Israeli f-16 shot down...?

[carlosMM]

Couple of things. One...in order to hit a combat aircraft flying at speed you need to lead it by about a football field length.

So? It is about firing in the air when you hear the plane. Aiming isn't part of it at all.

Two...I dont think there is a single record of a modern combat aircraft shot down by small arms fire.

Again, so? How many times have modern (post-Vietnam) aircraft been subjected to small arms fire? Rarely..... Remember the ratio in Vietnam - it was extremely rare, and it still is. But, as you should know, statistically, just because it is unlikely still means it WILL eventually happen if someone tries long enough.

And its not beyond the realm of possibility to assume that if they are supplied with anti-ship launchers that they could have anti-air launchers as well.

And there we agree again: they might even have stinger missiles, for all we know, from Afghanistan. In any case, an aimed projectile MADE FOR shooting down flying objects is far(!) more likely to have been the cause than a random bullet.

 

[nivi]

Heh, this plane, is actualy an Iranian made missile, misfiring after we bombed its warehouse, this missile is actualy capeble of reacing Tel-Aviv.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3277449,00.html

 

[.Shane.]

what's the golden bb?

Its the real-world equivalent of the "Spearman takes down Tank" Civ combat result.

 

[carlosMM]

Its the real-world equivalent of the "Spearman takes down Tank" Civ combat result.

now why did it take the entire civ community almost 3 pages for this.......

 

[Masquerouge]

Its the real-world equivalent of the "Spearman takes down Tank" Civ combat result.

Civ saves the day!

 

[Che Guava]

Heh, this plane, is actualy an Iranian made missile, misfiring after we bombed its warehouse, this missile is actualy capeble of reacing Tel-Aviv.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3277449,00.html

now that is funny..assuming its true...who can tell at this stage?

 

[nivi]

The footage of the missile on the ground in lebanon is all over the news here, but for some reason not at all in cnn, fox etc etc...

 

[Sidhe]

I find it doubtfull too, very doubtful it was an F-16. When I read the OP I thought yeah right.

 

[Kozmos]

And there we agree again: they might even have stinger missiles, for all we know, from Afghanistan.

lol, stingers from Afganistan

No, the Stingers need battery coolant units that have long expired by now.

 

[MobBoss]

So? It is about firing in the air when you hear the plane. Aiming isn't part of it at all.

Sigh. Of course aiming is part of it. And also recognizing if the plane is friendly or enemy. Your making assumptions here, not based on anything you know to be factual. And it shows.

Again, so? How many times have modern (post-Vietnam) aircraft been subjected to small arms fire? Rarely..... Remember the ratio in Vietnam - it was extremely rare, and it still is. But, as you should know, statistically, just because it is unlikely still means it WILL eventually happen if someone tries long enough.

I am going to go out on a limb here and state that a modern jet aircraft is never going to be shot down with small arms fire. It hasnt happened to the USA in the last 17 or so years (or more) and we have flown more combat missions than any other nation in the world. I would say your odds of winning the lotto vasty greater than small arms fire downing a modern jet combat aircraft.

And there we agree again: they might even have stinger missiles, for all we know, from Afghanistan.

I wouldnt bet they were stingers...but some soviet style knock off produced by any number of former soviet block nations. Not quite as effective, but still enough to get the job done. Just even the threat of manpad AA missiles would make the Israelis change their tactics.

 

[GinandTonic]

In the first gulf war the tornados were getting shot with small arm when they were dropping runway busters that required flying low, slow and steady. Remember footage of jets with small arms sized holes, and speculation as to if some of the losses from these missions were the result of the same.

Moot point since as I understand it there is now a new generation of such weapons and in any event such missions are not being flown.

 

[carlosMM]

Sigh. Of course aiming is part of it. And also recognizing if the plane is friendly or enemy. Your making assumptions here, not based on anything you know to be factual. And it shows.

yeah Mr. Condescending. Maybe you are smart and old enough to remember what they told the Vietnamese farmers? 'Just point the gun up, and when the sound gets louder, fire!' What great aiming

Maybe YOU should know that actually aiming is extremely hard, unless the aircraft is high up. Otherwise, you CANNOT lead far enough under normal circumstances over a city or forest, because your vision field is too blocked or you'll see the aircraft too late.

