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
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/14/2017 7:14:39 PM EDT
Just wondering what was fielded back then. I want to say ive seen pics of ANVIS being used but cant recall. What likely tubes do you think were being used back then?
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 8:09:46 PM EDT
PVS 7B, PVS 5, PVS 4, PEQ huge as shit and about worthless, a few others I don't remember.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 8:16:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/14/2017 8:19:02 PM EDT by Augee]
Dates are based on the dates that the corresponding NSNs were established, not specific fielding dates, but it should give you a general sense of periodization. Either way, during the time period you mentioned, depending on unit and personnel, you would have seen ANVIS, PVS-7s, and PVS-14s most commonly.

AN/PVS-5 ~ 1971
AN/AVS-6 / 9 (ANVIS) ~ 1982
AN/PVS-7 ~ 1985
AN/PVS-14 ~ 1996
AN/PVS-17 ~ 2000
AN/PVS-23 ~ 2003
AN/PVS-15 ~ 2005

~Augee
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 8:25:06 PM EDT
The Mum-14 was used around that era also... This is why it was never issued a NSN. 
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 8:35:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Augee:
Dates are based on the dates that the corresponding NSNs were established, not specific fielding dates, but it should give you a general sense of periodization. Either way, during the time period you mentioned, depending on unit and personnel, you would have seen ANVIS, PVS-7s, and PVS-14s most commonly.

AN/PVS-5 ~ 1971
AN/AVS-6 / 9 (ANVIS) ~ 1982
AN/PVS-7 ~ 1985
AN/PVS-14 ~ 1996
AN/PVS-17 ~ 2000
AN/PVS-23 ~ 2003
AN/PVS-15 ~ 2005

~Augee
View Quote


Pretty optimistic on those early dated units. Mostly protoypes or for testing purposes for those.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 8:42:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/14/2017 8:43:41 PM EDT by Harlikwin]
Originally Posted By BravoSierra:
Just wondering what was fielded back then. I want to say ive seen pics of ANVIS being used but cant recall. What likely tubes do you think were being used back then?
View Quote


Pvs7s, anvis, probably omni3 or 4/5 tubes. Pvs 14s with omni4/5 tubes as well.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 10:09:49 PM EDT
Believe it or not the PVS-15 was around as early as 2001. I've seen a picture of one in use overseas in a 2002 picture.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 10:45:39 PM EDT
Didnt think the -14 came on to the scene until 03 or so. I think in Dalton Fury's book he had several pics of his dudes wearing ANVIS. Would make sense that JSOC may have had -15 prototypes to test out as well. State of the art then was omniIV-V's it looks like.

Early thermal back then?
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 10:47:17 PM EDT
Thanks Augee, that more or less is what i was after.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 10:48:41 PM EDT
I was thinking F5050's were a recent iteration. Hmmmm thats interesting.
Link Posted: 3/14/2017 11:18:35 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cj7hawk:
The Mum-14 was used around that era also... This is why it was never issued a NSN. 
View Quote


Link Posted: 3/14/2017 11:34:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/14/2017 11:39:32 PM EDT by Augee]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:
Pretty optimistic on those early dated units. Mostly protoypes or for testing purposes for those.
View Quote


Those dates were pulled based on NSN establishment date alone, and are approximate, and as I mentioned, were given for a general idea of when certain pieces of technology would have entered the formal supply pipeline with their designations.

Since the beginning of the Global War on Terror and changes in the development and procurement system, a lot of the processes by which items begin to see operational use have been necessarily truncated, with developmental items sometimes seeing combat use before a formal designations and/or NSNs can even be applied.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure which dates you have issues with--AARs from the Son Tay raid in 1970 indicate that military aviators were experimenting with the operational use of night vision goggles for "special operations"-type activities as far back as then.

Moreover, from a document entitled "A Performance History of AN/PVS-5 and ANVIS Image Intensification Systems in U.S. Army Aviation (Reprint)," dated May 1998 (PDF will automatically download):

"In 1973, the Department of the Army adopted night vision devices for use in aviation. Known as the AN/PVS-5 night vision goggle (NVG), these devices...have become a mainstay for the aviator's capability to operate during periods of low illumination, i.e., at night" (264).

