When they were hearing the BEEP BEEP BEEEEEEEEEP from missile lock, what options does the A-50 have at that point?

When they were hearing the BEEP BEEP BEEEEEEEEEP from missile lock, what options does the A-50 have at that point? Can it maybe fricking zig zag or perform a dive while breaking right to make the missile fail the angle of attack?

What other options does it have?
>Increase speed to full and outrun the missile
>Discharge drop tanks and self destruct. The blast may distract the missiles
>Eject all cargo from cargo hold to create a chaff debris field
>Shoot down the missile with the rear tail guns
>Use ECM suite to jam the missile and make it fricking miss

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It was dropping flares.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Get a radar lock
      >Deploy flares

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        usually countermeasures are deployed in pairs with flares and chaff at the same time, but you can't see chaff from any appreciable distance.
        not that it's going to do a lot of good when your airplane is the size of an apartment building.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Piss or shit yourself.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    jump out with a parachute before the wings fall off and you get pinned to the walls by g-forces

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not much frankly. An airframe of that size with all the external fairings and antennae on it is not going to have any sort of maneuverability approaching a fighter.

    So pretty much they're limited to what you described, they can drop flares, hope they can jam whatever inbound is on them.

    These types of platforms are designed to operate either in relatively safe skies or at the minimum fighter escort. If folks are taking shots at it, they've already fricked up.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >. If folks are taking shots at it, they've already fricked up.

      assuming russian ECM is shit and they were in the why-the-frick-are-you-that-close range where they can't just turn to put the missile on their 6 and leave before it gets there, their best bet would have been going below the missile's minimum operational altitude at the range they were at and mashing the chaff/flare button(i assume it's combined dispensing tied to one button because why the frick else would they deploy flares against something that is almost certainly a radar-based threat), but idk what the minimum operational altitude would be and i doubt they fully did at the time either. i also don't know if what missile they had fired at them had systems to counter this avoidance technique or if it even had a minimum operational altitude because my ass isn't that knowledgeable about SAM systems honestly, even when sober

      >why-the-frick-are-you-that-close

      I know that Russians have proven us time and time again how fricking moronic they are, but I still cant comprehend how they keep leaving such a strategic asset undefended time, and time again.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If it's Ukraine somehow shooting you from 200-300km away? Descend and run, praying all the while that the missile runs out of energy before it reaches you. If it's your own FAS riddled countrymen shooting at you? Nothing.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      why would you descend? don't you want to the missile to waste energy coming up to altitude
      though i guess you're fooked either way

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Air is denser at lower altitudes. Denser air means more drag.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          neat, thanks

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Missiles also love going upwards a lot more than planes do.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Unless you're an SR-72 then your aircraft cares a lot more about a little altitude gain than any missile does.
        Descending will increase your speed as well as well as force the missile into a tighter turn, potentially losing lock.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        SAMs including S-200 are usually semi active radar homing. A targeting radar needs to light the target for the duration of the missile's flight. At distance of 220 km the plane will be below horizon if it can dive below 10 000 ft or so.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    assuming russian ECM is shit and they were in the why-the-frick-are-you-that-close range where they can't just turn to put the missile on their 6 and leave before it gets there, their best bet would have been going below the missile's minimum operational altitude at the range they were at and mashing the chaff/flare button(i assume it's combined dispensing tied to one button because why the frick else would they deploy flares against something that is almost certainly a radar-based threat), but idk what the minimum operational altitude would be and i doubt they fully did at the time either. i also don't know if what missile they had fired at them had systems to counter this avoidance technique or if it even had a minimum operational altitude because my ass isn't that knowledgeable about SAM systems honestly, even when sober

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >(i assume it's combined dispensing tied to one button because why the frick else would they deploy flares against something that is almost certainly a radar-based threat
      I believe this indeed is the case in russian planes.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      characteristics of an A-50:
      big - massive radar signature that can be picked up at longer ranges than the typical fighter
      slow - almost any SAM or AAM will be at least twice as fast as an A-50 and probably a lot more than that
      manuverability - imagine a bus with wings, it's not going to be able to out-turn a missile
      chaff - an A-50 isn't fast enough to move out of a radar or missile's field of view while the chaff is dense enough to decoy the missile, chaff disperses with time
      flares - useless against radar guided missiles or modern multi-spectral imaging IR seekers
      ECM - might be useful *if* you have it equipped, and you use it early enough after detection/launch