I am going to go out on a limb here and state that a modern jet aircraft is never going to be shot down with small arms fire. It hasnt happened to the USA in the last 17 or so years (or more) and we have flown more combat missions than any other nation in the world. I would say your odds of winning the lotto vasty greater than small arms fire downing a modern jet combat aircraft.

Yup, vastly greater. But the odds are NOT zero for a shotdown.

I wouldnt bet they were stingers...

Nore would I. I was constructing an unlikely scenario which I still thought more likely than small arms fire.

 

[Koelle]

So? It is about firing in the air when you hear the plane. Aiming isn't part of it at all.
Again, so? How many times have modern (post-Vietnam) aircraft been subjected to small arms fire? Rarely..... Remember the ratio in Vietnam - it was extremely rare, and it still is. But, as you should know, statistically, just because it is unlikely still means it WILL eventually happen if someone tries long enough.



And there we agree again: they might even have stinger missiles, for all we know, from Afghanistan. In any case, an aimed projectile MADE FOR shooting down flying objects is far(!) more likely to have been the cause than a random bullet.

Indeed, it was extremely huge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War

Aircraft losses of the Vietnam War:

[edit]
United States Air Force
A-1 Skyraider-- 191 total, 150 in combat
the 1st USAF loss was A-1E 52-132465 / 1 ACS / 34 TG shot-down during the night of 28/9 Aug'64 near Bien Hoa, SVN the final USAF loss was A-1H 52-139738 / 1 SOS / 56 SOW which was shot-down 28 Sep'72, the pilot was rescued by an Air America helicopter.

A-7 Corsair II-- 6 total, the 354th TFW 1st deployed USAF A-7D's to Korat RTAFB 10 Oct'72.
The 1st loss was A-7D 71-0310 / 353 TFS on 02 Dec'72 whilst acting as escort for a CSAR mission in Laos (Pilot Capt Anthony Shine KIA), also lost were 71-0312 / 353 TFS in a mid-air collision with an FAC Birddog in Laos on Xmas Eve'72(Capt Charles Riess PoW) ; 71-0316 / 355 TFS in a non-combat crash in Thailand on 11 Jan'73 (Pilot Rescued) ; 70-0949 / 354 TFS shot-down near the Thai-Lao border on 17 Feb'73 (Maj J J Gallagher Rescued) ; 71-0305 / 388 TFW / 3 TFS shot-down in Cambodia on 04 May'73 (1/Lt T L Dickens Rescued) & 70-0945 / 354 TFW shot-down in Cambodia on 25 May'73 (Capt Jeremiah Costello KIA)

A-26 Invader-- (22)
the 1st loss was B-26B 44-35530 / Det 2A / 1 ACG shot-down in IV Corps SVN on the night of 04/5 Nov'62 killing the 3 crew. The final loss was A-26A 64-17646 / 609 SOS / 56 SOW lost over Laos on the night of 07/8 July'69 killing both crew.

A-37 Dragonfly-- (22)
1st 1967 final 1972

AC-47 Spooky-- 19 total, 17 in combat
1st 1965 final 1969

AC-119 Shadow/Stinger-- --6 total, 2 in combat
the 1st loss was AC-119G 52-5907 / Det.1 / 17 SOS / 14 SOW which crashed on take-off from Tan Son Nhut, SVN on 11 Oct'69 killing 6 of the 10 crew. final 1971

AC-130 Spectre-- --6 total, all combat. The 1st loss was AC-130A 54-1629 / 16 SOS / 8 TFW hit by 37mm AAA over Laos and crash-landed back at Ubon 2 crewmen died (one died of injuries before reaching Ubon) but 11 others survived.
final 4x 1972

B-52 Stratofortress-- 30 total, 18 in combat
1st 1965 final 1973

B-57 Canberra-- --56 total, 38 in combat
1st 1964 final 1970

C-7 Caribou-- (20)
the first USAF Caribou lost was C-7B 62-4161 / 459 TAS / 483 TAW which was hit by a US 155mm shell on 03 Aug'67 in SVN killing the 3 crew. The final loss was C-7B 62-12584 / 483 TAW which crashed in SVN, furtunately all 4 crew survived.

