BLACK SEA RIVET JOINT INCIDENT: A Narrow Escape But The Reality Of Air-To-Air Missile Performance

[@DeInHo77]

When talking about the relative effectiveness of missiles, I always remember a quip from a US aviator who was being interviewed on the show ‘Dogfights’, who said something to the effect of: “Always fire two missiles at your targets. They’re called MISSiles, not HIT-tiles!”

[@notapound]

I think it might have been the great Robin Olds… but whoever it was, it’s a brilliant quote!

[@ohredhk]

This was often considered a important reason for the low hit rate of sparrow missiles during Vietnam because the base number was increased significantly. If the first missile did not guided probably or lunched out side parameter, the second missile would be just the same and you just wasted 2 missiles. The idea was clearly just hoping by increasing the number of weapon you throw at the target you would get a higher change of hitting you target. For guided missile, it really makes no sense. US navy pilot was trained to fire a missile first, observe and then decide what to do next. The result rely heavily on how skillful the pilot. So USAF just teach their pilot to just fire 2 missile at a time to keep thing straight forward.

[@Jeffei-qs7kp]

And how was that quip received?

[@nickmitsialis]

@@notapound I just remember reading that quip in Marshal Michel's book 'Clashes': "Boys, they're not called HITtles".

[@nickmitsialis]

@@ohredhk again, per Marshall Michel's book, 'Clashes': USAF pilots during 'Linebacker' (before improved training via 'Red Flag') were instructed to toggle off all four of each type of missile, either the AIM7s or the AIM9s, due to the poor performance of said missiles. So, Michel observed USAF pilots had only two firing passes, while the 'Top Gun' trained USN pilots had 8 chances to fire (AND I'm not even going to talk about the Navy's "fighting pair" formation vs the USAF's '"Fluid Four" formation. )

[@WindrunnerWargamer]

Just imagine being the second pilot going "oh hey we're gonna do a routine fly-by to intimidate the NATO guys, just the usual, y'know?" and your flight commander decides it'd be a great time to start WW3. That guy must have been seething.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

Literally the story in the lyrics for "World War Three" by Dos Gringos.

[@zeitgeistx5239]

You don’t start WW3 by shooting down a Rivet Joint. Soviets shot one down before and no WW3. Israeli’s bombed a U.S. Navy intelligence ship and North Korea captured one and no WW3.

[@anonaustria9867]

@@zeitgeistx5239 A bunch of important people were shot and it didn't start WW1. But one of them did. Just because a similar event had no consequences before doesn't mean the next one won't either.

[@baka-shinji7124]

​@@zeitgeistx5239 The Soviets never shot a Rivet Joint down

[@ossian108]

​@@zeitgeistx5239USS Liberty incident was a friendly fire issue. Israel and USA were not enemies at that time. I have no idea why WW3 would start because of that.

[@IsaacKuo]

Another possible factor is a self selection effect - someone who has their head on straight isn't nearly as likely to err on the side of shooting in this sort of situation. So conversely, someone whose mental judgement is off may be more likely to make mistakes executing the missile attack.

[@felis_8906]

considering that it's a decently high altitude shot and there wouldn't be much to interfere, it's most def a missile and guidance error. It's an embarrassing show of ineptitude on russia's part to not be able to shoot down a slow moving massive target lol

[@Farweasel]

@@felis_8906 See Above - That assumes the real purpose WAS to shoot down the RAF's Rivet Joint. *It may have been a Dog & Pony show with dummy missile & old drainpipe for 'plausibility' as missile 2 in order to force ECM intel from the Rivet Joint* . Russia's AF may be 'unsavoury' (Cf Syria & Chechnya). BUT - They ain't totally stupid.

[@casematecardinal]

​@@felis_8906 moreso poor maintenance. Missiles are quite delicate so poor maintaince practices increases likelihood of failures this compounds as a missile ages.

[@cisarovnajosefina4525]

Corruption probably means the maintainer just did the bare minimum

[@LupinYonderboy]

They always work fine in DCS, this real life isn't very realistic. Needs a patch, two weeks ?

[@jedibusiness789]

My chuckle for the day.

[@hertzwave8001]

he just had high ping

[@LupinYonderboy]

Rivit had the lag shield of desync @@hertzwave8001

[@Scott11078]

That was another nice thing the Strike Fighters series had besides at times scary AI enemies and triple ace allies. The stock game the missiles had horrid reliability, it's something you could mod as well.

[@machloop5229]

@@hertzwave8001…one ping only Vasili 😊

[@jackzhang8677]

5:07 this is incorrect. The active radar variant, the EA, never entered service. Vympel offers the R-27P, a passive anti-radiation variant, but again, does not appear to be in active production. The R-27R also lacks a proper inertial navigation unit. It lacks accelerometers or the software to calculate the missile's position along its intended trajectory. Instead, it only had gyroscopes to keep it pointed in a certain direction, and isn't capable of lofting like later missiles with proper intertial navigation units. Also, no R-77 variant has a backup IR seeker.

