Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site ssc-vax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!wanttaja From: wanttaja@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ronald J Wanttaja) Newsgroups: net.aviation Subject: Sidewinder Vs. 172 (resubmittal) Message-ID: <213@ssc-vax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 19-Nov-84 14:12:17 EST Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.213 Posted: Mon Nov 19 14:12:17 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 15-Dec-84 21:56:28 EST Distribution: net Organization: Boeing Aerospace Co., Seattle, WA Lines: 35 <"Cessna 09 Tango, cleared to land, check gear down"> <"Roger, gear down and welded..."> I'm resubmitting this article, as we have had some difficulty getting news in and out. My apologies for resubmittal if you all were just ignoring it :-). Since it has been pretty quiet on net.aviation, I'm throwing out a question to y'all. Let's take, for instance, the Sidewinder Air-to-Air missile, or its Russkie version, the Atoll. How effective are these against a non-turbine powered aircraft? Apparently, the ground launched anti-aircraft missiles are pretty non-discriminatory, i.e., they'll take off after any heat source. I would suspect, however, that the air launched kind have various anti-spoofing features that may cut down on their effectiveness against cooler targets. Maybe they wouldn't be so cool... but the major heat source, the cylinders, is shielded by the cowling, and in aircraft like the P-51, further shielded by the water cooling jacket. To set the input parameters, I would state two conditions: 1. Sidewinder/Atoll against P-51 (after all, there is one Latin American country that still operates F-51s) 2. Sidewinder/Atoll against Cessna 172 (I may want to take an aerial tour of Kamchatka Peninsula some day) Lets get some new discussion going here! I'm tired of "Re:Re:Re: B-1 vs B-52!" Ronald J. Wanttaja, Lieutenant Queens own Kamikazi Highlanders (ssc-vax!wanttaja) Flames will be dealt with by Redeye/SA-7. Be warned.