"Since 1973, several models of the basic AN/PVS-5 NVG have been fielded:...While all the models differ in one or more ways, they all use the 2 nd generation tubes" (265).

"For the purposes of completeness, two additional head mounted infantry versions of NVG will be mentioned. The first is the AN/PVS-7 series NVG which has replaced the AN/PVS-5 for ground use. The AN/PVS-7 is a biocular [sic]... The second to be fielded in the near future is the AN/PVS-14(MNVD)," [emphasis added (266).

"Although first operational tests were in 1982, it was not until 1989 that 3 rd generation tubes began to make their appearance. They were the foundation of a new night vision I2 system which was designed specifically for aviation. This system is the AN/AVS-6 Aviator's Night Vision Imaging System (ANVIS)" (ibid).

- 160th SOAR was founded in 1981, and it seems reasonable to believe that they would have participated in operational testing of prototype ANVIS/Gen. 3 devices.

"The first major contract for ANVIS, awarded in 1982 (Omnibus I), called for a delivery of 1366 [sic] units. By the end of 1990 with Omnibus II, over 16,000 ANVIS had been delivered or were under contract. As of December 1996 after Omnibus III, approximately 17,500 ANVIS have been fielded" (269).

"The primary Air Force priority in I2 development is a wide field of view panoramic NVG for fighter aircraft that will fit under the visor and provide safe ejection without prior removal...a FOV of approximately 40 by 100 degrees has been demonstrated in a prototype that weight no more than the present ANVIS" (291).


Another good reference re: early use of Gen. II and Gen. III NVGs, dated March 1989:

Night Vision Goggles (AN/PVS-7)--Performance Issues and Answers


The general timeframes as indicated by the establishment date of the NSNs seemed "close enough" in a rough sense, particularly since they fell outside of the scope of the period that the OP was initially asking about, with an implied focus on ground usage.

WRT to the OP's question about ground-use of ANVIS--it didn't take very long for organizations like Delta Force to adopt the ANVIS for ground operations, and by the time of Operation Gothic Serpent (Somalia - 1993), it was relatively commonplace:


(Kyle Lamb)


PVS-23 (F5050) "prototypes" were allegedly made in the commo shop by splicing ANVIS systems together with the battery compartment/switches from the PVS-7, their use of dual tube Gen. III goggles predates the introduction of the PVS-14 by a very wide margin.

SOCOM proper took relatively longer to adopt dual google systems, though repurposed ANVIS are still used by some folks to this day, while PVS-23s and PVS-15s are on their way "out" in favor of the PVS-31, though, as with any fielding and replacement process, the transition is not, and likely never will be 100% complete before something else "new" begins to be fielded.

~Augee
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 12:11:43 AM EDT
Mind blown. Love this stuff. And Mr Lamb looks so young.
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 3:01:51 PM EDT
I have found this thread to be interesting but I am wondering why you were curious about this specific time period.
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 3:29:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/15/2017 3:30:47 PM EDT by TNVC]
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 3:44:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 5:43:48 PM EDT
Augee,

Yeah I've read all that stuff, my only point was that while the PVS-5 was available in the early 70's (73 per the report not 71) and believe it or not the original specs were established in 64-65 IIRC). Those early models were mainly T&E versions and not fielded in any great numbers. Also, pre-SOCOM era SF did not get much in the way of "nice-new" gear, I have team room photos from the late 70's with comm gear from the 50's still in use (Yay GRC-109's). (and from everything I've been able to find the son-tay raiders used the PAS-5 NOT PVS-5).

I'd generally estimate the PVS-5 as entering limited service in the mid/late 70's (beyond a few units using the for T&E) and still fairly uncommon up to the late 80's. There were a ton of problems using the early PVS-5's for aviation use early on as well, which led to the development of the improved PVS-5's and eventually the ANVIS as those articles point out.

ANVIS and PVS-7's I'd say very late 80's early 90's for actual use on those beyond T&E. I've seen a fair amount of PVS-7 tubes living and dead and the earliest IIRC were 88-89 dated, but nothing earlier. And I've never seen a 80's dated 10160 style tube either, lots of early 90's ones though. And yeah I think the SOCOM guys figured out the whole ANVIS for ground use thing pretty early on as your pic shows, then again its not that hard to figure out if you look through a set of ANVIS vs a PVS5 or 7 which one you want to use.

