Air Force Question Thread

[shehbazi2001]

False Canopy

I never saw a false canopy paint on a PAF aircraft, although from time to time, I happened to see it on the military aircrafts of the world. Some background information about it is also available at,

Canopy (aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Here wiki has mentioned that some pilots are skeptical of its advantage but I think there may be some turns or maneuvers where this false canopy can deceive the other pilot.

A false canopy paint on Gripen,

JetPhotos.Net Photo » 30 (CN: 39.3301) Hungary - Air Force Saab JAS-39C Gripen by Branko Cesljas - CroSpotterTeam

 

[Muradk]

False Canopy

I never saw a false canopy paint on a PAF aircraft, although from time to time, I happened to see it on the military aircrafts of the world. Some background information about it is also available at,

Canopy (aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Here wiki has mentioned that some pilots are skeptical of its advantage but I think there may be some turns or maneuvers where this false canopy can deceive the other pilot.

A false canopy paint on Gripen,

JetPhotos.Net Photo » 30 (CN: 39.3301) Hungary - Air Force Saab JAS-39C Gripen by Branko Cesljas - CroSpotterTeam

Yar False Canopy concept is one failed experiment, You can put a canopy on the tail it woun't make much difference , If they are shooting you they don't care where the canopy is. Plus if a pilot fails to identify a bandit, where is the plane headed north or south he has no business sitting in a fighter.

 

[blain2]

Canadian AF CF-18s are the primary users of this false canopy concept. Their pilots say that during DACT/ACM, it helps to confuse the other side, but in a real shooting war, who cares where the canopy is as stated above.

 

[Blackpearl]

Alignement of Guns


I want to know that is it the same practice with jets like F-7s,Mirages and A-5s? and is it still left to the choice of pilots? ..........of course the fighters with a single gun are out of this discussion.

I dont think boresighting of guns, engagement of targets is left with the choice of pilots in PAF. There are always laid down standars technical procedures, organizational SOPs, for engagement of targets in aerial combat, as far as distance is concerned. Guns are boresighted at a pre determined distance. Its the pilot, who then have to engage the target at that distance bracket. Near or far from target, bullets will miss the target.

I have a question here, F-16 20 mm cannon can be used for straffing or not,

 

[shehbazi2001]

I think every gun on a combat aircraft can be used for Air to Ground work ie Strafing.....either fixed gun of aircraft or gun pod..........but u must change the mode............if ur mode is air-to-air and u use the gun towards a ground target, it shall miss the target..............;

I did the same mistake in Flight Simulations, once I was firing at an aircraft in air and gun was in strafing mode...............so no hits.........

In start, F-4s did not carry guns in Vietnam war, then gun pods were installed on the centreline pylon, and then USAF brought the F-4E with gun installed. But installation of gun in the nose changed the Centre of Gravity of aircraft and some internal fuel tanks had to be relocated to balance the CG.

There are many pictures of F-16 firing its gun (more precisely cannon) on ground targets. One of such pictures is in MODERN FIGHTING AIRCRAFT series Volume 2 (1983), written by Richardson and published by Acro Publishing.

 

[shehbazi2001]

I dont think boresighting of guns, engagement of targets is left with the choice of pilots in PAF. There are always laid down standars technical procedures, organizational SOPs, for engagement of targets in aerial combat, as far as distance is concerned. Guns are boresighted at a pre determined distance. Its the pilot, who then have to engage the target at that distance bracket. Near or far from target, bullets will miss the target.

I have a question here, F-16 20 mm cannon can be used for straffing or not,

ok may be its not left to pilots.............;;but its not clear whether the streams of bullets from both guns just go parallel to each other all the time or both the streams of bullets (say of F-7) meet at some distance ahead of aircraft ie having a focus point.

because the bullets dont maintain a straight line at long distance due to gravity and air-to-air gunnery gives best results only at short ranges, I think the focus point should not be far away............;

Further the focus point may be adjusted according to the mission, like for all F-7s, guns focal point can be optimised for air-to-air work and those of A-5s can be optimised for air-to-ground work. Effects of the gravity on the bullet in air-ground seems to be less serious than in air-to-air straight shooting or upward shooting.

 

[Muradk]

ok may be its not left to pilots.............;;but its not clear whether the streams of bullets from both guns just go parallel to each other all the time or both the streams of bullets (say of F-7) meet at some distance ahead of aircraft ie having a focus point.

because the bullets dont maintain a straight line at long distance due to gravity and air-to-air gunnery gives best results only at short ranges, I think the focus point should not be far away............;

Further the focus point may be adjusted according to the mission, like for all F-7s, guns focal point can be optimised for air-to-air work and those of A-5s can be optimised for air-to-ground work. Effects of the gravity on the bullet in air-ground seems to be less serious than in air-to-air straight shooting or upward shooting.

