Tigers List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Colin Mills <(email redacted)>

A report sent in by a reader has revealed that two traffic patrol
officers from North Berwick were involved in an unusual incident whilst
checking for speeding motorists on the A1 road between Oldhamstocks and
Grantshouse, in Northumberland. The policeman were using a hand-held
radar device to trap unwary motorists on the Edinburgh to London trunk
road. One of the unnamed officers used the device to check the progress

of an approaching vehicle, and was surprised to find that his target had

registered a speed in excess of 300 miles per hour. The machine then
seized up and could not be re-set by the bemused PC. The radar had in
fact latched on to a NATO Tornado aircraft in the North Sea, which was
taking part in a simulated low-flying exercise. Following a complaint
by the police to the RAF, it was revealed that the officers had had a
lucky escape, the tactical computer on board the aircraft had not only
detected and jammed the "hostile" radar equipment, but had automatically

armed a Sidewinder air-to-ground missile ready to neutralise the
perceived threat. Luckily, the Dutch pilot was alerted to the missile
status and was able to override the automatic protection system before
the missile launched. The Police have so far declined to comment,
although it is understood that officers will be advised to point their
radar guns inland in future.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

In a message dated 11/29/99 2:15:29 AM Pacific Standard Time,
(email redacted) writes:

> a Sidewinder air-to-ground missile

Colin,

Great story, except that the Sidewinder is an air-to-air missile, not
air-to-ground (there are also ground-to-air versions, such as the "Stinger".
It could only be used against a ground target that emitted a horrendous
infrared signature, such as a steam locomotive, and then only with a limited
chance of success because it uses an expanding rod warhead that relies on
proximity to the target rather than a direct hit. And WTF is the "automatic
protection system?" Never heard of such a thing.

Not to worry. I just thought that since the engineers on this list often
intimidate us with all their smoke and mirrors that maybe some of us old
fighter pilots could get in a few licks, too.

Regards,
Dick Barker

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Bob Palmer <(email redacted)>

Dick, Listers,

Perhaps these aircraft were from the "other branch" of our military (the,
choke, Air Force?) flying F-16s armed with HARM missiles. See, for example,
this official US government news bulletin:

F-16 fires HARM missile at Iraq radar site
Released: Jun 30, 1998

WASHINGTON (AFNS) - An Air Force F-16 pilot fired a radar-seeking missile
at an Iraqi site Tuesday after the ground station locked on to aircraft
patrolling the southern no-fly zone.
The pilot, assigned to the 4404th Wing (Provisional), fired one High-Speed
Anti-Radiation Missile at 1:30 a.m. EDT. The incident occurred near Al
Basrah in southern Iraq. The coalition aircraft returned to their bases of
operation without further incident.
"This is considered an action requiring aggressive defensive measures,"
said a spokesman for U.S. Central Command.
The aircraft flying in support of Operation Southern Watch were from
England, Germany and the United States. Ten of them were in the vicinity at
the time of the incident.
Southern Watch missions continue, including normal aircraft sorties
throughout the no-fly zone. Coalition forces are investigating this latest
incident and assessing battle damage.

Now, I don't recall, but was that US helicopter shot down in northern Iraq
hit with a heat seeking Sidwinder from a Navy or Air Force plane? A little
easier to forgive in northern Iraq than northern England I would think. ;-)

Bob

At 12:16 PM 11/29/99 -0500, (email redacted) wrote:
>In a message dated 11/29/99 2:15:29 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>(email redacted) writes:
>
> > a Sidewinder air-to-ground missile
>
>Colin,
>
>Great story, except that the Sidewinder is an air-to-air missile, not
>air-to-ground (there are also ground-to-air versions, such as the "Stinger".
> It could only be used against a ground target that emitted a horrendous
>infrared signature, such as a steam locomotive, and then only with a limited
>chance of success because it uses an expanding rod warhead that relies on
>proximity to the target rather than a direct hit. And WTF is the "automatic
>protection system?" Never heard of such a thing.
>
>Not to worry. I just thought that since the engineers on this list often
>intimidate us with all their smoke and mirrors that maybe some of us old
>fighter pilots could get in a few licks, too.
>
>Regards,
>Dick Barker

Robert L. Palmer
UCSD, Dept. of AMES
619-822-1037 (o)
760-599-9927 (h)
(email redacted)
(email redacted)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Bob Palmer <(email redacted)>

Dick, Listers,

I searched a little more and found more info on the HARM missile and the
accidental downing of, as it turns out, two helicopters with a total of 26
people aboard.