[@Voicesonthewindadventures]

R-77T/RVV-TE is the infrared version of the R-77. Its production is yes debated but a infrared R-77 was designed.

[@jackzhang8677]

@@Voicesonthewindadventures I wouldn’t even say it’s designed. Absent any evidence to the contrary, the other seeker versions of the R-77 exist only as concept art.

[@devingraves8044]

Meanwhile in Warthunder if every missile doesnt hit the most insane shot possible it drives people crazy

[@huskergator9479]

Holy crap dude! You are cranking out the long, detailed, EXCELLENT content!!! And i do not use the E word lightly. Thank you so much!

[@pastorrich7436]

RC-135V/W is one of my favourite aircraft in service today. In my previous life, I was a systems engineer and provided support to Airseeker, Cobra Ball and Rivet Joint processing systems. As challenging as that job was, I look back on it with satisfaction. Content Idea: Speaking of technical systems, how about a study of the offensive radar systems used in the Korean War night fighters? The USN/USMC had the F3D, which, as much as it was built for air-to-air, the Marines used it in a limited fashion for air-to-ground. Old habits are hard to break even when you're flying a plane that was not a pound for ground. Excellent reporting and analysis. Always enjoyable! Thank you!!

[@poseidonswe]

Defensive systems The infrared countermeasures was not limited to flares, but directed energy from the AN/ALQ-157 system.[4] The aircraft has an AN/ALE-47 Countermeasures Dispenser System [CMDS], is a "smart" dispenser that connects directly to infrared and radar warning receivers, release expendable and towed/retrivable decoys, as well as helping the pilot with situational awareness of the threat.

[@SweetVids2010]

How are you not at 100k subs is a mystery to me another great video :)

[@notapound]

Thank you! That is very kind :)

[@Matt_The_Hugenot]

I was surprised it was the flight leader that went rogue, the kind of error you expect from a junior.

[@brianrmc1963]

Remember the mission of the Rivet Joint platform. It is VERY likely the crew was listening to the Russian crew’s communications. They knew exactly what radar modes each Flanker was in. Considering that circa-1990 U.S. fighters had deception repeaters, wouldn’t it be logical to assume a U.S. national asset has capabilities far more robust? I don’t know, so I am not talking out of school here, but I don’t think those AA-10s just “went stupid” on their own.

[@Twirlyhead]

Yes. The main postscript to this incident for Russia is them trying desperately to analyse exactly how their missiles were defeated (if indeed they were (probably)). For Russia this incident is ultimately a positive: they didn't start WW3 but they have some much needed intelligence; at the least they will know there is work to be done but possibly more specific intel will have been gathered. On the flip-side NATO may have revealed a capability. All that said, let's hope they get their loose cannons under control, can't end like this every time.

[@obsidianjane4413]

50-50% this vs. just Russian junk.

[@guaposneeze]

For what it's worth, if some sort of classified ECM/Jamming system was at play in why the missiles failed, that would be consistent with the US and UK not wanting to talk much about the incident. That said, assuming there was some ECM system at play, even the air crew can't be 100% sure if that's why the Russian missiles failed, or if the missiles failed for unrelated reasons. Russian gear is certainly capable of not working without any outside help.

[@obsidianjane4413]

@@guaposneeze Well there is also the larger geopolitics of not wanting the escalate into WWIII... Even if successful, this wouldn't have been a "Lusitania moment" but it would have been a step towards it.

[@brianrmc1963]

@@guaposneeze I can say for sure that Rivet Joint sucked up EVERY BIT of electronic data involved in the event.

[@StromBugSlayer]

Could you take a look at air to air missile warheads? In particular expanding (or continuous) rod warheads? And maybe some air to ground too, like the Hellfires specialized for assasination?

[@railgap]

There is still no info forthcoming about the R9X other than the after-action pictures everyone has already seen. I think most people would be interested in continuous rod warheads tho - that was an important development and very clever.

[@justforever96]

​@@railgapyeah I want to know about the continuous rod, blast frag, the ones that use the shrapnel concept to shoot ball bearings at the target, etc. I don't really think ultra rare, ultra specialized air-to ground missiles for taking out individuals with helicopters and drones really fall under the purview of a channel about air to air combat. And it doesn't fall under the category of warheads either since IIRC they intentionally don't use a warhead on it to minimize collateral damage, the whole point is to make it a self powered guided projectile to take out high value soft targets. Interesting I'm sure but made in very small numbers and not really a "combat weapon" per se. I wouldn't expect a channel about infantry weapon systems to do an episode about some small batch CIA assassination tool that they built like ten of.