I think both the GWOT and the overall maturation of the technology is what has increased the speed of adoption these days. In the early days the manufacturers had to ramp up production and overcome alot of early production problems that were largely been ironed out by the 80's. These days you have standardized tubes, and most of the innovation is coming in housing and lens systems.
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 5:44:38 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe:
It's always surprising to me how old I2 tech actually is and how long our guys have been using it.

I'm trying to find a date, but even "new" tech like the AN/AVS-10 has been around for a while.
View Quote


There were quads for aviatiors in trials at least in the late 90's.
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 8:46:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SOT_Solutions:
I have found this thread to be interesting but I am wondering why you were curious about this specific time period.
View Quote


I'm a military guy. And while I can never say I was a warrior poet, I can say sack full of useless information. That, and my wife is an author and constantly asking me about various periods and technology used.

Also, we have some pretty smart cookies here. And I'd like to think this forum is much more about what expensive piece of equipment were all buying next. I like the deep discussions and it would seem the relative timeline of the devices was lacking. I've seen the hall of fame for the NV innovators online. Absolutely fascinating..
Link Posted: 3/15/2017 8:49:47 PM EDT
Harlykwin, "Also, pre-SOCOM era SF did not get much in the way of "nice-new" gear, I have team room photos from the late 70's with comm gear from the 50's still in use (Yay GRC-109's)."

My unit in 2005 had GrC's. We also had MJC's. That doesn't mean we used them, just that I got stuck with inventorying them and the TA handsets.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 7:49:04 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BravoSierra:
Harlykwin, "Also, pre-SOCOM era SF did not get much in the way of "nice-new" gear, I have team room photos from the late 70's with comm gear from the 50's still in use (Yay GRC-109's)."

My unit in 2005 had GrC's. We also had MJC's. That doesn't mean we used them, just that I got stuck with inventorying them and the TA handsets.
View Quote


They were used, I assure you. Which GRC were you using in 05?

GRC-109 for reference.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 10:26:31 AM EDT
-109's. And we had A PRC-64. There were other radios, im not sure what they were. All were in pristine condition. Again we didnt use them, just had them in inventory, and I had to go to storage every year and drag it all out. We were going from -94 Vans to the TDC in '04. And had PSC-5's, -113's, -138's, and several -158's used daily more or less. Pretty sure i prefered the simplicity of -77's, but these things were absolutely trick.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 11:44:12 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:


There were quads for aviatiors in trials at least in the late 90's.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe:
It's always surprising to me how old I2 tech actually is and how long our guys have been using it.

I'm trying to find a date, but even "new" tech like the AN/AVS-10 has been around for a while.


There were quads for aviatiors in trials at least in the late 90's.
so what was the outcome of those trials? nothing happened, too much $$$$, no interest, to heavy?
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 1:07:07 PM EDT
I didn't see the Simrad clip on night vision device mentioned yet (KN203 and KN253 series). They seemed to have been in use from the 1980s to early 2000s as both second and third gen systems.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 3:44:06 PM EDT
Did not even think of simrad..
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 5:23:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BravoSierra:
-109's. And we had A PRC-64. There were other radios, im not sure what they were. All were in pristine condition. Again we didnt use them, just had them in inventory, and I had to go to storage every year and drag it all out. We were going from -94 Vans to the TDC in '04. And had PSC-5's, -113's, -138's, and several -158's used daily more or less. Pretty sure i prefered the simplicity of -77's, but these things were absolutely trick.
View Quote
I'm impressed that the 109 is still even in the inventory, I know a bunch were overhauled in the 80's at tobyhanna but a great many were also surplussed in the 90's. They were in still active use in the 70's along with the 74's and 64's. Does anyone still know how to use CW in the army? The 109 was designed in ~1948....
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 5:24:00 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mrf2:
I didn't see the Simrad clip on night vision device mentioned yet (KN203 and KN253 series). They seemed to have been in use from the 1980s to early 2000s as both second and third gen systems.
View Quote
Yup, they were in service in that time frame.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 5:28:35 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By sardo_67:


so what was the outcome of those trials? nothing happened, too much $$, no interest, to heavy?
View Quote
I honestly don't know. I know the AN/AVS-10 was a product at one point, but per L3 its discontinued. Maybe they have something cooler now or it didn't work out for some reason (G limits, Ejection safety etc). For some reason I also "thought" they used the new 16mm tube format or at least thats what I recall having heard about a decade back.

