The Dogs of War

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 24 2003,02:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 24 2003,01:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1084802,00.html

Well now, this could turn into something interesting...<span id='postcolor'>

Well, they need to get some UN inspectors in there and look around.  See, US intelligence are the same people that pointed out a plant in Africa, that was then bombed, that turned  out to be an aspirin plant

Dont take this the wrong way, but I dont trust american/british intelligence and 'experts' any farther than I can throw them <span id='postcolor'>

Alternately, I don't know how much I trust the UN- not necessarily the inspectors, I know they're all experts, but the bureacracy that controls them. Not to mention something like this would completely humiliate some people and countries with considerable standing within the UN...

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ Mar. 24 2003,03:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">4--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 23 2003,214)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ok.

The talk about the Geneva Convention and POW's stops in this thread NOW.  It's beginning to get political again.  Move it over to the other Iraq thread, where the political discussion may be continued. M'kay?

Thanks <span id='postcolor'>

Geneva convention is not political discussion.  it's relevant to actions at the lowest level of action on the battlefield.<span id='postcolor'>

Talking about POW's being taken is germaine to this thread, yes.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Come now PitViper, what self-respecting dictatorial thug respects the Geneva Convention? Stalin didn't (all the german POW's and the Katyn massacre) the Nazis need no explanation. Maybe the US should put a price on Saddam's head...preferably detached from his neck.

<span id='postcolor'>

Comments like this move it into the political domain and that can be continued in the other thread. I am NOT telling you not to talk about it, just not in this thread.

[PitViper 0]

I can't imagine a division and a half securing the entire country. I wonder if Franks will deploy another one eventually?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ Mar. 24 2003,03:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I can't imagine a division and a half securing the entire country. I wonder if Franks will deploy another one eventually?<span id='postcolor'>

The idea was to bring in more from the north, but we know how that worked out. I imagine they're moving shit into H2 and H3 like madmen right now

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was just told that the British craft downed by the patriot had no transponder signal. Can anyone confirm this?<span id='postcolor'>

I'm almost positive that any combat aircraft would turn off it's transponder in combat. THey use something called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) instead that only friendlies should be able to pick up.

anyway, if the pilot had any brains he would of tried to dodge the missile, so it almost certainly wouldnt of been a direct hit, so they probably would of had time to eject. my best guess anyway.

[Cloney 0]

Isn't the 4th Infantry Division being moved to the area via ship at the moment? They were originally going to be deployed in Turkey but that was cut short.

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 24 2003,04:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">anyway, if the pilot had any brains he would of tried to dodge the missile, so it almost certainly wouldnt of been a direct hit, so they probably would of had time to eject.  my best guess anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

I think you're underestimating the capabilities of the Patriot. That thing's scary. Someone here already mentioned why it's very unlikely the crew survived.

*edit* I also wonder if we should be questioning wether the pilot lacked brains or wether it was the SAM operator(s) who had that problem

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Mar. 24 2003,09:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think you're underestimating the capabilities of the Patriot. That thing's scary. Someone here already mentioned why it's very unlikely the crew survived.

*edit* I also wonder if we should be questioning wether the pilot lacked brains or wether it was the SAM operator(s) who had that problem<span id='postcolor'>

You're right I don't know much about the patriot. But from what I understand most missiles aren't very maneuverable, just fast. so they can be pretty easilly dodged, considering what they are. is the patriot different?

[Tovarish 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Mar. 24 2003,04:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You're right I don't know much about the patriot.  But from what I understand most missiles aren't very maneuverable, just fast.  so they can be pretty easilly dodged, considering what they are.  is the patriot different?<span id='postcolor'>

I'm not an expert on US SAMs myself, but I know the Patriot is considered to be the most advanced SAM system the US has. It flies at Mach 5 and the warhead is pretty big (around 160lbs) so even a proximity detonation should do an aircraft in. The fact that it can intercept ballistic missiles means it isn't bad at maneuvering either, it would have to maneuver well to position itself to intercept such a fast moving target. Now take into account the fact that the Tornado was most likely flying low...not much chance of ejecting even if they survived the blast.

