To: John Lacelle who wrote (40178 ) 3/26/1999 3:44:00 PM From: nuke44 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
I didn't hear about the tomahawk failure, but if it fell that close to the ship it was more than likely a failure in the initial boost motor prior to switching to turbojet. I'm not familiar with the upgraded versions of the SA-9. The older version used Infrared guidance so it stands to reason that redundant guidance capabilities such as passive optical would have been added. Some of the strengths of the SA-9 has always been it's compact size, the fact that is is integral to a highly mobile wheeled launch vehicle, and it's ease of use. On the other hand the SA-9 only has a 4km defensive footprint or range. In my mind the SA-5s and SA-6s pose a greater threat because of their vastly superior range. As far as the Mig-29, it's closest comparable NATO aircraft is the F-18. It's missiles include anti-radiation, infrared, and radar. It's a formidable air superiority fighter, but my understanding is that there is only between 12 to 15 of these aircraft in Serbian inventory. My final permanent duty station prior to retiring from the Air Force was as a liason to 38 Jadgbomber Gruppe of the German Luftwaffe. In 1992, after the assimilation of components of the Former East German military into the reunited force, 38 Jagdbomber received 2 Mig-29s. I had the rather unique opportunity to clamber over and around one of these aircraft and sit in the cockpit. It was an odd feeling. The Luftwaffe pilots, while quick to point out the unbelievable power and agility of the Mig-29 said to a man that they preferred the Panavia Tornados that composed the remainder of the wing, because of their reliability and the sophistication of their avionics in comparison with the Mig-29.