I worked with AIM-9s & AGM-65s when I was in (73-77) at England AFB La. (gone now)
my AFSC was 31651L ... I miss those days and the guys I worked with ... todays generation of missiles and the younger generation who work on them are awesome.
BTW the aircraft at England AFB back then were A7D Corsairs!
@yoyoyoyoshua Apparently it's self cooled without using argon gas and isn't fooled by standard countermeasures (but never going into detailed as to WHY, which is what id like to know)
@yoyoyoyoshua The Aim-9X is a HOBS missile (High Off Bore Sight). Basically it enables the pilot, when mated with the JHMCS (Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System) to "look and lock" where the pilot is looking, fox (fire) and the missile will launch and pull into a hard turn to whatever direction the target is, generally about 180 degrees in the horizontal and vertical. The enhanced guidance and aerodynamics give the Aim-9X *almost* BVR ranges. I've heard, unoffically, a range of about 13 miles.
@phantomTomcat1985 ah ok. I've read about that helmet and read a little on the Aim-9X but it didn't say any details just how it's the newest missle and that it's similar to the Aim-9M
@yoyoyoyoshua Its in the same family but a generation beyond the -9M. Generally the -9X is backwards compatible with most aircraft the -9M was on. At current the F-22 is not -9X capable, but should be eventually.
And AMMO troops USAF rejoiced, no more standing around waiting for a batch of Argon bottles to refill. yay for them! Wait, I wonder if they'll still use 9L or M CAP's on training sorties. I've been out of the AMMO field for 10 years. Would be cool to visit a Missle maint shop and watch them test a 9X head.
@SternLX I worked with the L and M models too, and I've been out of doing that for almost 20 years. I was a 462 on F-111D and F models. Not a lot of missle handling for us, but I agree, it would be cool to visit a weapons shop, again.
@nbarile18 Would have to be saw loaded. I only maintained and delivered. Munitions Systems and Weapons Systems are different career fields in the USAF. But to answer the Question, Hauled full load outs to the flight line for F-15E's on OCA(Offensive Counter Air) sorties all the time. Pre-120 AMRAAM era that would be 4 - 7's and 4 - 9's with NAV and Targeting Pods. Between Operation Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom the OCA loadout changed to 6 - 120 and 2 9's with NAV and Targeting pods on 15E's.
@Battery9876 the targeting pods that I spoke of were for A/G weapons on 15E's. I didn't work on Targeting and weapons systems so I'm not familiar with their capabilities. I worked on the actual Munitions themselves. Would need to ask a Weapons Systems Tech. :)
I worked Sidewinder from 1976 to 1983 when I retrained into cruise missiles. From the B model to the 9L with the argon bottle. Amazing how something 2 people can lift onto a rail (they use 3 for safety) can do so much damage.
@rhblakeman We used 2 people in the MMS all the time to go from box to test or assembly stand. But then again 3 people gets in the way when only lifting waist high. The guy in the middle on the flight line was more of a spotter anyway. I always noted the shortest Load Toad got stuck in the middle when mounting 9's. LOL
@SternLX My guess is that with the new version the weight is greatly reduced too. In shop (before ammo got the missiles in the early 80's) we would move Aim-9's, AIM-7's and AGM-45's with 2 people no problem and AGM-65's, LGB's and HOBOs would be moved with a bomb lift truck or on a trailer. AIM-9B with the round nose is what we had at Nellis when I got there first part of 77 then shortly after we got AIM-9E's. Flightline the knuckledraggers used 3 and any less got safety on their butts.
@rhblakeman also to answer the question about thrust vector nozzle on the engines on those fighters is we have done testing with that and decide it costed to much money and we dont have room in the budget for it because the f-35.