On April 14, 1994, tragedy hit in a friendly-fire incident that left 26
families in mourning. Two U.S. F-15s shot down two American helicopters,
mistaking them for enemy planes flying in a "nofly" zone over Iraq. The
helicopters were carrying military personnel and civilians; all 26 on board
were killed.

I presume the Air Force F-15s used some type of air-to-air missiles such as
Sidewinders or the newer AMRAAMs.

Also, regarding the deployment of HARM missiles:

DESCRIPTION: HARM missiles are carried by U.S. Air Force F-16s, and Navy
F-18s and EA6B's.
The radar-seeking missile is the primary defense against fixed
surface-to-air missile sites.
HARM stands for High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile. As soon as a hostile
radar locks on or "paints" a U.S. plane, a HARM missile is fired in
response. The missile follows the radar signal to its source, destroying
the radar.
This practice has effectively kept Iraq from even turning on their
anti-aircraft radars, much less firing any surface-to-air missiles.
ANYTHING NEW? Missiles used to be carried by F-4G Wild Weasels. Now the
F-16CJ is the primary plane carrying the HARM missile.

Sounds from the above description like the "response" is both automatic and
swift Dick.

Bob
Robert L. Palmer
UCSD, Dept. of AMES
619-822-1037 (o)
760-599-9927 (h)
(email redacted)
(email redacted)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Chris Hill" <(email redacted)>

A 'heat seaking sidewinder'?....those bobbies with likely a Lucas heater and
a little 4-banger....I hope there weren't any cows in the area!
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Palmer <(email redacted)>
To: (email redacted) <(email redacted)>; (email redacted)
<(email redacted)>
Date: Monday, November 29, 1999 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: No Tiger content - watch your speed


>Dick, Listers,
>
>Perhaps these aircraft were from the "other branch" of our military (the,
>choke, Air Force?) flying F-16s armed with HARM missiles. See, for example,
>this official US government news bulletin:
>
>F-16 fires HARM missile at Iraq radar site
>Released: Jun 30, 1998
>
>WASHINGTON (AFNS) - An Air Force F-16 pilot fired a radar-seeking missile
>at an Iraqi site Tuesday after the ground station locked on to aircraft
>patrolling the southern no-fly zone.
>The pilot, assigned to the 4404th Wing (Provisional), fired one High-Speed
>Anti-Radiation Missile at 1:30 a.m. EDT. The incident occurred near Al
>Basrah in southern Iraq. The coalition aircraft returned to their bases of
>operation without further incident.
>"This is considered an action requiring aggressive defensive measures,"
>said a spokesman for U.S. Central Command.
>The aircraft flying in support of Operation Southern Watch were from
>England, Germany and the United States. Ten of them were in the vicinity at
>the time of the incident.
>Southern Watch missions continue, including normal aircraft sorties
>throughout the no-fly zone. Coalition forces are investigating this latest
>incident and assessing battle damage.
>
>Now, I don't recall, but was that US helicopter shot down in northern Iraq
>hit with a heat seeking Sidwinder from a Navy or Air Force plane? A little
>easier to forgive in northern Iraq than northern England I would think. ;-)
>
>Bob
>
>At 12:16 PM 11/29/99 -0500, (email redacted) wrote:
>>In a message dated 11/29/99 2:15:29 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>>(email redacted) writes:
>>
>> > a Sidewinder air-to-ground missile
>>
>>Colin,
>>
>>Great story, except that the Sidewinder is an air-to-air missile, not
>>air-to-ground (there are also ground-to-air versions, such as the
"Stinger".
>> It could only be used against a ground target that emitted a horrendous
>>infrared signature, such as a steam locomotive, and then only with a
limited
>>chance of success because it uses an expanding rod warhead that relies on
>>proximity to the target rather than a direct hit. And WTF is the
"automatic
>>protection system?" Never heard of such a thing.
>>
>>Not to worry. I just thought that since the engineers on this list often
>>intimidate us with all their smoke and mirrors that maybe some of us old
>>fighter pilots could get in a few licks, too.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dick Barker
>
>Robert L. Palmer
>UCSD, Dept. of AMES
>619-822-1037 (o)
>760-599-9927 (h)
>(email redacted)
>(email redacted)
>
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted)