[@FancyPantsOnFire]

The notion rivet joint has no ECM or EW to defeat threats is a bit silly. I’d put my money on the rivet joint having spoofed the missile

[@justforever96]

Yeah I don't see why they would invest that much in a very expensive jet full of high tech stuff and not give it at least a few ECM and EW pods. Those are designed to be carried by fighters, they would easily fit into a big jet like this. Although I'm also not sure why the US would try to hide that fact. Unless it was for exactly this reason, so when someone tries to shoot one down and fails you can pretend it was just their incompetence and nothing else. And maybe claiming it is "a defenseless reconnaissance plane" makes it easier to play the victim where if you admit it has stuff protection it seems more like a combat plane. As well as making you look worse if the attack succeeds anyway and your ECM pods didn't save you. But it would seem really dumb to not include those at all, it wouldn't increase the cost or hurt the performance more than slightly. I know they can't operate them without messing up the data collection, but that doesn't mean you can't keep the option available. Although maybe they just value the data collection over all else and they don't want the crews switching them on any time enemy fighters get close "just to be safe", preventing them from picking up the valuable data from the enemy jets because the interference from the pods, and they just gamble that always flying "in international airspace" will be enough to keep the crews safe. Assuming they actually do that.

[@coreyandnathanielchartier3749]

Absolutely agree. For this Boeing to leave the ground without any EW capability is not imaginable. My guess is , they saw these SU's long before the SU's saw them.

[@philipparana9225]

Rivetoints carry AN/ALE-39 countermeasure suites in us. Since the us maintains the British ones its likely they are equipped with similar or uograed versions.

[@notapound]

Interesting - thanks for that detail. The UK sources didn’t mention that but it did seem strange to me. Chances are that there are some countermeasures… but even so, it must have been a stressful couple of minutes for that crew

[@railgap]

Funny how almost no page or channel talks about the "hog cheeks". :) A very good friend of mine did a lot of the design/buildout work on 'RJ', and some other interesting aircraft.

[@cliffalcorn2423]

Another great job, keep it up.

[@earlthepearl3922]

Very well done! Really good insights. Thanks!,

[@ThePaulv12]

Yes but you forgot to mention the most important thing, the pilot has to be sober.

[@adamwinterton2512]

Bloody great video knackers! Interesting bit of insight!!

[@johnmoore8599]

The Russians shoot first and ask questions later. They shot down KAL 007 which was over Soviet airspace accidently due to a navigation error. The Russians committed a similar error by thinking the airliner was an RC-135. But, this was at night and there was a lot of confusion. The pilot was also ordered to shoot down the target. Why they tried to shoot down this RC-135 in international airspace can only be determined by asking that pilot. Since his wingman was asking him what the hell he was doing means they had no orders to fire on that aircraft. We were lucky the incident didn't get worse thankfully. As for missile performance, I knew they were bad in Vietnam, but not that bad.

[@tonyennis1787]

In 2023, I expect air-to-air missiles to work. I have no idea how the British aircraft survived.

[@Archer89201]

Missiles miss, AIM-9X missed a virtually point blank shot on a Su-22 from rear aspect over Syria in 2017 when the Syrians were bombing ISIL . The F/A-18 had to use an AMRAAM to finish the job. Unlike the Rivet Joint the Su-22 from 1970s lacks much of the electronic counter measures and sensors

[@16rumpole]

I had read something about the Xs being overrated.@@Archer89201

[@casematecardinal]

​@@Archer89201 to be fair its countermeasures were so old and poorly optimized that they created such a tremendously dirty ir burst that it blinded the 9x across the whole ir spectrum as it uses an ir camera, not a seeker and by the time it was able to see it lost the target.

[@casematecardinal]

You shouldn't even today they aren't extremely reliable. The only reason certain missiles are more reliable is due to different practices and some modifications learned through tough experience. Its why by the end of their service sparrows were so relatively reliable. Vietnam was not a kind place to them

[@cisarovnajosefina4525]

​​​@@Archer89201with newer missles its mostly an software issue not a hardware problem. Thats why patriot in Ukraine is giving america bilions worth of combat data when they ping and shoot Russian, North Korean and Iranian missles and drones. Testing in Americans to get this data would be either imposible or VERY expensive

[@Excal500]

R-27As were tested on MiG-29 tested aircraft in the late 80s, however the overall project was canned except as an export offering in favor of focusing on the R-77s development. R-27EA is as good as a vaporware.

[@Crissy_the_wonder]

Could you do a video please on British missiles like the Red Top and Firestreak?

[@losonsrenoster]

Who else noticed the wooden railings at 5:40?. In 2019 an East German university professor told me what it is about, but I forgot the details. I seem to remember some flexibility issue with the original railings.

[@Tokeamani]

That’s crazy. Ol’ TOPCAP02 was over my American Indian reservation July of that year. I still want to know what it was doing here, and why didn’t it pick up the police operating way outside of regs. Or maybe it did. There was an MC-130 launching and recovering drones here a couple years ago. They all died when it crashed in the southern US a couple weeks later. I just think it’s odd.

[@railgap]

Equipment checkout or research would be my guess. Perhaps the rez was thought to be a low-emitter area, although why they couldn't fly over, say, some Nevada desert that nobody uses much, I dunno. There are plenty of radio silent zones they could have overflown but I'll grant they aren't large. That's interesting.

