Korean War Arena?

[Puma44]

Were there guided weapons in the Korean war? 

[gyrene81]

Were there guided weapons in the Korean war? 

it would take a bit of research to be exact but i believe the first gen sidewinder heat seeking missles were deployed in 1957/58(?). short range radar detecting missles were deployed some time in 1955/56.

in short, no. they were still dog fighting with machine guns and cannons in korea.

[skorpion]

firing guided munitions at other aircraft isn't exactly dogfighting, but it is easier.

theres still manuvering you have to do. thats considered dogfighting. theres weapons you have to get into range with. thats considered dogfighting. 

the main point of dogfighting is to outmanuver your enemy, get into killing range and actually kill them.

[BulletVI]

it would take a bit of research to be exact but i believe the first gen sidewinder heat seeking missles were deployed in 1957/58(?). short range radar detecting missles were deployed some time in 1955/56.

in short, no. they were still dog fighting with machine guns and cannons in korea.

gyrene81 you are right as i rember watching a progamm on the sidwinders development and history. In the last 10 months of the Korean war they where used in its combat test period. And its also how the Russions got their Version of the sidewinder when one failed to explode in a Mig15s tail fin or was it tail pipe anyway the mig pilot managed to return to base with it sticking out of his mig and the ruskies said we'll have it to reverse engineer it

But all through the war it was manly radar controlled Ack Ack ULP nasty stuff that.   
But a Korean war theartre would make me signup again in a flash as the last good Korean war game i played was Mig Alley from Rowan i think it was 

BulletVI

[dj4592]

+1 for AMRAAM's!!          +1 for F86 and MiG15!    +0 cuz we already got the terrain!  

  0
  1
+1
___
 2            

[gyrene81]

theres still manuvering you have to do. thats considered dogfighting. theres weapons you have to get into range with. thats considered dogfighting. 

the main point of dogfighting is to outmanuver your enemy, get into killing range and actually kill them.

i think you watched independence day too many times. you know what the term "weapons lock" means? as sophisticated as modern aam's are, you don't even have to be in visual range to fire a missile at another aircraft as long as your onboard radar can track it.

[Rino]

     Methinks you vastly overestimate the capabilities of radar guided weapons and their ease of use.  The fire and
forget system is fairly recent.  Semi Active Radar Homing meant you had to continually track the bad guy <while flying
towards him of course> and hope the missile functioned correctly.

     Early missiles of all types were fairly crude and failed often.  Plus radar didn't function well in a look down mode....
down low where alot of AH action happens.  They didn't call the AIM-7 Sparrow the Great White Hope for nothing in
Vietnam    I've read accounts where pilots fired 3 $120K Sparrows to get the target to turn so he could use a $39K
Sidewinder to get the kill.

     

[gyrene81]

     Methinks you vastly overestimate the capabilities of radar guided weapons and their ease of use.  The fire and
forget system is fairly recent.  Semi Active Radar Homing meant you had to continually track the bad guy <while flying
towards him of course> and hope the missile functioned correctly.

     Early missiles of all types were fairly crude and failed often.  Plus radar didn't function well in a look down mode....
down low where alot of AH action happens.  They didn't call the AIM-7 Sparrow the Great White Hope for nothing in
Vietnam    I've read accounts where pilots fired 3 $120K Sparrows to get the target to turn so he could use a $39K
Sidewinder to get the kill.

uh bino, talking recent decade here, not nam.

the gulf war had dogfighting...what the hell are you talking about?

i don't believe i'm overestimating anything. radar guided missiles in the 60s and 70s were "short range" missiles and were shown to be ineffective against fast moving aerial targets. you definately had to be within "visual range" to even fire the things and i think a microwave burst could send it off track. heat seekers had shorter targeting ranges, even after infrared was added but within operational limits, very effective. within the last 20 years or so, aim's have gotten a lot more sophisticated and multi-purpose, to the point of being useful against certain types of ground targets if the need arises.

[skorpion]

uh bino, talking recent decade here, not nam.


i don't believe i'm overestimating anything. radar guided missiles in the 60s and 70s were "short range" missiles and were shown to be ineffective against fast moving aerial targets. you definately had to be within "visual range" to even fire the things and i think a microwave burst could send it off track. heat seekers had shorter targeting ranges, even after infrared was added but within operational limits, very effective. within the last 20 years or so, aim's have gotten a lot more sophisticated and multi-purpose, to the point of being useful against certain types of ground targets if the need arises.

so just because the missles have a longer range, means that there are no more close quater fighting with planes? pssh, that'll be the day.

[Devil 505]

I'd love to have Korean War aircraft. But in the grand scheme of AH it ranks somewhere adding the Meteor and adding submarines. HT's top priority should be updating existing aircraft and vehicles.

[dj4592]

HT's top priority should be updating existing aircraft and vehicles.

I wonder what they are working on, not what they should be working on...    

[Rino]

uh bino, talking recent decade here, not nam.


i don't believe i'm overestimating anything. radar guided missiles in the 60s and 70s were "short range" missiles and were shown to be ineffective against fast moving aerial targets. you definately had to be within "visual range" to even fire the things and i think a microwave burst could send it off track. heat seekers had shorter targeting ranges, even after infrared was added but within operational limits, very effective. within the last 20 years or so, aim's have gotten a lot more sophisticated and multi-purpose, to the point of being useful against certain types of ground targets if the need arises.

     Sparrows were BVR and the AN/APQ-120 in the F-4Es I maintained could auto-magically track a target to 50 miles.
Closing velocity had to be less than 2700 mph <not all that difficult  >  The missiles worked best in the mid-range
as it would have time to react to course changes and yet still had plenty of power and hydraulics. 

     In fact, the ideal AIM-7 solution wasn't a "hit" at all.  The missile was designed to pass close to the target before
exploding, giving the shrapnel time to speed up before impacting the target.

     Planar array antenna, electronic beam steering and active terminal missile guidance are indeed recent developments,
and these still do not provide an automatic wish-em-dead solution.

[Ruah]

Frrankly, I don't think the community has the numbers to support it.  WWI is a good example of this. 

Its also a matter of reasources - I would rather see more ww2 planes added then a whole new set of them for an arena that would be disussed (even if it would be cool for a bit).

[coombz]

-1

I would prefer they added more ww2 planes, more maps, and more things to make the game interesting, in order to attract more players

[Rich52]

it would take a bit of research to be exact but i believe the first gen sidewinder heat seeking missles were deployed in 1957/58(?). short range radar detecting missles were deployed some time in 1955/56.

in short, no. they were still dog fighting with machine guns and cannons in korea.

Whats wrong? Wikipedia down? Maybe you can recomend a book instead.