      In short, the best way for an A-50 to avoid getting shot down by SAMS is not to go near them in the first place.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >the best way for an A-50 to avoid getting shot down by SAMS is not to go near them in the first place.
        "Don't be there" is the first layer of all the survivability onions

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You're fricked. pray for a technical failure in the weapon being fired at you, you're probably just going to be written off with the airframe, i doubt theyd let you bail out before it gets hit and you may not survive getting hit.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    so they got hit by a radar seeking s200, can't you just turn the radar off? pls no bully

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      There's still the leftover radar after they turn it off.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        that's not real is it

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >that's not real is it
          its as real as the fact that drinking soda makes you see faster

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The A-50 was too sexy.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >radar seeking s200
      it's not radar seeking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-active_radar_homing
      it's passive radar

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not many options really, that's why it had the fricking escort in the shape of SU-34(I think) so it would shoot down any missiles that are flying at it
    Now what the frick its escort was doing I have no clue considering that even according to Russian media it was shot down by their own AA unless by that they man that its own escort accidentally shot it down

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This c**t didn't have to die crying and afraid if his compatriots had merely stayed inside Russia

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is Ukraine’s sad attempt to create a positive media environment after their monstrous defeats lately. Tell your handler in London it didn’t work.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Ahm actually it's working with me.
      Combined with the fact russia is at 1.200.000 Kia Mia wia, I am very confident russia will collapse before Ukraine loses will to fight.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      One damaged / maybe destroyed Abrams = "monstrous defeats". Get a grip Ragnesh. No one's buying that.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine shitting in your flightsuit as the range callouts get closer and closer, until impact, and dying in a fire while the wreckage spins at 7g, and as you die in a soiled flightsuit you've never shat in an indoor toilet in your home while shitposting on /k/

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    legally after referendums my wiener is occupying your mom

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I recognize your wiener's ancient claim to anon's mom

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    speed to full and outrun the missile
    drop tanks and self destruct. The blast may distract the missiles
    all cargo from cargo hold to create a chaff debris field
    down the missile with the rear tail guns
    >>Use ECM suite to jam the missile and make it fricking miss
    Is this some moronic slide thread?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Is this some moronic slide thread?
      No, this is

      [...]

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >turn off RADAR
    >dump chaff and flares harder than I dump after Taco Bell destroys my insides
    >dive, hopefully in the direction of friendly air control assets
    That's literally it. All they can do. And it won't be enough.
    These things are not supposed to be shot at.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Do you understand how S200 works? Do you know that in order to launch the s200 they had to bring it up to the very front line, to Black person-rig a full concrete launch pad for it (in order for the 30 feet long missle that weighs 5 tons not to tilt the launcher under its weight), not to mention how straight up moronic that would be considering how much highly explsoive fuel is in that missile.

    Not to mention that such missile would travel 250-300km, the A50 would have all the time in the world to spot it.

    The A50 was shot by americans with far more modern and harder to detect missile in an attempt to escalate the situation. Russians know full well what actually happened, they are just not responding to bait.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Getting your most valuable plane shot out of the sky is just bait.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        russia can just build more (they can't)

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          They are, technically, building newer and better A-100's
          In the same way they are building Armatas that is

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the A50 would have all the time in the world to spot it.
      so what moron?
      >Black person-rig a full concrete launch pad
      or just use a road you moron

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >have a frickhuge missile launcher sit down in the middle of a road where everyone has drones filming and automated arty

        Good luck convincing ANY missile crew to do that.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Maybe Ukrainians aren't worthless cowards like Russians?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >where everyone has drones filming and automated arty
          are you moronic?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >or just use a road you moron
        Road? Unknown technology блять

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Mad cuz outskilled by phat boomer missile.
      Git good scrub.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the A50 would have all the time in the world to spot it.
      so what moron?
      >Black person-rig a full concrete launch pad
      or just use a road you moron

      Americans used lasers. Probably from a satellite.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >he A50 would have all the time in the world to spot it.
      It's going mach 3.6, and it's comparatively small
      >had to bring it up to the very front line
      Not necessarily. After swapping vacuum tubes and transformers of the old flight computer to modern electronics, this missile would be at least 100kg lighter, meaning more range