[@VectorGhost]

Can you do a larger video on the r27 missile?

[@notapound]

That's a good idea. I have plenty of information from the Cold War era, so I will probably keep the video to the period until 1990. Also thinking about videos on the 'Aphid' and 'Alkali'

[@PosthumousAddress]

​@@notapound I love that you focus on the cold War and especially the earlier part. It really was a golden age, for example those crazy 1973 air wings compared to today's boring all-Hornet deck

[@hifinsword]

If the interpretation of the ground controller was in fact "THE TARGET", that argues for implying the pilot has clearance to shoot at a TARGET versus identifying a BOGEY, an unknown. A target is something to shoot at. A bogey would be something to identify. Linguist aboard the River Joint would either intercept that msg, or be given that from other sources. A CLEARANCE TO FIRE would be non-ambiguous if it was given. We will never know how much was clear to the RJ or the Russian pilot since it is all classified and unlikely to be unclassified in our lifetimes.

[@Manbemanbe]

Great video

[@dustinandrews3223]

I wish I were as confident as you that, had the missile hit its target, NATO would have actually responded.

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

Not WW3 bit they'd have been a measured response.

[@16rumpole]

there would have been strong statements but as usual the left wingers in NATO would have done nothing. What I am curious about is what would have happened if it was an AWACS that got hit. If it was Trump, he would have said that the next Russian fighter or bomber that would have entered US airspace even for a second, was going down. Obama would have said nothing like that.

[@engine4403]

Whats this party talk doing here? This isnt the first time NATO and Russian aircraft have engaged and it wont be the last. Nevermind the fact that when it happened during the Cold War, back when tensions were even worse several missiles and guns did hit with aircraft downed and people killed. What did the strong leaders of those times do about it? Scurry to the phone and assure eachother they werent at war. As Obama and Trump will do because theyre not into checking if M.A.D. works under pressure. Go back to shitty 2 party system and gender politics where you belong.

[@impguardwarhamer]

There is also the possibility that the missile simply wasn't in range. Missile effective ranges vary drastically depending on the relative vectors of the launching aircraft and the target. If we're presuming pilot error I would think this is a particularly high chance.

[@markcoveryourassets]

Thank you for this story. I didn’t recall the incident and am grateful to hear the details. With regards to Russian aviator skills, I read or heard something in the last year that said Russian combat pilots get very little practice flight time compared to European and US combat pilots. Sounds like they get very little time on the radios, too.

[@Slaktrax]

Ah! You swallow all the western propaganda too!

[@billballbuster7186]

Its like you were reading the brochure, Soviet / Russian hardware is seldom working as advertised as we have seen on many reports. This was like missing the proverbial Barn Door while standing next to it!

[@bdh985]

I don't think it's too far fetched to speculate that the Rivet Joint would have some electronic countermeasures / chaff and flares that could have helped the situation in their favor. Those things are national assets, not having several layers of countermeasures would be silly. However I do agree that missile construction, age, handling, and pilot error could have played a part. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if the second missile was fried by an EW capability.

[@richardwillson101]

I 100% believe this was down to countermeasures of various types and not "Russian junk". The aircraft was playing a very dangerous game in the middle of a conflict, there isn't a chance on earth that those crews were not always ready for a potential attack The first missile may have caught them by surprise and they reacted in time, but they will have been expecting the second!

[@theflyinggasmask]

@@richardwillson101 Highly doubt they have the technical ability to make the second missile just fall of the rails. I'm sure they defeated the first missile and the second one was likely just a Russian dud.

[@richardwillson101]

@@theflyinggasmask true, you can't make it "fall off the rails" but without being there, we won't know if that means the rocket motor didn't fire, or if it broke lock almost immediately and lost all guidance. There is certainly a chance it was a dud, or the pilot failed before the system was ready. Modern countermeasures are very effective against older weapon systems. Especially if deliberately tuned to meet specific threats where they are operating.

[@LeCharles07]

7:23 Idk why but I find the explosives placards on the cart obviously covered in A2A missiles quite hilarious.

[@justforever96]

Because anything with explosives needs to be marked. What if it was a cart of dummy munitions for training and firefighters wasted valuable time trying to keep them safe expecting them to blow up if the fire reached them, when they didn't actually have explosives on them? Or worse, the captain looks at a cart and thinks they look like training rounds so they ignore them. Only they are actually a new missile he's not familiar with and they get set off and kill a dozen firefighters, because it was not necessary to mark them as explosives "because anyone ought to know that".

[@martindice5424]

I am unclear - does Rivet Joint have ECM? I would be surprised if it doesn’t .

[@buffewo6386]

Active ECM is a bad idea for Rivet Joint missions. The aircraft is covered with tons of VERY sensitive antennas. (Combat Sent is worse by an ungodly amount. ) In short, think of it as listening for conversations at a party. If you are carrying around a speaker blasting music, will you do better or worse? If it had an IR seaker... those have other ways to be degraded. Without messing up the EM spectra where the RJs are listening. This is why I hated the fact that they pulled the tail-gun/gunner off the B-52. Give us at least some chance to protect ourselves while your other Fighter-Mafia buddies are going for another kill over there... This could have very easily started a major issue. The type that gets lots of people dead.