F-16 does strafing and it does it beautifully.
To compenste Gravity we keep the nose up by 20degree and then fire ( Air-to Air )

zB99xkfvxas[/media] - F16 20mm cannon



A-10 and F-16 both doing Strafing.

2QNyAtIgFjg[/media] - A-10 & F-16 strafing run

 

[shehbazi2001]

Yar False Canopy concept is one failed experiment, You can put a canopy on the tail it woun't make much difference , If they are shooting you they don't care where the canopy is. Plus if a pilot fails to identify a bandit, where is the plane headed north or south he has no business sitting in a fighter.

I agree, rather it is clear that a false canopy is useless against any type of missile or even gun bullets.........but its only role is in close-in dogfight......it may not be much useful but investment is also nothing......just a paint

and I can think of some situations where it may be useful like in a horizontal turning fight.....u are chasing the opponent but somehow decide to disengage....now u shall have to reverse the direction, either first diving if altitude permits, or rolling the wings and pulling away.........u roll the wings and at the same time if the opponent turns his head back for a second.......he would get an impression that u r still pulling towards him.......

this deceptive painting can be taken further, and not just limited to false canopy........false pylons, false fuel tanks can also be painted over the wings.......and it costs almost nothing........

but I can think of reasons why PAF did not implement it........perhaps this deceptive paint would degrade the primary camoflauge colors on the upper and lower surfaces of the aircrafts........like a camoflauge color on the underside that blends with the sky and a color on the upper side that blends with the terrain.........it then becomes a comparative study of advantages and disadvantages......

 

[Myth_buster_1]

I agree, rather it is clear that a false canopy is useless against any type of missile or even gun bullets.........but its only role is in close-in dogfight......it may not be much useful but investment is also nothing......just a paint

and I can think of some situations where it may be useful like in a horizontal turning fight.....u are chasing the opponent but somehow decide to disengage....now u shall have to reverse the direction, either first diving if altitude permits, or rolling the wings and pulling away.........u roll the wings and at the same time if the opponent turns his head back for a second.......he would get an impression that u r still pulling towards him.......

this deceptive painting can be taken further, and not just limited to false canopy........false pylons, false fuel tanks can also be painted over the wings.......and it costs almost nothing........

but I can think of reasons why PAF did not implement it........perhaps this deceptive paint would degrade the primary camoflauge colors on the upper and lower surfaces of the aircrafts........like a camoflauge color on the underside that blends with the sky and a color on the upper side that blends with the terrain.........it then becomes a comparative study of advantages and disadvantages......

black canopy will not enhance any performance nether confuse the enemy, though it can confuse the spectators?.
what i think the most effective camouflage is "stealth camouflage"..

 

[Muradk]

I or I could say my engg made a fake canopy on 2 F-6s , when I was commanding 14 sqd. Me and my Flight Cmd including OC flying all 3 went head to head with each other, The fight was so close that we 3 were mostly 20 or 30 feet behind each other, My stick could feel his jet wash but after 10 min no one could shoot each other and then we changed positions and asked the OC fllying to shoot us while we point the fake canopy towards him at a distance of 3 miles . It took him couple of sec to spot us and shoot us down.
I think it was just waist of paint.

 

[Imran Khan]

sir murad whats the pc-3 with E-2C HAWKEYE AIR BORN EARLY WARNING SYSTEM.its same like SAAB-2000?

 

[Neo]

sir murad whats the pc-3 with E-2C HAWKEYE AIR BORN EARLY WARNING SYSTEM.its same like SAAB-2000?

Its another modern platform being developped for the Maritime AEW/AEWACS requirements, comepareable to Erieye.

​

The Lockheed Martin P-3 AEW Orion was developed using ex-Royal Australian Air Force and US Navy P-3B airframes, combined with the APS-125 Radar and Mission System (later retrofitted with an APS-138 system) from the United States Navy E-2 Hawkeye carrier-borne AEW&C aircraft. The United States Customs Service, which is at this time the sole user of the P-3 AEW, took delivery of the first one in 1988 and since 1993 has been operating a fleet of four aircraft for counter-narcotics missions in the US particularly over the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean. Other radars fitted to the P-3 AEW to fulfill the counter-narcotics mission includes the Hughes APG-63U, derived from the radar used in early model F-15 Eagle fighters.

 

[Imran Khan]

THANKS NEO. i get the point

 

[Muradk]

THANKS NEO. i get the point

Imran: these Maritime AEW/AEWACS have special equipment to track subs under water and throw a sonar on top of it and then drop a torpedo. Second way is they spot it or track it call in the heli which is carrying a torpedo and that does the work.

 

[Imran Khan]

thanks sir its the point they can detect subs and distroy them also but saab200 is multyrole AWCS from sea to air we seen in viedeo there is 8 modes to set the hight of saab2000