[FSPilot 0]

i dont know why they would of been flying low if they were close enough to kuwait to be considered a threat.  they might of been, but i dont know.

the thing about SAMs is that they're very fast and dont have very big control surfaces, so they're goign to be very unmaneuverable.  the trick to dodging them is to put them on your 3 o clock position, get close, and then pull up sharply.  hopefully they wont be able to pull up to meet you and they'll just explode near you.  it's not that hard to do, especially for a tornado, and especially if you have lots of experience.  it gets dangerous when you put terrain in the game, and maybe more than one missile.

but when you use a missile to intercept a missile it shouldn't be hard.  the target missile probably wont do any evasive maneuvers, so all you'd have to do is calculate the right lead and junk to get close enough to nail it.

anyway, point is.  if they saw the missile coming they would of tried to dodge it which, unless they really screwed it up, would of probably given them a better chance of ejecting and surviving.  then again there are a lot of factors i dont know about.  they could of had a wing blown off and had too many Gs to pull the handle, they  might of been knocked unconcious, they might of been killed instantly.

i hate to be so graphic but it's just what happens.

edit - Dumbest Reporter Ever. Maybe I shouldn't be so harsh on the guy, he apparently saved the convoy from an ambush. But he did act really stupid by going off road, away from his escorts to meet up with another unit, ended up meeting some Iraqis.

[Tovarish 0]

This is all speculation anyways. We'll just have to wait and hope, but I don't give them much of a chance

[Tex -USMC- 0]

If a Patriot can hit another missile in flight, then it can eat any aircraft in existence for lunch. As far as I know, the only SAM in existence that can come close to the Patriot are the SAMs on Aegis destroyers, which have a 150 mile 'it flies, it dies' bubble

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 24 2003,09:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If a Patriot can hit another missile in flight, then it can eat any aircraft in existence for lunch.<span id='postcolor'>

Well no, not really.  Missiles are not as maneuverable as airplanes, just faster, and any missile with a computer or radar tracking system can compute a lead for a missile.  The target missile isn't going to try to avoid the patriot.  You've got a target going relatively steady and a computer to tell you where to aim.

On the other hand when you're shooting at an airplane, the pilot is going to see you coming and react.  He can change every aspect of his flight, jam your radar or IR, shoot your radar, and dodge you.  The missile isnt going to be doing much turning, especially if it's a ballistic missile.

[Tovarish 0]

Do you not realize that a ballistic missile will change it's position in the sky much much faster than any fighter, and that it's trajectory is not always constant and predictable?

[FSPilot 0]

not compared to an airplane.

missiles, when compared to an airplane, are not as maneuverable. they've got small flippers and they're going very fast, so they're goign to have a huge turning radius. airplaneson the other hand have bigger control surfaces and go generally slower, so they're going to be able to turn much tighter, and pull up much tighter. yes missiles dont fly a perfect arc in the air, but compared to an airplane they fly generally steady.

[Schoeler 0]

FSPilot, i hate to contradict you, but we make 98% of the missiles in the U.S. inventory here in Tucson at Raytheon, where my father is currently and my brother was formerly an engineer.

The Patriot PAC3 isn't a true ballistic missile interceptor, it doesn't have the speed. That being said however, it is excellent for intercepting theatre missiles like the Scud, Al Samoud and North Korean missiles which do not move at the velocity or with the same exo-atmospheric trajectory of a true ICBM. Theatre missiles travel in a ballistic arc and do exit the atmosphere (most of them anyway), but they only move around 4000-8,000 mph. An ICBM has a true exo-atmospheric ballistic arc and moves around 17,000-28,000 mph.

The Patriot PAC3 is highly maneuverable and does not have an explosive warhead, instead relying on kinetic energy to destroy its target. If you've seen any of the footage of the intercepts in this war, you will see what I mean. Its like hitting a bullet with another bullet. No way is a plane going to dodge something this quick and maneuverable.

The only missile in the U.S. inventory capable of hitting an ICBM is the newest Navy Standard Missile (I believe its the Block IV version, but I could be wrong) and only when it is coupled with an Aegis radar/fire control system. The problem with intercepting ballistic missiles is that the warhead of the ICBM travels so fast , it actually outraces the explosion of the interceptor's warhead. This is why current ballistic missile defense projects rely on impact and kinetic energy kills. That means these missiles have to be extremely fast and maneuverable, way beyond the capabilities of your Daddy's generation of SAMs.

The new exo-atmospheric kill vehicle or EKV, which despite the bullshit propaganda being spread by politicians, is highly successful in tests where its rocket delivery system did not fail (not the designers fault, but the rocket manufacturers), or someone didn't forget to properly cool its infrared sensors, is the most promising ICBM killer ever developed. It can spot a warhead in space among the decoys and destroy it about 85-90% of the time. A lot of nations are pissed about us developing this because it virtually renders their ICBM force useless.

[HellToupee 0]

that missle would be coming so fast you wouldnt have time to react.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (HellToupee @ Mar. 24 2003,06:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">that missle would be coming so fast you wouldnt have time to react.<span id='postcolor'>

Correct. I'm sure the pilot never knew what hit him or knew for a fraction of a second.