[@SweetVids2010]

Russian equipment is good on paper but the entire personnel structure aroud it is rotten. I worked with Russians alot and realy like the people, when they told me what the conscription was like i was shocked. My friend from Saint Petersburg severd with the national guard he was payed $30 a month showered once a week and slept in a room with 100 guys and in a year he shot once as a soldier and mostly was rented out to do construction work like clearing forrests. You treat people like shit then expect them to do thier job while the boss is also stealing you get this. Corruption is a trickle down economy that rots the military and when a guy is so fed up and doesnt care about his equipment he just steals for him self or doesnt work.

[@swenhtet2861]

We’re there any differences in the Soviets and Russians in terms of military power?

[@SweetVids2010]

@@swenhtet2861 Well Ukraine was the only place the could build and maintain big ships like the Kuznetsov what was built in mykolaiv. They lost a lot of talent and facilities at the fall of the union

[@cisarovnajosefina4525]

Grunts break everything now imagine that your pilots will also be draftees or pilots woth tiny amount of flight hours

[@cisarovnajosefina4525]

​@@SweetVids2010plus its also 30 years after the Soviet Union fell apart so the people that know how to make the systems are either dead of old age or long retired. As the soviet unions engineers and scientists were already pretty old

[@megalamanooblol]

@@cisarovnajosefina4525 Dont be an idiot, there is no such thing as conscript pilots. Every single pilot is officer, starting at lieutenant rank.

[@ndfgaming6824]

Idk why but made me think of that inccindent were during an training exercise a US f14 ahot down an RF-4 phantom

[@bearshrimp]

Another shining example of why I would love to share a pint with you! If you are ever in Seattle I would be happy to pay for a night of drinks to pick your brain. Right now you are my favorite aviation buff on KZbin.

[@JD-tn5lz]

These are the kind of messages that need to be drummed into the heads of aerospace engineers...as in "yes, Dummy, we also need a gun."

[@angeloftheabyss5265]

If you need a gun then you need a super maneuverable jet.

[@bobvila1444]

You mean kinda like a Flanker?

[@16rumpole]

the Flanker has a gun. This isn't Vietnam where they handicapped our pilots but not putting guns on early Phantoms

[@De_cool_dude]

​@@16rumpolethe Phantom wasnt handicapped by lack of gun, it was handicapped by restrictive and stupid ROE

[@naoakiooishi6823]

As I heard from the people related some of our P-2s had experienced similar affairs in the 70s and 80s

[@kennethhummel4409]

This kinda proves what an old artillery officer told me. The more expensive and sophisticated the weapon is, the more likely it is to misfire or just plain miss.

[@thelordofcringe]

All automatic weapons must instantly jam then since theyre so much more expensive and sophisticated than a flintlock

[@kennethhummel4409]

They do if you don’t handle them right. And mathematically the cost of a good firearm back then would cost almost as much as a good one today once you figure inflation and production costs. Even today a cheap replica musket from India will run you $800.00 dollars. cheap AR-15 clones will run $600.00 to $800.00 dollars @@thelordofcringe

[@thelordofcringe]

@@kennethhummel4409 nah, 500ish is pretty average for a cheap ar. Got one for only 300 recently lol. US gun prices are historically wacky.

[@kennethhummel4409]

So that makes the AR-15 cheaper than a musket if you adjust for wages and inflation .@@thelordofcringe

[@gansior4744]

Such a fudd comment. They don't, when they are serviced. In this case, they were Russian, so they weren't serviced

[@donparker1823]

Great episode! I was stationed at Riyadh AB in 2003 where we had a Wing of Rivet Joints. That's all I'll say about that. I had no idea the RAF flew these. The unprofessionalism of these Russian pilots is a bit scary. I wonder if they copied the Sparrow's guidance system like they did the Sidewinder? If so it's no wonder the missiles went dumb.

[@thiscouldntblowmore]

Soviets flew combat missions and engaged in a2a combat gaining a2a kills in both Eqypt and Afganistan... at least and there maybe some other cases too, Angola and Vietnam come to mind.

[@AlphaCentCom]

It seems strange the Rivet Joint didn't have any warning it was being locked up.

[@justforever96]

What's it going to do if it did have that warning? Pull Gs and break the tracking? It's a Boeing heavy jet.

[@tonyennis1787]

Are the craft at 1:29 MiG 29s?

[@majorborngusfluunduch8694]

No.

[@erictaylor5462]

The Su-27 is a 46 year old fighter design, yet it still serves as a front line fighter. Sure there are other more advanced fighters, but the Flanker is still good enough to be competitive in a fight. It is still a functioning weapons system, Assuming Russia is not the operation. The Su-27 is meant to go against 4th Gen fighters like the F-14 or the F-15. This generation is around 50 years old. Can you imaging the Sopwith Camel still being operated in the skies over Vietnam in 1966?

