Well it looks like the most recent F-16 crash might not have anything to do with camel spiders, but something much more serious.
Tactical Report blog reports that there are indications the F-16 that crashed four days ago was shot down. This is a disturbing development if true, since the U.S. military had seemingly gotten its arms around the spate of crashes and shoot-downs of helicopters.
The indication that the shoot-down occurred during the aircrafts takeoff is also alarming because it points to the possibility that MANPAD teams are able to get close enough to U.S. air bases to launch in the opening moments of an aircrafts flight.
The Tactical Report article follows:
Another US F-16 aircraft crashed on 15/7/07 during takeoff at Balad air base, 80 kilometers north of Baghdad. This was the second F-16 aircraft crash in just a month, as a crash had taken place on 15/6/07 shortly after taking off from the same base.
While the pilot of the first crash was killed, the pilot of the second one survived. But what caused both crashes remains under investigations by the US Air Force.
Reports from Baghdad suggest that hostile fire caused both crashes.
According to these reports, it is not just a coincidence that both aircraft crashed during takeoff.
Circles close to the Iraqi Defense Ministry suspect that a shoulder-held anti-aircraft missile might have been fired at both aircraft from an area not far from the air base.
These circles add that it is too difficult for any aircraft to maneuver and avoid a missile during takeoff.
According to these circles, the Iraqi insurgency has different types of anti-aircraft missiles, including SAM-7, SAM-8 and SAM-11, which can hit an aircraft during taking off or flying at low altitude.
UPDATE: Astute readers pointed out that while the SA-7 is a MANPAD, the others listed are not. It would be pretty unlikely for the USAF to not notice a truck-mounted system parked close by its air field, which casts even more doubt on the authenticity of this report. But it’s still worth keeping and eye on what MNF-I determines might have been the cause of the crashes.
(Gouge: NC)
SA-8 and SA-11? I highly doubt it. Those are both vehicle mounted systems. SA-7 yes. SA-16 maybe. I don’t know about trusting those “cirles” you are getting your info from.
SA-8 is a vehicle-mounted SAM, not a MANPADS. See:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-8.htm
SA-11 is an even larger vehicle-mounted system:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-11.htm
The SA-7, however, is man-portable:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-7.htm
as is the SA-14:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-14.htm
and the SA-16:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-16.htm
There’s also a more-advanced MANPADS system called
the SA-18:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-18.htm
I’m pretty sure the Insurgents/Guerrillas in Iraq
and Afghanistan have access to SA-7 and SA-14,
But I’m not sure about SA-16 or SA-18.
Can anyone out there provide more info?
This site is in dire need of an additional editor to check the facts before stories/articles get posted. One set of eyes is always going to be insufficient, no matter how good they are or how knowledgeable the brain behind them is. A lot of these are just silly mistakes, but the sillier the mistake, the dumber you can look.
At least this article is the subject material it should be. No more of the Paris Hilton crap.
MANPADS? hmmm, why not a simple .50 sniper rifle?.…from far enough away not to be found easily.…more than just a “golden BB” shot, perhaps many shots attempted, but if only a few take effect… thats all it takes.
far more likely than advanced manpads.
Logan Hartke -
I just read that both pilots were reading Stuff just prior to takeoff which contained an article related to Paris Hilton… sorry man…
Thanks dear readers for the MANPADS catch…You’re my “extra set of eyes”…
In response to OceanMinded,
Just because something is worth reading doesn’t mean that isn’t capable of being improved. I have a lot of books in my personal collection that are worth owning but chock full of errors and typos. As far as me trying my own hand at it, I only wish I had the time to.
Nowhere did I say that Christian is doing a bad job, nor that I or anyone else could do a better job. I just think that having another set of eyes to say “that doesn’t look quite right” would benefit the credibility of this blog and the readers of it.
Obviously, it’s the editor’s prerogative to take the suggestion or leave it, but I’ve performed the role of editor a few times, and it’s always better when you’re not the only one performing quality control.
You all need to be more careful in claiming facts or making suppositions that may or not be true in dealing with people’s lives, especially those in combat. I’ll claim nothing more than betting no one here really knows all of the facts–perhaps even any of them, other than a jet went down. The USAF Safety Investigation Board process is a trusted agent system, and is meant to limit conjecture and rumors–like this. That’s why the USAF has the lowest aviation mishap rate in the armed forces.
Manpads bringing down Vipers? Not impossible, but I don’t think so…
Can we kill off the MANPADS acronym? Sounds like a masculine hygene product.
if this is the first it won’t be the last.
if the usa is gearing up to bug out, this would be the right time to pass some SAM’s to the partisans, make it that much more of a sporty course.
which means a deal is that much closer with iran.
gonna git messy.
So if I understand some of the (apparently) more informed comments in this thread, our boy Christian is at it again, eh?
Still, gotta give him a little credit: At least he isn’t rushing to imply that it’s the nefarious Tehran connection.
It’s obvious that a SAM-7 cannot hit an aircraft that takes off since it can only FOLLOW a heat trail. Presumably the launcher is somewhere ahead of the aircraft (if it was on the side it wouldn’t have the range)Other models aren’t shoulder-launched. You should have at least a basic understanding of the weapon systems before going around posting this kind of stuff.
It would have to be a more sophisticated weapon and if it were then we would have heard it by now, maybe seen the footage on youtube. You don’t go around wasting good missiles on jets, they would shoot large helos carrying troops to increase the shock value.
We’re just posting the info, George and sglover. No need for ad hominem BS. If you have some intel, bring it.
And anyone who knows anything about IR guided missiles knows you don’t have to be behind the target to “get a tone.“
Thanks for being part of the DT community.
Why are we not filming every single take-off? As with the camera in the bank or the 7–11, you only keep the film if something bad happens.
It is hard to believe that the air traffic controllers or someone on the base wouldn’t notice if a missile started climbing into the sky right outside the wire.
“You don’t go around wasting good missiles on jets, they would shoot large helos carrying troops to increase the shock value.…“
Novemeber 2003 — Iraq
http://www.michael-forman.com/gallery/dhl.html
A DHL Freight Jet was hit by a SAM missile.
Given, it’s a bigger target and lacks anti-SAM equiptment, but they managed to clip this bird while apaches circled the Baghdad airport
A couple of misconceptions to correct: an IR-guided missile does not follow a “heat trail” — it tracks hot metal such as the exhaust nozzle of a jet engine. I also don’t see why it’s obvious that such a missile couldn’t hit an aircraft taking off, as long as the aircraft overflies the launcher. Once the aircraft flies past, its engine is now exposed to the seeker on the SAM.
Hmm, the article at:
http://nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2007/August/ArmyHelos.htm
includes the following:
“A few days later, an SA-16 missile took down an
AH-60 Black Hawk, which resulted in the deaths of
four crewmembers and two passengers.“
So it looks like the SA-16 HAS been used in Iraq
against an AH-60 helo, and perhaps other targets
as well.
In case you’re wondering what an “AH-60″ is. See:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ah-60l.htm
More on the AH-60 at:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/mh-60l-dap.htm
All i wanna know is who packed the chute that the pilot used when ejecting. The reason for wondering is i am stationed at Misawa and the jet that crashed was a 13th jet. I am in the Survival Equipment shop which used to be part of Fab.