C-47 Skytrain-- (21)
the very first USAF a/cft. lost in the SEA conflict was C-47B 44-76330 of the 315 AD on TDY at Vientiane, Laos which was shot-down by the Pathet Lao on 23 March 1961 killing 7 of the 8 crew. The sole survivor, US Army Maj. Lawrence Bailey was captured and held until Aug'62. Fittingly, one of the final a/cft. lost in SEA was EC-47Q 43-48636 / 361 TEWS / 56 SOW which was shot-down in Laos on the night of 04/5 Feb'73 killing all 8 crew.

C-123 Provider-- --53 total, 21 in combat
the first loss was C-123B 56-4370 attached to the 464 TCW which came down on a Ranch Hand (defoliation) training flight between Bien Hoa and Vung Tau, SVN on 02-February 1962 final 1971

C-130 Hercules-- --55 total, 34 in combat
1st 1965 final 1972

C-141 Starlifter-- (2)
C-141A 65-9407 / 62 MAW was destroyed in a night-time runway collision with a USMC A-6 at Danang, SVN on 23 Mar'67 killing 5 of the 6 crew and C-141A 66-0127 / 4 MAS / 62 MAW crashed soon after take-off from Cam Ranh Bay, SVN on 13 Apr'67 killing 6 of the 8 crew.

E/RB-66 Destroyer (14)
the 1st loss was RB-66B 53-0452 / Det 1, 41 TRS / 6250 CSG which went down on the night of 22/3 Oct'65 West of Peiku, SVN killing the crew crew. The final loss of the conflict was EB-66C 54-0466 / 42 TEWS / 388 TFW shot-down in I Corps, SVN on 02 Apr'72 during the Spring Offensive 5 of the 6 crew were KIA, the sole survivor was LtC. Iceal Hambleton "Bat*21" eventually reached safety after 10 days after numerous rescue attempts which had resulted in the loss of a number of US Army & USAF a/cft. & crews.

EC-121 Bat Cat-- (2) the only to EC-121 losses both occured in 1969
EC-121R 67-24193 / 554 RS / 553 RW crashed 25 Apr'69 soon after daytime take-off in a thunderstorm from Korat RTAFB killing all 18 crew. Whilst, EC-121R 67-21495 / 554 RS / 553 RW crashed in heavy rain on approach to Korat RTAFB (4 of the 16 were Killed)

F-4 Phantom II-- --445 total, 382 in combat
the first non-combat loss was F-4C 64-0674 of the 15 TFW / 45 TFS which ran out of fuel after strike in SVN on 09 June 1965 ; the first combat loss was F-4C 64-0685 of the 15 TFW / 45 TFS was shot-down by a NVAF MiG-17 near Ta Chan, NW NVN on 20 June 1965. final 1973

F-5 Freedom Fighter-- (9)
1st 1965 final 1967

F-100 Super Sabre-- --243 total, 198 in combat
1st 1964 final 1971

F-102 Delta Dagger-- (14)
1st 1964 final 1967

F-104 Starfighter-- (14)
1st 1965 final 1967

F-105 Thunderchief-- --397 total, 334 in combat
1st 1964 final 1972

General Dynamics F-111A "Aardvark"-- --10 total, 6 in combat
1968 (3) 1972 - 1973

HU-16 Albatross-- (2)
1966 x2

KB-50 Superfortress-- (1)
the only Superfortress lost in the SEA conflict was KB-50J 48-0065 of the 421 ARS Detachment at RTAFB Takhli which crashed in Thailand on 14 October 1964. Fortunately all 6 crew survived.

KC-135 Stratotanker-- (3)
1968 (2) 1969

O-1 Bird Dog-- --172 total, 122 in combat
1st 1963 final 1972

O-2 Skymaster-- --104 total, 82 in combat
1st 1967 final 1972

OV-10 Bronco-- --63 total, 47 in combat
1st 1968 final 1973

QU-22-- (9)
the 1st loss was YQU-22A 68-10531 / 553 RW which crashed due to engine failure on 11 June'69 final 1972

RF-4C Phantom II-- --83 total, 76 in combat
1st 1966 final 1972

RF-101 Voodoo-- --39 total, 33 in combat
1st 1964 final 1968

SR-71 Blackbird-- --2, 0 combat
SR-71A 64-17969 / Det OL-8 / 9 SRW suffered engine failure over Thailand on 10 May'70, both crew ejected safely. SR-71A 64-17978 / Det OL-KA / 9 SRW crashed n landing at Kadena, Okinawa on 20 July'72m both crewmen survived.