WAIT A MINUTE...Air-to-Air Combat is NOT a cat & mouse game (currently), it was in World War II when the USAF (US Air Force) & the BRAF (British Royal Air Force) were going up against the Nazi German Air Force...Allies flew Supermarine Spitfire Fighters, USAF had P-38 Lightnings in the Pacific Theater (against Japan), but in the European Theater, the USAF & the BRAF (Allies) were running up against the Nazi Germany Flown Messerschmitt Me-262 (1st Fighter Jet). it could fly WAY Faster & Higher
@bekazau yes, i do 2,it would have been great if the navy update the f-14 for a2a, just because we don't have a true a2a fighter on, yes the f-18 is a fighter and a bomber, and does the multi-role great. but as a fight 1 on 1 w/ other frontline fighter it's weak (bvr) is the key,but when the missile r gone the navy needs a f-14 or better a f-22navy model,but they could put vector thrust engine and truly giving it enough thrust the fight.Why no thrust vector nozzle engines on the F151618?
@hotrod4you2 we tried to make the f/a-22n anyway this would be a bad idea because we would have to modified it a lot and the f/a-22 needs a lot of maintenance and carrier aircaft take a lot of abuse. so yeah bad idea. but we have the f-35. the f/a-18e/f is better for the navy as far i am cornered more advanced avionics for better situlational awareness it can track 12 targets and destory 8 of them with the aim-120 that can the f-14 could not carry.
I'm really way out-of-touch of the latest updates on the newest aircraft weapons used on US fighter aircrafts today. I didn't realize a latest version of AIM-9 sidewinder missile such as the AIM-9X is used until I bought a scale model of F-18s and F-16. It quite an improvement I believe compared to other AIM-9 versions. Too bad, the F-14 models I bought didn't carry them.
THE TRUE IS RUSSIAN AND CHINA OUT RANGE U.S AND NATO MISSILE BY MILES, WHY HAVENT U.S AIR FORCE REPLACED AIM-54 Phoenix air-to-air missile WITH A LONGER RANGE MISSILE? THEY JUST RETIRED THE PHOENIX TO REPLACE IT WITH A MUCH SHORTER RANGE MISSILE ( MORE WASTED MONEY) LIKE IT OR NOT THE U.S.A.F engagement range IS LOST
Well, Aim-9X is interesting... but R-73M/M2 easily outdo him. Aim-9X all anyone can really say on his is the off boresight... which there is no concrete data for. Aim-9X is said by many to have 90 degrees off boresight, but as I say, tehre is no realy data to support this. More likely it is 75-80 off bore. R-73M has 75 degrees off bore, but surpasses Aim-9X is manuverability, speed, and range.
@bittemeinrammstein Actually there are plenty of data to support AIm-9X's superiority (Raytheon/Versa etc). R-73M2 has limit of G load for 12+ but Aim-9x can pull over 60G (that is 5 times the pulling effect). Aim-9X has far superior recognition control and interface modules, and of course, range than any Vympel products.
@bittemeinrammstein Actually it does have 90 degree off-boresight, some of the training videos I've seen and demonstrations show them doing a damn near 180 once it left the rail.
block 2
hotrod4you2 1 week ago
I worked with AIM-9s & AGM-65s when I was in (73-77) at England AFB La. (gone now)
my AFSC was 31651L ... I miss those days and the guys I worked with ... todays generation of missiles and the younger generation who work on them are awesome.
BTW the aircraft at England AFB back then were A7D Corsairs!
KWG
kwg1 2 months ago
ok they lost me what is the difference between the AIM-9X and AIM-9M
yoyoyoyoshua 7 months ago
@yoyoyoyoshua Apparently it's self cooled without using argon gas and isn't fooled by standard countermeasures (but never going into detailed as to WHY, which is what id like to know)
Cplblue 7 months ago
@yoyoyoyoshua The Aim-9X is a HOBS missile (High Off Bore Sight). Basically it enables the pilot, when mated with the JHMCS (Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System) to "look and lock" where the pilot is looking, fox (fire) and the missile will launch and pull into a hard turn to whatever direction the target is, generally about 180 degrees in the horizontal and vertical. The enhanced guidance and aerodynamics give the Aim-9X *almost* BVR ranges. I've heard, unoffically, a range of about 13 miles.
phantomTomcat1985 7 months ago
@phantomTomcat1985 ah ok. I've read about that helmet and read a little on the Aim-9X but it didn't say any details just how it's the newest missle and that it's similar to the Aim-9M
yoyoyoyoshua 7 months ago
@yoyoyoyoshua Its in the same family but a generation beyond the -9M. Generally the -9X is backwards compatible with most aircraft the -9M was on. At current the F-22 is not -9X capable, but should be eventually.
