume both leading and trailing edge flaps almost fully down) to slow down enough.
It's an airshow maneuver. Speed is life. USAF (and presumably other AF's) send out 2 to 4 ship (or if we look at Desert Storm, over 70 ships). If you "stall" or perform this maneuver, whomever is behind you might overshoot, but his or her buddy will nab you.
Check out Stroke 3. This is an F-16 strike on an oil facility in Iraq. Stroke 3 avoided six Iraq (Russian-made) SAMs /without/ deploying any counter measures. Simply amazing to listen to.
Fun (?) fact -- the first strike in Desert Storm was performed by eight Apache attack helicopters with two Pave Low helicopters leading them at NAP of the earth level at nighttime.
So not quite "backwards", but dang close. With that being said, beyond visual range (BVR) engagements for gen 4 and higher fighters (gen 4 would be F-16 (the best plane ever produced, and everyone here knows it ;), F-18, MiG-29, Su-27; gen 5 would be F-22, F-35... and somewhat arguably Su-57) should be the norm. The USAF/US Navy is a bit behind on this with the AIM-120C/D being a medium-range missile where as some of the Russian-produced missiles have a longer reach. The USAF currently has a program to produce a long-range variant of the AIM-120C/D (our last long range missile was the AIM-54 Phoenix, exclusively carried by the retired F-14) with the designation of AIM-260 -- the AIM-260 is expected to replace the AIM-120.
AIM-120C/D "maddog" call -- now that'd be an interesting air-to-air engagement -- "maddog" is the call for firing the AIM-120 without the aircraft having radar lock and whatever the missile picks up on it's terminal guidance radar is likely doomed.
Ahhh I played way too much Falcon 4.0 and the DCS F-16 module.
I've actually created this setup (in order to ditch Okta as it is far more expensive than AAD P1 if you want MFA).
You federate AAD and Okta. Sign in to Okta and it's smooth sailing into AAD-based resources like M365.
Okta puts on a good dog and pony show for execs. From a technical perspective, they're no better for corps (at least in first party auth or B2B -- I don't get into the B2C space). We found, for the apps we used, AAD as of ~4 years ago had better SCIM support (!) than Okta.
On top of getting O365 E5 + Ent Sec (I think they're just now called M365 E5) which gave us AAD P2 licenses, overall it was much cheaper than Okta. The goal was to just get MFA, which Microsoft gives away for free (with limited toggles) or in P1 licenses (with more toggles) where-as Okta wanted $6/user/month _just for_ MFA.
Microsoft puts on a terrible sales pitch, though. We were fortunate enough to have an _awesome_ Principal Program Manager spend days with us in-person answering all of our questions and explaining AAD to our IT management.
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/media-serv...
Supports HEVC (H.265) output.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/media-services/lates...
You can put budget alerts in place on Azure resources to handle costs.