T-28 Trojan-- (23)
1st 1962 final 1968

U-2 "Dragon Lady"-- (1)
the only loss in the SEA conflict was U-2C 56-6690 of the 100 SRW / 349 SRS which crashed on 08 Oct'66 near Bien Hoa, SVN after a recon. flight over NVN Maj. Leo J Stewart ejected and was rescued.

U-3 Blue Canoe-- (1) the only loss in the SEA conflict was U-3B 60-6058 which was destroyed on the ground during a VC attack on Tan Son Nhut, SVN on 14 June 1968.
U-6 Beaver-- (1) the only loss in the SEA conflict was U-6A 51-15565 attached to the 432 TRW which crashed in Thailand on 28 December 1966, fortunately both crewmembers survived.
U-10 Courier-- (1) U-10D 63-13102 / 5 SOS / 14 SOW hit by ground-fire crashed 14 Aug'69 near Bien Hoa killing 1/Lt Roger Brown.
CH/HH-3 -- (14)
CH/HH-53 -- (10)
Source: Air Force Magazine, Vol.87, No. 9, September 2004, P.58, "The Vietnam War Almanac," with attribution to USAF Operations Report, Nov. 30, 1973 Individual loss a/c report details come from "Vietnam Air Losses" CHristopher Michael Hobson, Midland Publishing 2001

[edit]
United States Navy
A-1 Skyraider --65 total, 48 in combat
A-3 Skywarrior --7 total, 2 in combat
A-4 Skyhawk --282 total, 195 in combat
A-5 Vigilante (7) --0 in combat
A-6 Intruder --62 total, 51 in combat
A-7 Corsair --100 total, 55 in combat
C-1 Trader --4 total, 0 in combat
C-2 Greyhound --1 total, 0 in combat
C-47 Skytrain (1)
E-1 Tracer --3 total, 0 in combat
E-2 Hawkeye --2 total, 0 in combat
EA-1 Skyraider --4 total, 1 in combat
EC-121 Warning Star (1?)
F-4 Phantom --138 total, 75 in combat
F-8 Crusader --118 total, 57 in combat
OV-10 Bronco (7)
P-2 Neptune (4)
P-3 Orion (2)
RA-5 Vigilante --26 total, 18 in combat
RF-8 Crusader --29 total, 19 in combat
S-2 Tracker --4 total, 2 in combat
Source: hand tabulation of individual loss entries by date and aircraft carrier, June 7, 1964-August 15, 1973, carrier air wings only, recorded in Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club, René J. Francillon (1988)

[edit]
United States Marine Corps
A-4 Skyhawk 81
A-6 Intruder 25
C-117 Skytrain 2
EA-6 Prowler 2
EF-10 Skynight 5
F-4 Phantom 98
F-8 Crusader 21
KC-130 Hercules 4
O-1 Bird Dog 7
OV-10 Bronco 10
RF-4 Phantom 4
RF-8 Crusader 1
TA-4 Skyhawk 10
TF-9 Cougar 1

 

[carlosMM]

In the first gulf war the tornados were getting shot with small arm when they were dropping runway busters that required flying low, slow and steady. Remember footage of jets with small arms sized holes, and speculation as to if some of the losses from these missions were the result of the same.

Moot point since as I understand it there is now a new generation of such weapons and in any event such missions are not being flown.

Not quite moot - the losses in the 1st Gulf War due to 'unknown causes' and small IR anti-aircraft missiles as well as random AAA and flak were big enough to lead to a change in tactics. Guess why the highest percentage went in at mid-altitudes: too high for aimed fire and tight barrages. The Tornadoes got hit exactly as you descibed: slow, stead, predicatable - put enough lead into the path of the aircraft and you WILL hit it.

