Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 11/13/2001 6:54:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/13/2001 6:54:50 PM EDT by I_am_Sancho]
I was told by person once, some sort of ex-military guy a long time ago that a stinger cannot target any commercial aircraft or us military aircraft. anyone know this? I'm seeing stinger missile typed about a lot here lately and I keep thinking about what this dude said and if he is right those towl-iban guys coulnd't use them over there or the newest theory that they brought down that jet yesterday. I doubt they have the electronics h4xx0r1ng sk1llz to fix the missiles to do that.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 6:58:36 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:00:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/13/2001 6:53:48 PM EDT by I_am_Sancho]
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: McSancho - This might be because civilian engines are cooler than military engines? I dunno.
View Quote
it was something electronic I guess I should have said that, like the planes had some kind of identifier beacon or something in them that the missile knew to stay away from. not mc either, I aint him.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:02:40 PM EDT
Probably not true. There is an IFF antenna on the Stinger that interrogates the transponder of the passing plane. If it squawks the correct code, the grunt just doesn't pull the trigger. That's the way it used to be *I believe*.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:06:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:09:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:09:15 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Erasmus: Probably not true. There is an IFF antenna on the Stinger that interrogates the transponder of the passing plane. If it squawks the correct code, the grunt just doesn't pull the trigger. That's the way it used to be *I believe*.
View Quote
Those codes change EVERYDAY.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:12:56 PM EDT
The system is a "fire-and-forget" weapon employing a passive infrared seeker and proportional navigation system. Stinger also is designed for the threat beyond the 1990s, with an all-aspect engagement capability, and IFF (Identification-Friend-or-Foe). Military aircraft use IFF to identify themselves, but civilian aircraft transponders systems are diffrent. Navy, It's not just a job. It's an indenture!
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:14:31 PM EDT
The Stinger has an IFF microchip that will not let the missile fire at a friendly aircraft. The military was worried that the Taliban might have the knowhow to bypass the IFF sensor.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:24:35 PM EDT
The Stinger is a fire and forget weapon that tracks the infra-red heat signature of any aircraft. The missile is an all-up-round, encased in a canister at the factory. It requires no regular maintenance. The launch device is separate from the missiles until loading. When you want to fire a missile, you open up the transport/storage canister, remove the missile round tube and mount it to the firing device, which should already have a battery in it. The gunner then applies power, releases the Identification, Friend or Foe (IFF) antennae that look like a flat BBQ grill that flips up on either side, and points the missile in the general direction of the enemy aircraft. He is normally aided on by his assistant. As the gunner gets on the target, he weaves the launcher back and forth a bit slowly and listens in his headphones for the missile acquisition tone. If the aircraft is "squawking" a friendly IFF code, he does not fire. If the aircraft is not squawking the code, indicating an enemy, the gunner can then pull the trigger and launch the missile. The missile is pushed out of the launch tube by a small explosive charge to a safe distance, then the solid rocket motor ignites and away she goes...tracking the heat from the aircraft engines. The missile is effective against all aircraft, including helos, within its operational radius. The latest versions have much improved seekers over those given to the Afghanis many years ago. So...in answer to your question...this weapon can be used against any plane. There is no special secret decoder widget to protect civilian airliners, which don't have the military IFF codes anyway. (All aircraft squawk certain ID codes. Only US and certain allied military squawk the right special codes to protect themselves.) The man in the loop is the final protector against doing something very stupid.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:31:01 PM EDT
From my understanding it maybe academic. The stingers are more then a decade old now. They need fresh batteries and coolant. The chip that prevents firing at friendlies can be bypassed by someone with a little knowledge. A lot of guys on the board with electronics or engineering experience could probably do it.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:40:09 PM EDT
I just looked at that webpage about missiles it says the missile is propelled out of the tube by an explosive charge to get it a safe distance away before the engine starts. Thats gotta be a kick to the shoulder, a 22 pound 161,920 grain projectile. and here I thought a 370 gr maxi-ball in front of 150gr of pyrodex hurt to shoot!