phantomTomcat1985 7 months ago
@yoyoyoyoshua
self cooling seeker, better avionics, n improved eccm
Tomahawk1999 7 months ago
And AMMO troops USAF rejoiced, no more standing around waiting for a batch of Argon bottles to refill. yay for them! Wait, I wonder if they'll still use 9L or M CAP's on training sorties. I've been out of the AMMO field for 10 years. Would be cool to visit a Missle maint shop and watch them test a 9X head.
SternLX 9 months ago
@SternLX I worked with the L and M models too, and I've been out of doing that for almost 20 years. I was a 462 on F-111D and F models. Not a lot of missle handling for us, but I agree, it would be cool to visit a weapons shop, again.
jonesy97 9 months ago
@SternLX Seeing as you worked in a weapons shop what was the most amount of missiles you loaded or saw loaded onto an aircraft.
nbarile18 8 months ago
@nbarile18 Would have to be saw loaded. I only maintained and delivered. Munitions Systems and Weapons Systems are different career fields in the USAF. But to answer the Question, Hauled full load outs to the flight line for F-15E's on OCA(Offensive Counter Air) sorties all the time. Pre-120 AMRAAM era that would be 4 - 7's and 4 - 9's with NAV and Targeting Pods. Between Operation Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom the OCA loadout changed to 6 - 120 and 2 9's with NAV and Targeting pods on 15E's.
SternLX 5 months ago
@SternLX If I may ask, can the targeting pod be used as a irst and/or cued to the radar?
Battery9876 2 months ago
@Battery9876 the targeting pods that I spoke of were for A/G weapons on 15E's. I didn't work on Targeting and weapons systems so I'm not familiar with their capabilities. I worked on the actual Munitions themselves. Would need to ask a Weapons Systems Tech. :)
SternLX 2 months ago
I worked Sidewinder from 1976 to 1983 when I retrained into cruise missiles. From the B model to the 9L with the argon bottle. Amazing how something 2 people can lift onto a rail (they use 3 for safety) can do so much damage.
rhblakeman 9 months ago in playlist Missile launches
@rhblakeman We used 2 people in the MMS all the time to go from box to test or assembly stand. But then again 3 people gets in the way when only lifting waist high. The guy in the middle on the flight line was more of a spotter anyway. I always noted the shortest Load Toad got stuck in the middle when mounting 9's. LOL
SternLX 5 months ago
@SternLX My guess is that with the new version the weight is greatly reduced too. In shop (before ammo got the missiles in the early 80's) we would move Aim-9's, AIM-7's and AGM-45's with 2 people no problem and AGM-65's, LGB's and HOBOs would be moved with a bomb lift truck or on a trailer. AIM-9B with the round nose is what we had at Nellis when I got there first part of 77 then shortly after we got AIM-9E's. Flightline the knuckledraggers used 3 and any less got safety on their butts.
rhblakeman 5 months ago
Comment removed
rhblakeman 9 months ago in playlist Missile launches
@rhblakeman also to answer the question about thrust vector nozzle on the engines on those fighters is we have done testing with that and decide it costed to much money and we dont have room in the budget for it because the f-35.
Nielsenkc 2 months ago
WAIT A MINUTE...Air-to-Air Combat is NOT a cat & mouse game (currently), it was in World War II when the USAF (US Air Force) & the BRAF (British Royal Air Force) were going up against the Nazi German Air Force...Allies flew Supermarine Spitfire Fighters, USAF had P-38 Lightnings in the Pacific Theater (against Japan), but in the European Theater, the USAF & the BRAF (Allies) were running up against the Nazi Germany Flown Messerschmitt Me-262 (1st Fighter Jet). it could fly WAY Faster & Higher
thedeem0N 11 months ago
I GUESS U KNOW THE F-14 HAS BEEN GONE OUT OF SERVICE FOR YRS NOW RIGHT
hotrod4you2 11 months ago
@hotrod4you2 i love th f-14 man i rlly do
bekazau 9 months ago
@bekazau yes, i do 2,it would have been great if the navy update the f-14 for a2a, just because we don't have a true a2a fighter on, yes the f-18 is a fighter and a bomber, and does the multi-role great. but as a fight 1 on 1 w/ other frontline fighter it's weak (bvr) is the key,but when the missile r gone the navy needs a f-14 or better a f-22navy model,but they could put vector thrust engine and truly giving it enough thrust the fight.Why no thrust vector nozzle engines on the F151618?