Here is glamour shot of Ed with one on a ground helmet mount...

Link Posted: 3/16/2017 5:48:51 PM EDT
Perhaps they already have a dual tube wide FOV type setup?
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 5:57:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 6:05:54 PM EDT
We used anpvs-4's back in the early 80s.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 7:13:33 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:

I honestly don't know. I know the AN/AVS-10 was a product at one point, but per L3 its discontinued. Maybe they have something cooler now or it didn't work out for some reason (G limits, Ejection safety etc). For some reason I also "thought" they used the new 16mm tube format or at least thats what I recall having heard about a decade back.

http://www.wilcoxeng-res.com/EdANVIS10sms.jpg
View Quote
Not sure on the tube diameter, but some patents at least seem to show some odd tubes that aren't completely potted. Guess the 31 uses the same stuff.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 8:10:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2017 8:11:38 PM EDT by BravoSierra]
Anvis vs PNVG circa 2000?

Kind of interesting if you havnt seen this previously. Also has a download and goes into it with more detail.
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 8:57:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe:

AVS-10 was hardened and became the GPNVG as I understand, making the 10s a reduntant product line.
View Quote
So aviators are using them? I find that difficult to believe...
Link Posted: 3/16/2017 9:50:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2017 9:51:43 PM EDT by crazy_raccoon]
Random, but I know Hollywood tends to get things wrong a lot but I do remember seeing SF guys at the very beginning of Air Force One using either a PVS-14, MUM-14 or some other similar monocular. That movie was released in 1997. Here's a YouTube link to check out for yourselves.

[youtube]07TdF-Ngl8Y[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07TdF-Ngl8Y
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 5:49:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2017 5:51:51 AM EDT by murtis]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By crazy_raccoon:
Random, but I know Hollywood tends to get things wrong a lot but I do remember seeing SF guys at the very beginning of Air Force One using either a PVS-14, MUM-14 or some other similar monocular. That movie was released in 1997. Here's a YouTube link to check out for yourselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07TdF-Ngl8Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07TdF-Ngl8Y
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By crazy_raccoon:
Random, but I know Hollywood tends to get things wrong a lot but I do remember seeing SF guys at the very beginning of Air Force One using either a PVS-14, MUM-14 or some other similar monocular. That movie was released in 1997. Here's a YouTube link to check out for yourselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07TdF-Ngl8Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07TdF-Ngl8Y
Looks like some version of 18 to me though that's a bit odd given the time the movie was made

Originally Posted By Harlikwin:


So aviators are using them? I find that difficult to believe...
Perhaps rotary wing use? No quick bailing out of those unless you fly a Ruskie thing. Haven't seen much footage of AVS-10 in use, are they even used anymore?
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 8:10:43 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By murtis:

Looks like some version of 18 to me though that's a bit odd given the time the movie was made


Perhaps rotary wing use? No quick bailing out of those unless you fly a Ruskie thing. Haven't seen much footage of AVS-10 in use, are they even used anymore?
View Quote
Yeah maybe, usually its the weight that is the issue, pull 6G's and all of sudden those few hundred grams are a now few kilograms pulling on your head, so neck injuries etc. is the main concern. There are good reasons ANVIS were as lightweight and balanced as they are. And while I've never used the GPNVG I imagine its heavy with 4 tubes/glass etc.
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 12:01:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 6:13:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/17/2017 6:14:52 PM EDT by Harlikwin]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TNVC_Sam:
Use of NVG's in Aircraft is still quite limited in terms of the missions tactical aircraft can accomplish, For Example Rhino guys don't go out and dogfight in Goggles like they do during the daylight hours, you've got to be able to swivel your head and maintain eyes on fast moving objects during various ACM stages of flight. Eventually it will be integrated into the Flight Helmets glare sheild along with a HUD and other overlays like Thermal and SWIR no doubt, and once they achieve this it wont be long until the SOF community comes calling for a ruggedized ground system.

