I think you mean to say out maneuver not out run if a pilot knew where an SA2 was coming from then he could perform a sharp turn(or semi parabolic pattern if wish to sound overly complicated) in the direction of the SAMs flight path this was outside the the tracking abilities of the guidance system because the SA2 was not able to turn at such a rate and explode its shrapnel into the target(larger SAMs want to explode proximity not contact) seeing as it flew at mach 3.5 outrunning it in a mach 2 aircraft like the F-4 is impossible at combat loads double impossible.You'd also be popping chaff if you had it.Also running a true semi parabolic pattern would be suicide because the North Vietnamese very often fired 2 or 3 SAMs at one aircraft with the express intention to nullify such a tactic this is why during Vietnam we began using aircraft for electronic warfare and others to hunt and kill SAM radars (Wild Weasel) because the most reliable way to avoid a SAM is to disable it from attacking you in the first place.

The Soviets learned this and started making the SA3 which witch was more maneuverable and had better ground radar systems in 1972 and they had a devastating effect on the IDAF during Yom Kippur in 1973.The IDF did not have effect SAM counter measures at the time.

That picture is the only one I've ever found over the years...does anyone know of any more in existence?

What was the purpose of doing this dangerous tactic? Did it throw the V1 off course enough to matter? They weren't exactly known for precision targeting in the first place.
:06:

The purpose was to tip the V1 enough so that its guidance system would go crazy and it would crash. It can't hurt anyone if it just crashes in the water.

As the boundary layer airflow separates from the wing at the tip, it creates a strong outward/rearward vortex.
The V1 had extremely limited correctional autopilot abilities, so kicking it off it's level roll axis would send it into a terminal spin, crashing short of target. The vortex from the Spit/Jug/Tempest could do this.

I was talking to an F-105 pilot who told me that you could get the guidance confused (if you couldn't turn into it) by pitching up and down (can't remember specific G forces required) and as the missile tried to follow, the size of the missile's parabola kept increasing until it either ran out of fuel, hit the ground, or simply quit tracking.

I shall do further investigation to verify...

*I HAVE DIAGRAM* - editing to fit purpose...

PS: In the Wings Over series by Thirdwire, I can always defeat an AIM-9 or AA-2 Atoll with a sharp inside loop

:up:

That took some balls!

Or the Dam Busters...

Or those brave bomber crews that just refused to give up the ship and made it back to England on a wing (or lack thereof) and a prayer (or hundreds)

Thanks for the info. I had no idea they could do this.

I thought it was the SA-6 'GAINFUL' that the IDF had so much trouble with in '72? Like in the beginning of The Sum of All Fears.

SA-3 was as old as the SA-2 at that time.

:hmmm:

The SA-6 was the major killer in the Yom Kippur War (Which was in 1973, BTW). It caught the IAF completely by surprise and led to a large amount of losses.

EDIT: Nevermind about my estimates, I was thinking of something completely different. Gah, that's the second time that happened today. In either case, it was by far the most effective Arab SAM system in the war.

:yep:

I actually watched that for the first time last night - I'm sorry I couldn't recall what they used though! :03:

Thought it mostly a good film.

Yes it was a good film, although I didn't like that they swapped the Arab terrorists from the novel for Neo-Nazis and the chopper crash was totally wrong (at least the director admitted it in the commentary).

If it got to close it might blow the Tail off the B-24 :o .:oops:

I don't think the Tail Gunner or Pilot would be to happy. :-?