hotrod4you2 9 months ago
@hotrod4you2 we tried to make the f/a-22n anyway this would be a bad idea because we would have to modified it a lot and the f/a-22 needs a lot of maintenance and carrier aircaft take a lot of abuse. so yeah bad idea. but we have the f-35. the f/a-18e/f is better for the navy as far i am cornered more advanced avionics for better situlational awareness it can track 12 targets and destory 8 of them with the aim-120 that can the f-14 could not carry.
Nielsenkc 2 months ago
I'm really way out-of-touch of the latest updates on the newest aircraft weapons used on US fighter aircrafts today. I didn't realize a latest version of AIM-9 sidewinder missile such as the AIM-9X is used until I bought a scale model of F-18s and F-16. It quite an improvement I believe compared to other AIM-9 versions. Too bad, the F-14 models I bought didn't carry them.
abeamarra 1 year ago
One hell of a MIG killer. I'd like to see some BS Russian MIG acrobatics avoid that :)
Jospehporta 1 year ago
0:03 - 0:12 Knight one, fox two!... ID4 style :D
RektalFlottenAdmiral 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE TRUE IS RUSSIAN AND CHINA OUT RANGE U.S AND NATO MISSILE BY MILES, WHY HAVENT U.S AIR FORCE REPLACED AIM-54 Phoenix air-to-air missile WITH A LONGER RANGE MISSILE? THEY JUST RETIRED THE PHOENIX TO REPLACE IT WITH A MUCH SHORTER RANGE MISSILE ( MORE WASTED MONEY) LIKE IT OR NOT THE U.S.A.F engagement range IS LOST
hotrod4you2 1 year ago
@hotrod4you2 aim-54, was us navy not the airforce.
american1812 1 year ago
@hotrod4you2 f-15c close in about 50nm.
american1812 1 year ago
look for the Python 5 thets a missile
ILLBEDAMND 1 year ago
Argon?! It must be an Air Force thing, we use nitrogen in our launchers, well that's if it's the E/A variant of the LAU-127. F/As are the best.
Eagle1oh7 1 year ago
The Block II can be mounted in the inner pylons of the F-35.
TuAFFalcon 1 year ago
No more argon bottles? Of course this is after i got out.
bondizz 1 year ago
@bondizz No shit huh!!!!!!! Bring back the argon, everyone must be miserable!
sakoshooter48 1 year ago
Well, Aim-9X is interesting... but R-73M/M2 easily outdo him. Aim-9X all anyone can really say on his is the off boresight... which there is no concrete data for. Aim-9X is said by many to have 90 degrees off boresight, but as I say, tehre is no realy data to support this. More likely it is 75-80 off bore. R-73M has 75 degrees off bore, but surpasses Aim-9X is manuverability, speed, and range.
bittemeinrammstein 1 year ago
@bittemeinrammstein Actually there are plenty of data to support AIm-9X's superiority (Raytheon/Versa etc). R-73M2 has limit of G load for 12+ but Aim-9x can pull over 60G (that is 5 times the pulling effect). Aim-9X has far superior recognition control and interface modules, and of course, range than any Vympel products.
looxgood 1 year ago
@bittemeinrammstein Actually it does have 90 degree off-boresight, some of the training videos I've seen and demonstrations show them doing a damn near 180 once it left the rail.
Eagle1oh7 1 year ago
@bittemeinrammstein WILL IS THAT RIGHT,THERE'S NONE ON R-73
hotrod4you2 1 year ago
Cool!
TopGunPilot01 2 years ago
thats awesome!
blazefox2 2 years ago