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >vacuum tubes and transformers
        Daam, I was joking, but then
        >Пoлyaктивнaя гoлoвкa caмoнaвeдeния pacпoлoжeнa в гoлoвнoй чacти paкeты пoд paдиoпpoзpaчным oбтeкaтeлeм (PПO) и включaeт в ceбя пapaбoличecкyю aнтeннy диaмeтpoм oкoлo 600 мм и лaмпoвый aнaлoгoвый вычиcлитeльный блoк
        It fricking really is using vacuum tubes

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Tubes are not uncommon today because they are EMP resistant.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            that's not why they use them. it's because they struggled to make integrated circuits, which are not difficult to harden against EM interference.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >struggled
              it was 1964, man. Everyone was using tubes

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                then they weren't using them for EMP resistance. That's my point.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            tubes are extremely uncommon with the exception of RF power components like TWTs, there are ways to filter out EMP pulses including the effects of nuclear explosions

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >It fricking really is using vacuum tubes
          At least you have free heating in the cabin

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        technically 5+ mach, it only drops to 3 when the engines are done doing their thing

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Also for other numbers, Mach 5 is around 1.7 km/s. So it'd go 220km in about two minutes. Yeah the A50 might be able to see it coming but for a big slow aircraft that's really not much time to try to hit the deck or whatever.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If it is a new system being tested it would be worse than it being an S200 for russia

            If it was a new system they would already leak it to the public because that's how you sell weapons. And which is why I believe that it was shot down by a western-operated system, be it jet or whatever else. Now we can debate if it was sanctioned by americans or not, who knows really but it was definitely an attempt to bait Russians into heavier retaliation that would get NATO to deploy soldiers to Ukraine.

            Russians are incompetent tacticians in the field but not incompetent strategists.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              You're a fricking moron dude. What are you taking about? This entire war, as conceived, has been the biggest fricking blunder for the Russian Federation since it's foundation. Russian strategists completely fricked it during the opening week of the war.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >has been the biggest fricking blunder for the Russian Federation since it's foundation
                anon those c**ts gifted communism to the world - but this is definitely top 3

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It was founded after the communist USSR failed. And Marx and Engels were Germans.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                My apologies, I didn't parse the "Federation" part of your post, so at this point yes, I think you're right. As for the two German c**ts you mention, the USSR still spread the cancer they created.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >If it was a new system they would already leak it to the public because that's how you sell weapons
              Yeah, members of the public are the ones purchasing 50 foot long anti air weapon systems

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              > to bait Russians into heavier retaliation that would get NATO to deploy soldiers to Ukraine.
              you are a moron

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              NATO is never deploying troops to Ukraine. Only vatniks believe it would happen. The only thing NATO would ever do is a first strike to disable Russian nuclear capability. Their questionable claims of a massive nuclear arsenal are and always have been the only reason NATO didn't shut Russia the frick up decades ago.

              Put a real NATO force in Ukraine and Russia gets stomped so hard that they have no choice but to nook. Anti-air assets are gone in 24 hours. All RuAF aircraft are grounded or dead within one hour. All Russian artillery assets are deleted within a week. Look at that situation and tell me they don't consider it an "existential threat".

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >If it was a new system they would already leak it to the public because that's how you sell weapons

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              That's the dimmest take I've heard yet about this war !

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >shot by americans with far more modern and harder to detect missile

      This didn't happen. But it should have.

      .t burger

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >>Spot it from afar

      Plenty of systems around that fill the air with radar noise at the frontlines are full of crap flying around adding to the mess. A50 was flying in fixed pattern over and over so they just needed to ping it once and get it's speed to fire the missiles. Than fill the air fith radar noise till it got very close and than drop the noise and illuminate the target again for the final part of the missile flight.