[@liberatumplox625]

It would probably do ok in a 1 circle.

[@16rumpole]

don't underestimate the Super Flankers though, they are amazingly good at dogfighting.

[@stug77]

It's wild this was last year. It feels like something you want to chock up to barely-tested Soviet interceptor shenanigans. Or maybe Iranian decades-expired equipment malfunctions. But it's 2023 *and* Russia is several years deep in a war. You would think something as basic as procedures to servicing an interception correctly would be old-hat. And that equipment wouldn't be to Iranian maintenance standards.

[@ryssa2409]

It didn't happen in real life

[@robertrolfingsmeyer4743]

Read: war was avoided with Russia because Russian equipment is crap. Holy cow what a close call. It’s such a shame that planes as gorgeous as the SU-27 are meant for death and destruction. I look at the F-15 and the Mig25/31 and they’re just stunning.

[@notapound]

It is incredible how close a call that was. Fortunate that the pilot decided to use the most complicated and failure prone weapon available to him in that moment.

[@richardwillson101]

😂 You believe that propaganda. You will probably find that it was the swift action of the rivet joint crew that prevented the first missile downing them and the readiness for the second. I fully believe those missiles were 100% serviceable and a viable threat. But I also believe that the Rivet Joint is more than equipped to handle them. After all. They have been flying around watching a war take place. The know the threats and how to handle them!

[@mylesleggette7520]

@@richardwillson101 Both things could easily be true. I find it interesting that event after the war has dragged on for years now, with example after example of how Russia's culture of corruption has hampered military readiness at every level you still think it is "believing propaganda" to think there is less than a 100% chance that extremely complex military hardware was not properly maintained and ready to perform to spec.

[@16rumpole]

India has a lot of Su-30s and they are just beautiful. Unlike, the Russians, however, the Indians are very skilled pilots. If you think I'm saying that look up Red Flag exercises US versus India. Also in the 60s when Iraq got it's first Mig -21s Saddam didn't hire Russians to teach his pilots. He hired Indians.

[@richardwillson101]

@@16rumpole that's because many Indian pilots were combat veterans... Who better to teach fighting than combat veterans? It's also why Indians have done so well at Red Flag, fighting US pilots who have never even flown into contested airspace, let alone seen an enemy.

[@Matt.Willoughby]

The Rivet Joint must have ECM, or some other defence

[@RCAvhstape]

The lack of professionalism shown by the Russian air crews says a ton. Not knowing or obeying the rules of engagement, screaming and cursing at each other over the radio like a bunch of teenagers playing an MMO video game, etc. All of that plus the quality control we've come to expect in Soviet/Russian high tech hardware.

[@ahsansariyadi29]

that is why US should provoke Russia into nuclear war even more !!

[@wubuck79]

Screaming and swearing in shock at your wingman, at least, is a normal reaction in this situation, not a lack of professionalism.

[@16rumpole]

it was the other way around, the video says that the wingman was the one screaming at this leader who was the one who launched the missiles.@@wubuck79

[@christosrigoutsos7068]

So the F-14 crews involved in the 1989 Gulf of Sidra incident were unprofessional?

[@Treblaine]

There is a selection gate where anyone stupid enough to try to start WW3 is unlikely to be smart enough to configure a missile launch properly.

[@justforever96]

But smart enough to actually fly a fighter jet in the first place. Sure, why not.

[@Treblaine]

@@justforever96 "Fly? Yes. Land? No."

[@Isgonesomewhere]

Didn't know about this. Woah.

[@stevewinegar6364]

I think it's highly unlikely that a strategic asset as important as an RJ wouldn't have any ECM systems or other countermeasures aboard.

[@justforever96]

It makes more sense when you realize they would be totally unable to use them without ruining their value as intel gathers. You can't emit and collect at the same time, even assuming the emitters don't actually damage your highly sensitive receptors. If they had to switch on an ECM any time a potential hostile got close, they couldnt gather any data from the fighters at close range, which is usually a great opportunity, and all the Russians would have to do is send out a jet to shadow them any time they show up and they would be unable to carry out their mission. You can't just switch the ECM pod on when you see him making a missile attack, that's not how it works.

[@LilSebastian_]

The RAF Rivet Joint jammed the missiles.... that's what happened to the missiles. If they were able to listen in on the Russians secured radio channels the idea that they can jam the missiles seems plausible.