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 7:42:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 5:07:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DoubleFeed: [url]http://home.netcom.com/~chadeast/missiles/fim92.html[/url]
View Quote
Thanks for the link. That's a sweet site![:)]
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 5:17:03 AM EDT
The booster charge in a Stinger (or other rocket-type round)makes the launcher behave much like a recoiless rifle (even though its smoothbore). There is a trifle reaction from rifling, most recoil is due to Newton's second law (every action has an equal and opposite reaction) as applied to projectile mass* muzzle velocity + ejecta mass * ejecta velocity. In the Stinger/LAW case, the muzzle velocity times the mass of the rocket plus the forward ejecta times its velocity is equal to the backblast mass (tiny) times its velocity (huge). Old Stingers had a limited range of about 8,000 feet of target altitude due to the requirement for superelevation of the launcher. New models (never given to Afghans) are direct fire and have a greater range. Its possible the warhead could be modified to reduce weight, giving a greater range.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 5:58:43 AM EDT
Good luck getting a Stinger up to airliner cruising altitude as well.
View Quote
Shoot at a plane as it's taking off and that isn't an issue. Also, who says that the Taliban/Al-Quaeda's only man-portable SAMs are Stingers? They might very well have a few factory-fresh Russian or Chinese missiles.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 6:06:05 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 6:29:36 AM EDT
When we screwed around with the stinger target box(fake stinger tube with a computer telling you if you hit your "THREAT" aircraft) we were told that anyone being a smart ass and locking on to a comercial aircraft(apparently they have a warring system) we would be subject to UCMJ.....we did it anyways...
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 6:47:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: Shoot at a plane as it's taking off and that isn't an issue. Also, who says that the Taliban/Al-Quaeda's only man-portable SAMs are Stingers? They might very well have a few factory-fresh Russian or Chinese missiles.
View Quote
A couple of points. As long as the gunner fires, the missile goes. IFF is irrelevant if the gunner doesn't use it. The effective range numbers are calculated for aircraft moving at certain speeds and with a certain ability to maneuver. Civilian aircraft don't make evasive maneuvers. What's most dangerous about the profile of civilian aircraft is the approach. In the case of LAX, aircraft landing in LA, turn right over whittier, well within stinger range. Although they are more heavily loaded with fuel on takeoff, at least the plane can climb out rather quickly compared to the leisurely approach altitudes. Finally, go to Janes or FAS.ORG and look at the effective altitudes of the newer missiles other than Stingers. Specifically, look at SA-14, SA-16 and MISTRAL. There are tons of them out there, and they have some good capabilities.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 10:47:44 AM EDT
Ardoc has it right I think. These missles are 10 years old at the youngest. Rocket motors and warheads, as well as batteries and stored coolant has a shelf life. Plus who knows how many they really used out of what we gave them. You also have to take into account how they were stored and handled. Like another said, I think there is a bigger threat with newer chicom, and soviet hardware. Hell, stingers were probably sold to them after the war to develop better ones for our "enemies". It would be nice if they could wire in a coded reciever into weapons we "give" out that we disable (Read: FRY) on command at the end of a conflict or whenever to keep them from falling into the wrong hands. I'm sure there is a way to incorperate it into the electronics that it an attempt was made to alter it it would cook it-self. BrenLover
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 2:32:00 PM EDT
The Stinger missile can fire at allied aircraft. The tone tells the gunner not to do so. Battery life is indefinite. Essentially some sort of contained gunpowder producing electrical power when triggered by the gunner. Lasts a few minutes then must be replaced. Redeye battery worked this way and I was told so does Stinger. Max range IIRC was 2K for Redeye. FWIW DFB (former Redeye team chief) and with the permission of the dickless POS DuhMan (AKA FecalDud) 11B4Q
Top Top