[theavonlady 2]

Pardon me if I missed it but no one seems to have reported the Blackhawk down with 6 killed. Not sure but I believe in Afghanistan.

About the Najaf chemical plant, you heard it hear first yesterday, if you were following this thread, courtesy of The Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick, who phoned in from the scene.

No one's sure yet what they've found. Here's the current Sky article on it:

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1084802,00.html

Blix & Co. have so far said they didn't know of anything around there.

[Tovarish 0]

*edit* My bad, old news

9 KIA in heavy fighting at An Nasiriyah (25 according to Iraq)

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Mar. 24 2003,07:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">9 KIA in heavy fighting at An Nasiriyah (25 according to Iraq)<span id='postcolor'>

That's a roundup from yesterday's news about An Nasiriyah.

[theavonlady 2]

From the Jerusalem Post via AP:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Mar. 24, 2003

US helicopter crashes in Afghanistan, killing six

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON

A US Air Force helicopter crashed in Afghanistan Sunday, killing all six people on board, the US military said.

The HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopter was on a medical evacuation mission when it crashed at about 1620 GMT, about 18 miles (29 kilometers) north of Ghazni, Afghanistan, US Central Command said in a statement.

The helicopter was not shot down, the statement said.

The precise cause of the crash is under investigation.

The Central Command statement did not say whether the medical emergency was in connection with Operation Valiant Strike, a mission involving members of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division in southeastern Afghanistan.

That mission, which began earlier this month, is meant to root out remnants of the al-Qaida and Taliban believed to be operating in the area.

The last helicopter crash in Afghanistan was Jan. 30, when an Army Black Hawk helicopter - the Army's version of the Pave Hawk - on a training mission crashed near the Bagram air base, killing four.<span id='postcolor'>

[Tovarish 0]

Well, if there was any doubt, it's confirmed. The Tornado pilots didn't make it

"The Tornado was returning from operations in Iraq when it was targeted by a U.S. Patriot missile battery, the British military said. The Royal Air Force base at Marham, in Britain, confirmed the two crewmembers were dead"

"Paul Beaver, an independent military analyst formerly with Jane's Defense Group, said there was "99 percent no excuse" for shooting down a friendly aircraft.

"

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....ly_fire

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tovarish @ Mar. 24 2003,07:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"Paul Beaver, an independent military analyst formerly with Jane's Defense Group, said there was "99 percent no excuse" for shooting down a friendly aircraft."<span id='postcolor'>

I would have said 100% but, OK, still haven't seen reported what the 1% excuse was here.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">FSPilot, i hate to contradict you, but we make 98% of the missiles in the U.S. inventory here in Tucson at Raytheon, where my father is currently and my brother was formerly an engineer.

The Patriot PAC3 isn't a true ballistic missile interceptor, it doesn't have the speed. That being said however, it is excellent for intercepting theatre missiles like the Scud, Al Samoud and North Korean missiles which do not move at the velocity or with the same exo-atmospheric trajectory of a true ICBM. Theatre missiles travel in a ballistic arc and do exit the atmosphere (most of them anyway), but they only move around 4000-8,000 mph. An ICBM has a true exo-atmospheric ballistic arc and moves around 17,000-28,000 mph.

The Patriot PAC3 is highly maneuverable and does not have an explosive warhead, instead relying on kinetic energy to destroy its target. If you've seen any of the footage of the intercepts in this war, you will see what I mean. Its like hitting a bullet with another bullet. No way is a plane going to dodge something this quick and maneuverable.

The only missile in the U.S. inventory capable of hitting an ICBM is the newest Navy Standard Missile (I believe its the Block IV version, but I could be wrong) and only when it is coupled with an Aegis radar/fire control system. The problem with intercepting ballistic missiles is that the warhead of the ICBM travels so fast , it actually outraces the explosion of the interceptor's warhead. This is why current ballistic missile defense projects rely on impact and kinetic energy kills. That means these missiles have to be extremely fast and maneuverable, way beyond the capabilities of your Daddy's generation of SAMs.

The new exo-atmospheric kill vehicle or EKV, which despite the bullshit propaganda being spread by politicians, is highly successful in tests where its rocket delivery system did not fail (not the designers fault, but the rocket manufacturers), or someone didn't forget to properly cool its infrared sensors, is the most promising ICBM killer ever developed. It can spot a warhead in space among the decoys and destroy it about 85-90% of the time. A lot of nations are pissed about us developing this because it virtually renders their ICBM force useless.<span id='postcolor'>

wow.

Looks like I've got a lot to learn about the patriot.

But what I said still holds true about other SAMs, like Soviet-era ones that the Iraqis would use. At least give me some shred of dignity. Countless hours Falcon 4.0 must have taught me something.