Looking back, the extremely-low-altitude missions to close airfields were probably unnecessary: Allied control of the air was good enough to have taken on the few Iraqs who did NOT flee.

 

[MobBoss]

yeah Mr. Condescending. Maybe you are smart and old enough to remember what they told the Vietnamese farmers? 'Just point the gun up, and when the sound gets louder, fire!' What great aiming

Ok, Mr. Scientist, show me the proof of where they did this. Anything besides your assumption. Also, give me a number of how many jet combat aircraft were shot down by small arms fire in Vietnam while you are at it. Koelle's link only lists losses, both combat and non-combat, but not how they were destroyed. Even out of all those hundreds/thousands of aircraft lost, I bet you can count on one hand the number brought down by small arms fire alone (and I bet all of those were propeller driven, and not jet aircraft).

You see, the vast majority of Vietnamese farmers didnt carry AKs with them while farming and its pretty silly of you to make that allegation. Most couldnt even work a simple crossbow (which many were armed with btw).

Remember, you classifed me as a expert in this field. I will leave the beakers to you, but this is my area of expertise.

Maybe YOU should know that actually aiming is extremely hard, unless the aircraft is high up. Otherwise, you CANNOT lead far enough under normal circumstances over a city or forest, because your vision field is too blocked or you'll see the aircraft too late.

Depends on your location and visability. And for what its worth, considering the speed of such aircraft, you wont hear it coming anyway, regardless of the terrain visibility. Your points here simply give more weight to my arguement than it does yours. In that, small arms fire isnt going to shoot down a modern combat aircraft, regardless of your "statistical chance".

Yup, vastly greater. But the odds are NOT zero for a shotdown.

Close enough to zero that for all intents and purposes (and statistically) it is zero.

 

[MobBoss]

Not quite moot - the losses in the 1st Gulf War due to 'unknown causes' and small IR anti-aircraft missiles as well as random AAA and flak were big enough to lead to a change in tactics. Guess why the highest percentage went in at mid-altitudes: too high for aimed fire and tight barrages. The Tornadoes got hit exactly as you descibed: slow, stead, predicatable - put enough lead into the path of the aircraft and you WILL hit it.

Looking back, the extremely-low-altitude missions to close airfields were probably unnecessary: Allied control of the air was good enough to have taken on the few Iraqs who did NOT flee.

There have only been 17 combat aircraft lost in battle since 1990 for the USA. 13 due to Radar Guided missiles, 3 to AAA batteries and 1 due to a aircraft lost due to the pilot thinking he was under enemy attack. None lost to "unknown causes". None lost to small arms fire. 6 were downed by manpad stinger-type missiles. The majority of those downed by the smaller missiles and AAA were A-10 or close support fighter/bombers. That is out of thousands upon thousands of sorties flown.

 

[The Last Conformist]

There have only been 17 combat aircraft lost in battle since 1990 for the USA.

According to CNN, the US lost 37 fixed wing combat aircraft in the '91 Gulf War alone. You're telling me more than half of those were lost outside of combat?

 

[MobBoss]

According to CNN, the US lost 37 fixed wing combat aircraft in the '91 Gulf War alone. You're telling me more than half of those were lost outside of combat?

Yup. Only 17 since 1990 were attributed as "combat" losses. The rest were accidents or pilot error. Please note that the 17 lost as combat losses also covers the ones lost in Bosnia in the late 90s.

 

[McManus]

I don't think that downing a modern fighter is possible with small arms fire, but when I was in the army we were drilled to fire at low flying aircraft and/or choppers with our assault rifles. So I guess there is a theoretical chance, however unlikely. (And yes, we were also trained to take a proper... err... whatchamacallit... "ennakko"... errr... well, to shoot far enough ahead of said aircraft to have the theoretical chance of hitting it )

 

[MobBoss]

I don't think that downing a modern fighter is possible with small arms fire, but when I was in the army we were drilled to fire at low flying aircraft and/or choppers with our assault rifles. So I guess there is a theoretical chance, however unlikely. (And yes, we were also trained to take a proper... err... whatchamacallit... "ennakko"... errr... well, to shoot far enough ahead of said aircraft to have the theoretical chance of hitting it )

Helicopters can sure as hell be brought down. All you need to do is shoot at the rotor.