Author Topic: AGM-65 @ FA-50  (Read 2085 times)

adroth

  • Administrator
  • Boffin
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
    • View Profile
    • The ADROTH Project
AGM-65 @ FA-50
« on: July 03, 2017, 11:37:30 PM »
« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 11:48:30 AM by adroth »

adroth

  • Administrator
  • Boffin
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
    • View Profile
    • The ADROTH Project
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50 #007?
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2017, 11:49:10 PM »
Slightly perspective c/o PTV


horge

  • Timawan
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50 #007?
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2017, 01:25:58 AM »
Deep Saxe Blue 113.

 :)


Mr. Pitz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
  • Defense technicalities are a thing
    • View Profile
    • Pitz Defense Analysis
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50 #007?
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2017, 04:09:39 AM »
More close-up video with regards to AGM-65 Mavericks here:

People's Television YouTube Account
Never assume unless it is highly stated.

Protect the integrity, sovereignty and welfare of the Philippine Republic

horge

  • Timawan
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50 #007?
« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2017, 07:00:17 AM »
More close-up video with regards to AGM-65 Mavericks here:

People's Television YouTube Account

That confirms the earlier blue, and now no brown, no yellow, and no pink, meaning:
drill; no LE (meaning no rocket motor); no HE (no warhead); and no seeker.
Generally for familiarizing aircrew with the aircraft's flight behavior when humping
the approximate weight/drag of Mavericks.






adroth

  • Administrator
  • Boffin
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
    • View Profile
    • The ADROTH Project
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2017, 09:14:53 AM »
One of the best shots yet. Posted on the forum's FB extension

https://www.facebook.com/groups/rpdefense/permalink/1365456486873528/


horge

  • Timawan
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2017, 01:44:19 PM »
Look at those AIM-9's. Assuming some idiot with a paint can DIDN'T decide to seriously fuck with groundcrew,
(and why on earth would anyone in PAF tolerate that sort of criminal backwardness?) those Sidewinders still
have HE warheads (yellow, see?), but no rocket motor (no brown), and no seeker (no pink).

Either those are also drill, meaning they actually serve a purpose training groundcrew on handling, and aircrew
on flight behavior with heaters strapped on... or they're simply eye-candy. Either way, they strike one precisely
as expired Bravo stock from 1963-1967 (cue CCR's Fortunate Son...) with the solid propellant safely-removed.
If it was up to me, those would get a band of Deep Saxe Blue 113 as well... I mean, what other use? If it's just
for eye candy, then I understand the no-blue... hint, hint.

On the other hand...
those drill Mavericks would have been acquired as-is: configured and marked as for training purposes. PAF
either uses them for training or as eye-candy only: if the former, then we may see live AGM-65G in PAF's future...
but it's as-easily a case of ONLY the latter. Drill munitions are sometimes included with the "training package" that
is itself OFTEN bundled with purchases of combat aircraft: andun na e, so gamitin na pang-porma man lang, even
if there is absolutely ZERO plan to acquire live Mavericks in PAF's future.

That sexy inboard GPB iron, however, is definitely marked live HE (yellow, albeit maybe not Golden Yellow 356).




EDIT: Creedence didn't release 'Fortunate Son' until '69 pala, same year Eddie Peregrina's 'Mardy' came out...
so maybe 'Ring of Fire' is more appropriate.



 8)
« Last Edit: July 05, 2017, 02:13:29 PM by horge »

adroth

  • Administrator
  • Boffin
  • *****
  • Posts: 3577
    • View Profile
    • The ADROTH Project
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50
« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2017, 10:23:15 PM »

sbhntr

  • Timawan
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50
« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2017, 11:04:47 PM »
the sidewinder has no rollerons but the forward section looks like an old -9b. that also is the sleekest bomb i've ever seen. I remember them as having a somewhat rough surface. no place for the fuze either. the yellow stripe is confusing, all indications point to "training"...

see picture of as-211 / aim-9b dated 2013 near the end of the page:

https://rhk111smilitaryandarmspage.wordpress.com/2013/09/29/philippine-as-211-warrior-improvements-september-2013/

looks like its the same "missile"
« Last Edit: July 08, 2017, 08:34:41 PM by sbhntr »

horge

  • Timawan
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: AGM-65 @ FA-50
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2017, 11:44:46 AM »
that also is the sleekest bomb i've ever seen. I remember them as having a somewhat rough surface. no place for the fuze either. the yellow stripe is confusing, all indications point to "training"...


Oh, there's technically ;) a place for an M904 fuze up front.
It's just presently-occupied by a pointy shipping plug, and (reflecting your 'sleek' and my 'sexy' comments)
also caked over in gloss green makeup. Keep in mind that if that GPB was primed up its ass with an M905,
a shipping plug in the nose would be EXACTLY what we'd be looking at, although all that sexing-up with
Maybelline gloss green suggests something else is at hand.

It's probably a lot like those wingtip Bravo heaters: technically still having its warhead, but isn't a usable
wep (unless a fair bit of work/materials is put in), nor is even marked for training purposes.



I suspect the "rough surface" you recalled is the thermal insulation sometimes applied to casing exteriors
of modern stock (mostly 80-series), in contexts where cook-off is a significant risk (think: 'USS Forrestal').

« Last Edit: July 09, 2017, 12:09:44 PM by horge »