I suspect that we are in the presence of another one of those cute urban myths. A
factor that needs to be considered is that a hand held police radar gun has a
thirty watt transmitter. I very much doubt that it would be detected by anyone
more than a mile or so away and it certainly wouldn't transmit a high enough
energy signature for it to be mistaken for an active targeting system.

Honest, I tried to stay out of this but I just couldn't help myself.


Mike Clark
B382100417

Bob Palmer wrote:

> Dick, Listers,
>
> Perhaps these aircraft were from the "other branch" of our military (the,
> choke, Air Force?) flying F-16s armed with HARM missiles. See, for example,
> this official US government news bulletin:
>
> F-16 fires HARM missile at Iraq radar site
> Released: Jun 30, 1998
>
> WASHINGTON (AFNS) - An Air Force F-16 pilot fired a radar-seeking missile
> at an Iraqi site Tuesday after the ground station locked on to aircraft
> patrolling the southern no-fly zone.
> The pilot, assigned to the 4404th Wing (Provisional), fired one High-Speed
> Anti-Radiation Missile at 1:30 a.m. EDT. The incident occurred near Al
> Basrah in southern Iraq. The coalition aircraft returned to their bases of
> operation without further incident.
> "This is considered an action requiring aggressive defensive measures,"
> said a spokesman for U.S. Central Command.
> The aircraft flying in support of Operation Southern Watch were from
> England, Germany and the United States. Ten of them were in the vicinity at
> the time of the incident.
> Southern Watch missions continue, including normal aircraft sorties
> throughout the no-fly zone. Coalition forces are investigating this latest
> incident and assessing battle damage.
>
> Now, I don't recall, but was that US helicopter shot down in northern Iraq
> hit with a heat seeking Sidwinder from a Navy or Air Force plane? A little
> easier to forgive in northern Iraq than northern England I would think. ;-)
>
> Bob
>
> At 12:16 PM 11/29/99 -0500, (email redacted) wrote:
> >In a message dated 11/29/99 2:15:29 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> >(email redacted) writes:
> >
> > > a Sidewinder air-to-ground missile
> >
> >Colin,
> >
> >Great story, except that the Sidewinder is an air-to-air missile, not
> >air-to-ground (there are also ground-to-air versions, such as the "Stinger".
> > It could only be used against a ground target that emitted a horrendous
> >infrared signature, such as a steam locomotive, and then only with a limited
> >chance of success because it uses an expanding rod warhead that relies on
> >proximity to the target rather than a direct hit. And WTF is the "automatic
> >protection system?" Never heard of such a thing.
> >
> >Not to worry. I just thought that since the engineers on this list often
> >intimidate us with all their smoke and mirrors that maybe some of us old
> >fighter pilots could get in a few licks, too.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Dick Barker
>
> Robert L. Palmer
> UCSD, Dept. of AMES
> 619-822-1037 (o)
> 760-599-9927 (h)
> (email redacted)
> (email redacted)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Marc James Small <(email redacted)>

At 10:36 PM 11/30/1999 -0800, (email redacted) wrote:
>I suspect that we are in the presence of another one of those cute urban
myths.

Well, it IS an urban myth, that first arose in the UK five or ten years
back, involving a British cop and an RAF fighter of some sort. I've come
across it in at least four different permutations.

Marc

(email redacted) FAX: +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: "Steve Griffing" <(email redacted)>


> I suspect that we are in the presence of another one of those cute urban
myths>
>
First rule of Urban Myths; I lie and you swear to it. If it is remotely
possible it spreads like wildfire.

How many of you read this and IMMEDIATLY hit the forward key. Come on,
quick survey, be honest!!