Helo guys dont pull G's like Fixed wing Tactical aircraft do, nor do they have the closure rates. A 40 deg FOV in a knife fight aint where I want to be, that said BVR missile engagements are still possible and with NODs on you might get some early detection of missile launch plumes from SAM's or Air to Air missles at some pretty good distance. Kind of like a poor mans IRST system only with IR light not thermal.

Back in 2006 some Iraqi A-hole shot at me with an SA-7 or SA-18 over Diwaniya in Central Iraq and I was under ANVIS-6's and spotted the launch almost immediately and I was at FL200, I was able to warn my crew to take evasive action well in advance and we easily avoided the missile as it tracked straight up but over 300 yards off our Port wing and continued up to probably 25000 ft where it detonated safely away from us. Thank God because I knew I had to make it home to post up on arfcom later that day.
View Quote
Man's gotta have priorities.


I was mainly thinking fast movers for air applications, and G load is one of the various things discussed for that. So, you seem to be in the position to answer the question if the pano night vision is being used by helo aircrews. Sounds like the answer was no in 06, any idea about today?
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 7:50:28 PM EDT
PVS-15, PVS-18, to some extent the lighter non-divable PVS-23 (aka 5050) used by NavSpecWar that period.
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 8:01:44 PM EDT
I recall seeing an article about PNVG's in use with several squadrons of F-16CJ's and A-10's. Ive been looking to post it here but cant find it. May have been on an AF website or sent to me on a .mil adress. They were evaluating them in combat. Want to say this was 2010ish. In a nutshell the feedback was that the pilots didnt like the akwardness of them, loved the field of view, and yes, the weight was uncomfortable on long sorties.
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 8:03:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DanoTii:
PVS-15, PVS-18, to some extent the lighter non-divable PVS-23 (aka 5050) used by NavSpecWar that period.
View Quote
Thanks!
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 8:50:10 PM EDT
I never even knew what a PVS-18 was until they stopped making MuM's several years ago. I thought it was just the replacement or product improved version of the MUM.
Link Posted: 3/17/2017 9:10:11 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BravoSierra:
I recall seeing an article about PNVG's in use with several squadrons of F-16CJ's and A-10's. Ive been looking to post it here but cant find it. May have been on an AF website or sent to me on a .mil adress. They were evaluating them in combat. Want to say this was 2010ish. In a nutshell the feedback was that the pilots didnt like the akwardness of them, loved the field of view, and yes, the weight was uncomfortable on long sorties.
View Quote
Sounds like not much changed from the initial trials then http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA400120

Didn't know this but looks like the initial solution for fixed wing was to have the goggles come up with you during ejection.
Link Posted: 3/18/2017 1:23:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/18/2017 1:23:42 PM EDT by firemedic2000]
Use to drive a gun jeep with ir headlights wearing pvs 5 we also had a ir laser that was was about the size of a small can of pineapple juice. It was round in shape. Early 80s
Link Posted: 3/19/2017 3:10:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/19/2017 3:11:39 PM EDT by Augee]
To my knowledge--and that's very limited, I'm not an aviation guy, and definitely not a fixed wing guy, so again, my knowledge in this area is not extensive:

But my understanding has been that like Ground PNVGs, the AN/AVS-10 was generally a special-purpose item because of limitations that have already been brought up, never a "total replacement" for AN/AVS-9s. That being said, to my limited knowledge, they're still in use, they may be discontinued per L3 in and that they're not producing any more of them, but like the RULR, it doesn't mean they're not still being used operationally. IIRC, by listing them as "discontinued," they buy themselves some time and money if they get another contract, since they need to spool up production again, but again, we're rapidly moving into territory beyond my depth.

The time period BravoSierra initially asked about is already, IMHO, relatively far into the maturation of the use of NV for ground combat, a head mounted ANVIS or PVS-14 and an AN/PEQ-2 is still nothing to scoff at even today, and would have been used during that time, as we've already covered, with mostly incremental advances in ground-hardened goggles. Obviously advances like panos, fusion, thermal devices and clip-ons have advanced in some leaps and bounds since then, but in terms of the "basic toolkit" for ground combat, "top of the line" in '99 is still pretty damn good today.