      If it is a new system being tested it would be worse than it being an S200 for russia

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russian cope is that it was targeted by a Ukrainian S-200 but Russian air defence shot down the Ukrainian missile before it hit the A-50. However, the Russians then preceded to shoot down the A-50 with a second missile that had been launched in their bid to tag the S-200

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why is it so acceptable in their culture to be complete morons rather than just admitting you got got? It's insane to me that Moskva smoke break looks better to them than getting hit with a missile.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        "winning" is entirely subject to the culture you come from
        in the west a victory comes from defeating your opponent to the point they cannot make demands or concessions of you.
        in china a victory comes from arguing louder than your opponent, ironically all about trying to save face.
        in russia a victory comes from not backing down from any perceived challenge, no matter how much you lose in the process. if you back down you lose automatically

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          So in the West you actually get something tangible and real for your hard work and struggle. In China you get to feel smug. And in Russia you get to have a dick in your ass but feel good that you didn't back down.
          I wonder why the West runs the world...

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        They had years of propaganda showing on the TV every day as a rural nation of peasants, the dissonance is too great (then they say they are the same people too)

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because in their culture everything is about strength and dominating others. Therefore, saying you are stronger than the enemy, albeit moronic enough to shoot down your own AWACS, is preferable to the enemy beating you.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just checked S-200 on Wikipedia and according to operational history it successfully shoots down only Russian planes. So anyone saying that it couldn't do it is just seething

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >implying their RWR works as intended and/or hasn't simply been turned off to stop the constant alerts every time their own air defense lights them up with FCR.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    @61027680
    Concern trolling

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    low effort, low iq posts like that deserve the jannie.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Dump chaff like you're trying to coat the ground with it, turn hard, and shut down the radar. Pray that the engineers overdesigned your plane to take a hit.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      shouldnt a plane that size have a really powerful radar jammer? and at 200km distance to the targeting radar a jammer should actually have a chance.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        To be fair, knowing Russian engineering, it'd probably be built so that the jammer jams its own radar, and you have to turn both on at once.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Practically speaking, the radar it'self could be a jammer. It's already an antenna capable of massive radar outputs. However, an AWACs is slow enough that fighters can get in close where the jamming loses effectiveness.

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Didn’t some milblogger b***h that it was a friend-fire incident? Ukies tried to shoot a S-200 at it, and Russian ground AD engaged it with two missiles — the first missile struck the approaching S-200 but the second missile’s friend-or-foe system failed and homed in on the A-50. It’s possible, but that would still requirement a S-200 to get ridiculously close to the front and there’s no way they wouldn’t see a tracking radar blasting out, certainly not some old Soviet-era boombox, and the A-50 should have been able to turn around and book it at the edge of engagement range. Secondly, how did the friend-or-foe fail, Russia has had that forever, both older Soviet systems and newer ones; these things are simple transponders with simple signaling it’s not like it’s doing something crazy advanced science fiction, it shouldn’t just be failing like that. Of course it’s Russia and anything can happen I supposed but still it’s not really convincing.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Ukies tried to shoot a S-200 at it, and Russian ground AD engaged it with two missiles — the first missile struck the approaching S-200 but the second missile’s friend-or-foe system failed and homed in on the A-50.
      >It’s possible
      it sounds moronic

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      That narrative they're now trying sounds like so much cope that they can export it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I still say the Friendly Fire narrative makes the Russians look even worse than losing one to the Ukies.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        This, its like goalie doing own goal from a easy to catch kick from across the field. Embarrassing and the other team still scores.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        This, its like goalie doing own goal from a easy to catch kick from across the field. Embarrassing and the other team still scores.

        In the eyes of vatniks it's better to humiliate yourself than to acknowledge your enemy is competent

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why are they like this

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          And to any other audience it makes you look like the most incompetent fighting force.
          I’ve seen Chinese, Indians, Africans, all state that friendly fire is worse because it should be seen as a double loss, you wasted a missile to kill a member of your own force. Not even Thirdies eat this cope.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why are they like this

          I think it's more the individual commanders trying to save themselves. If your AA shoots down a friendly plane, you blame US space lasers. If your pilots get hit with enemy missiles, you blame the AA. Combine that with a reflex to always lie about everything, and it adds up to a really schizophrenic narrative.

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BBC POCCNN

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also, S-200 isn’t really mobile. It’s a major project to move them and set them up, not something you can just poke into someplace, take a pot shot and scoot. So if it’s a S-200 it’s a heavily modified system,, ie, putting the missile into a heavy-duty carrier truck rigged into a TEL with tracking illumination provided by something else remotely, ie, a Patriot battery radar set.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Realistically how could you bail out of this thing and live

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *