The most prestigious air to air kill in history?
 

Wait, what? :doh:

What was this pilot flying? An X-15! :haha:

Anyone know where the X-37Bs are? :shifty:

Source

Way too little information there how is that even possible honestly? Unless maybe the plane fired an air to ground munition just as the Scud launched because I don't see other wise this would really be possible a Scud would be far to fast I'd think for a missile the Patriots can hit something coming down to earth but that is using a lot more ability than an aircraft would have.:hmmm:

I am thinking an ATG munition was used and just so happened that the Scud was just launching when hit so they considered it an air to air kill.Or it was just perfect timing and the ac was at the right place at the right time and did fire and got a hit.

Early in the acceleration stage of the launch, I'm sure a sharp pilot could get lucky.

In Vietnam you could "out run" a SAM by going into a semi parabolic pattern at full power

This is not nearly as difficult as it is thought to be. Your dealing with a ballistic missile here. Its not like a cruise missile where its going flat out horizontally. The only struggle is if the shooter acquires the target from the rear quadrant. Otherwise, its not difficult depending on the weapon used.

The issue is really one of math - and one that us subsimmers use alot when we play. Target is moving a course X, speed Y. It will be at a certain point at a certain moment in time. Make your shot hit (or get close enough to FOD out) the target. 20 years ago the Patriot system proved that computers could pull off this trick at extreme speeds in three dimensions. Now, 2 decades later, increases in technology (not just computer power) has allowed other weapons to do the same.

You only have to have a weapon that moves faster than your target if your chasing it.... if you have a good angle (and remember - the Scud-C is designed to follow a ballistic trajectory) then the shot is high percentage.

What goes up, comes down - and in a predictable way. Your shot can move at a relatively slow 1.5 Mach against a Mach 5 target if your ahead (or - from another perspective - below) your target and close enough to its course.....

Think about it... 20 years is a long time in weapons tech....

Lets not forget that a B-24 Rear gunner shot down a V2 during its acceleration stage in WWII

Would like to see more detailed information but I would have thought it possible, especially if it was during the early launch phase.

You have a source for that? I'd like to read that story.

For my money I don't think you can beat the feat of the WWII fighter pilots who physically tipped the wings/fins of the V-1 rockets...up real close and personal like.

Well, that's the ABM program out the window then, Congress will just ask the Airforce to be the new ballistic missile shield to save money.

I was thinking the same thing.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lying_Bomb.jpg

Thank you.

Most welcome. :up:

Me too. I would assume this to be a bit risky tactic. Do anyone know did there happen any mishaps when doing this?

As far as i can remember from reading some books it sometimes ended with shattered wing tips of a fighter plane when V1 giro kicked in to stabilize the flight.
The pilot had to flip the wing beyond the correction point.
This tactics was used to avoid shooting on V1 which occasionally exploded in mid air.

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.