[@ViscountAlbany]

you can't just 'jam' a missile which doesn't have active radar homing, that's the whole point. The missile is not transmitting any signal. If the RC135 was sending out signals to detect radar the missile would have homed in on it, in fact I'd say a major reason for missing was that the pilot had fired the missiles without locking-on to the target, which from beyond visual (and therefore also IR) range would leave the missile's guidance system without any point of reference

[@LilSebastian_]

@@ViscountAlbany You can jam/render useless any electrical device... any. I have a Flipper zero and it will render any electrical device useless and/or give me control of it. It happens in seconds, not minutes, not hours. I bought it on Amazon, what do you think the military doesn't have something better? "iPhone security warning issued over Flipper Zero attack that renders your iPhone useless" If it can do it to a phone you does it seem absurd to you to be able to do it to a missile? Maybe next time, slugger.

[@ViscountAlbany]

@@LilSebastian_ are you insane? A flipper zero (funnily enough a Russian invention) is a tool which interacts using short range comms networks such as bluetooth and NFC. It is not capable of "jamming any electrical device" only those emitting a wireless signal. The entire video is predicated on the Su-27 using semi active homing missiles which DO NOT transmit their own signal. Why is this so hard to understand?

[@doggy2601]

@@LilSebastian_ this is an old comment but no you cant just "jam" those things as the launcher has to guide them in anyway and the su 27s radar can work well in ecm environments and they were close enough that they could burn through any jamming the fact you compare a flipper fucking 0 to a million dollar aircraft baffles me its not even the same thing

[@LilSebastian_]

@@doggy2601 Yes... yes you can just jam a missile. Any object that relies on electronics can in fact, be jammed with EW. You're a moron deluxe and did a fantastic job proving it. Congratulations.

[@cirian75]

Would have been a straight up article 5

[@AdamosDad]

"Just because technology is improving doesn't mean our humanity is." ~John Lovell (Warrior poet)

[@avrolancaster6987]

Luckily Rivet Joint is not as easy mark at all. Carries the absolute top of the line defensive systems.... and was no doubt able to spoof pretty much any missile BUT likely wouldn't have been pumping those electrons out... as we aren't actually at war 😂

[@FinFunnel68]

Me thinking the title of the video was about maintenance mishaps….

[@coreyandnathanielchartier3749]

Any chance the Russians were just spoofing the Boeing to test it's EW capability? Perhaps they mistook it for a civilian airliner, that would explain why they opened fire without determining it's mission or intent.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

Great video which firing a Fox-1 atleast with US craft is less about hitting the right sequence of switches which should have been hit already and more about irading the target and having and sustaining a lock... Something the report you read did not mention.

[@16rumpole]

do you mean irradiating?

[@AugustusLarch]

The Rivet Joint unit likely compromised the missiles electronically as soon as they were in range.

[@0MoTheG]

Semi active radar homing missiles are notoriously bad. They can be jammed by blinding, saturating the receivers or sending AM noise.

[@bradenhagen7977]

No. 2 probably lost a few years in stress, thanks to his flight lead.

[@godfree2canada]

But what is the real range, delta speed, 50-100% chance of hit? So many variables

[@MrLeewsee]

It is unconscionable that western nations would not escort an asset like this, even in international waters! To think that your enemy will follow the rules, leaving your soldiers unprotected, is irresponsible. In short, the planners and those giving approval for this mission should have been court-martialed.

[@hellbreaksloose5536]

RC-135s have an endurance of 11 hours without refueling and escort planes have a max 2 hours.

[@MrDino1953]

Considering what was at stake, that RC135 should have been escorted even if it meant replacing the escorts in shifts every 2 hours.

[@ShortArmOfGod]

There wasn't much at stake. Firing on the aircraft couple be perceived as an act of war, there was no reason to assume such an action would take place.

[@dubsy1026]

I reckon all airliners should be escorted too, plus if you have to drive anywhere there should a soldier to make sure you're safe

[@MrArgus11111]

I don't think you understand everything associated with what you're proposing. Also, the Russians would probably take even greater exception to armed NATO aircraft in that area and the situation could have been much worse. There is a time and place for what you are proposing. It is neither the time nor the place.

[@68orangecrate26]

I’m thinking those Alamos were license built by Boeing…🤔

[@downunderrob]

The RAF use the RC-135?

[@lostcat9lives322]

"It's just not real until you see it on the Telly".

[@daciandraco6462]

Given that we've only got one side of the story, how do we know we're not being lied to? I know, the British MoD would never lie to its people, but we're very quick to take uncoroborated information for fact.

[@wubuck79]

I assume the first part of the second sentence in your comment is sarcasm, and I chuckled.

[@daciandraco6462]

@@wubuck79 Would Mr Wallace lie to an entire nation? Nnnnaaaaaaah

[@AirForceBuilder]

You're giving a lot of long ranges on these missiles. There's a big difference between a missile's range where it can fly away and fall out of the sky, and the range where it can fly and be effective at intercepting a target. I'm not going to throw out numbers, but the effective combat ranges of the Archer or any model of the Alamo isn't anywhere close to what you've said.

[@Boric78]

Admiral Josh Painter : "This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it." Hunt for Red October 1990.............