As many of the documents posted here have already attested to, many of the big advances have been primarily directed towards aviation usage, but the evolution and use of NV technology for ground-focused combat and special operations is definitely fascinating, and is potentially even more interesting because of the fact that much of the early stuff is adapted technology designed for aviation use.

It's also interesting looking back now, to a time when L3/Insight didn't have such a strangle-hold on military VAS equipment, hahaha.

The early '90s adaptations are, for a variety of reasons, especially interesting to me, with low-altitude aerial interdiction being done by snipers wearing AVS-6s with Israeli AIM-1s, and custom built QD adapters made to attach either a SIMRAD or AIM-1 laser to Leupold M3A scopes rings--there were definitely some interesting solutions for early devices pre-1913 rails, too.

While hard to see clearly, these gentlemen appear to be using Colt R0723 M16A2 Carbines with the AN/PAQ-4C and the old barrel/FSB mount:










Early versions of the AN/PAQ-4 (NSN established early 1981, with early manuals also published later on that year) were also significantly different in appearance than the know well known Charlie version (there were also, A and B variants), that has to some extent defined the "look" of most modern U.S. IR aiming lasers (flat, box-like form factory mounted to the top rail with an offset emitter), and may be the "beer can"-like laser that @firemedic2000 describes, though there are other potential options that it could have been:









TM-11-5855-261-10


~Augee
Link Posted: 3/20/2017 7:21:35 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:
So aviators are using them? I find that difficult to believe...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe:

AVS-10 was hardened and became the GPNVG as I understand, making the 10s a reduntant product line.
So aviators are using them? I find that difficult to believe...
the air guard Pavehawks in the 106 on long island are using quad tube NODS on their birds, I have a buddy there and he said they've had them for a few years now. not sure which version they have or any detail specs on them. i'll ask if all 4 crew have them or just the pilots, or even the PJs too.
Link Posted: 3/20/2017 8:07:09 AM EDT
Nice Writeup Augee,

One minor nitpick, the PAQ-4B is basically the same thing as the C version, except the laser blinks, you have pics of PAQ-4A.
Link Posted: 3/20/2017 9:00:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2017 9:00:56 AM EDT by lilMAC25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TNVC_Sam:
Use of NVG's in Aircraft is still quite limited in terms of the missions tactical aircraft can accomplish, For Example Rhino guys don't go out and dogfight in Goggles like they do during the daylight hours, you've got to be able to swivel your head and maintain eyes on fast moving objects during various ACM stages of flight. Eventually it will be integrated into the Flight Helmets glare sheild along with a HUD and other overlays like Thermal and SWIR no doubt, and once they achieve this it wont be long until the SOF community comes calling for a ruggedized ground system.

Helo guys dont pull G's like Fixed wing Tactical aircraft do, nor do they have the closure rates. A 40 deg FOV in a knife fight aint where I want to be, that said BVR missile engagements are still possible and with NODs on you might get some early detection of missile launch plumes from SAM's or Air to Air missles at some pretty good distance. Kind of like a poor mans IRST system only with IR light not thermal.

Back in 2006 some Iraqi A-hole shot at me with an SA-7 or SA-18 over Diwaniya in Central Iraq and I was under ANVIS-6's and spotted the launch almost immediately and I was at FL200, I was able to warn my crew to take evasive action well in advance and we easily avoided the missile as it tracked straight up but over 300 yards off our Port wing and continued up to probably 25000 ft where it detonated safely away from us. Thank God because I knew I had to make it home to post up on arfcom later that day.
View Quote




Glad you guys made it back safe.
Link Posted: 3/20/2017 3:08:46 PM EDT
Great, now i want a PAQ-4A.....
Link Posted: 3/20/2017 3:46:33 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Harlikwin:
Nice Writeup Augee,

One minor nitpick, the PAQ-4B is basically the same thing as the C version, except the laser blinks, you have pics of PAQ-4A.
View Quote
Yes, the A is an "early version," but the "C" is the ubiquitous version that everyone imagines/knows about when you mention "PAQ-4." I was simply pointing out that early variants were different from what most now consider to be the "type specimen" of the PAQ-4 series.

Thanks for the clarification--my posts always seem to end up a lot longer than I originally intend them to be, and I start taking shortcuts when they get longer.

~Augee
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top