[@justacomment1657]

I do have a question about the dos and donts in international airspace. what if a tu160 would release a weapon in such an airspace? would you be allowed to intercept the bomber if you would suspect it is armed with long range weapons and moving at say mach 1.4? I personally think it's very dangerous to keep poking an enemy close to collapse for the crew of those EW Aircraft... launching a dumb missle is one thing... but they guy could also have gone for the gun... 30mm Rounds are no fun...

[@ivancho5854]

A brilliant video. I wonder if the pilot was awarded a medal or stationed in the Siberian Arctic? A very close call indeed for everyone. Slava Ukraine. 🇺🇦🇬🇧

[@jefclark]

judging by how russia has acted to soldiers who have accomplished nothing but retreating from Bucha and committing war crimes - he'll get a medal. (like those war criminals)

[@jamiegivens]

With this in mind, about how unreliable missiles are, it’s amazing the kill rate achieved by Sea Harriers in 1982 in the Falklands, with much older tech missiles. I wonder what the launch/kill ratio was there. I know they downed 20+ Argentine planes. Thoughts?

[@rags417]

I know that the AMRAAM has a Pk of around 77% with almost every kill against an obsolete or non maneuvering target (inlcluding a US helicopter !). I think that no matter how high tech the missile actual Pks in actual combat will never exceed 50%, especially against a target that values its own life than the mission success.

[@Twirlyhead]

​@@rags417What's that got to do with the Sea Harriers in the Falklands.

[@mattfgln]

Aim-9L was a very very good missile

[@rags417]

@@Twirlyhead OP was wondering what the Pk was for AIM-9Ls in the Falklands War, I pointed out that it probably wasn't greater than 50% since almost every missile ever made has a less than 50% kill rate vs a maneuvering target, AMRAAMs included and they are for some reason taken to be the gold standard in AAMs

[@Twirlyhead]

@@rags417 And there was I thinking you mistakenly thought the Sea Harriers were equipped with AMRAAMs in the Falklands in 1982 when they only were equipped with them from the 1990s FA2 version which also had the vastly improved Blue Vixen radar and the AMRAAM itself being only available from 1991. Altogether much more capable than the Sea Harriers of 1982. Just shows how wrong I can be, thanks for explaining to me.

[@andresgarcia7757]

In the 80s su-27 if you break lock to the target, the r-27 would not guide. It could be that the first one the pilot simply broke lock. Another explanation is that the target had countermeasures and jamming on, making the missile loose lock. The second one simple dropping might be explained by hardware failure; heck even the first missile failure could have been hardware failure. So far the only Russian missile that I have seen used successfully has been the r-73.

[@hemendraravi4787]

most of the flankers used outside of ukraine were equipped with r27s , if his wing man was screaming at him right after he fired its possible that he dropped his radar lock , its a semi active radar guided missile and its the only benefit it has over a fox 3 missile , you can cancel lock any time and make the missile disengage the target. as for the 2nd missile launch ? where are the sources for this ? how did the bbc know that the missile just dropped dead ? , i highly doubt the crew from the rc-135 were able to see the missile , even if they detected 2 launches they wont know if the missile dropped dead or not , unless the flankers were flying side by side , then they probably just fired those missiles in front of the rc-135 like warning shots to scare them off , none of this adds up and there isnt a lot of proof/good sources. but then again r27r is nearly 40+ years old by this point , i wont be surprised if it malfunctioned.

[@Taczy2023]

Russia and NATO wouldn't go to war over a single shootdown. Occurrences like this have happened several times in the past.

[@avrolancaster6987]

Ethiopia V Eritrea were likely mercenary pilots too... Russian V Russian... or Ukrainian (likely even back then)... or some other mix of flyers that were rated on Soviet export types.

[@grasstreefarmer]

I may be mistaken but as far as I know an R27 is a rail launched missile. Meaning for it to leave the aircraft it has to have its rocket motor ignite. Most older missiles work like this. For a missile to just drop off an aircraft would imply its a more modern type like an R77. The R77 is more like the American AMRAAM in that it drops off the pylon before its motor is ignited. Just looking at pictures from other times Russian jets have shadowed and harrassed US planes they always seem to have R77's on board. Comparing the effectiveness of cold war and earlier missiles to modern missiles is a mistake. Modern missiles are far more effective than older types. No doubt the Rivet Joint has effective electronic warfare capability and can deal with an incoming missile, especially at longer ranges.

[@productNine]

I'm pretty sure R-27 can do both rail or ejector. I've seen them centerline on Flankers in pictures. To that point, though, unless I'm somehow mistaken a missile cannot just fall off a rail. More likely it was ejected and the motor didn't ignite, or if it was on a rail the motor ignited only briefly. Just guessing, though. So many things can go wrong in such complex systems.

[@thetir0]

WHAT!

[@M60A3]

As they say in dcs: dont shoot down awacs or you will be banned

[@yawningkitty457]

The U.S navy did a hard study into why so many sparrow missiles fired were duds, they found that in some cases missiles loaded onto a Phantom might well stay on the aircraft for weeks without being needed, weeks of daily carrier take offs, high manuvering followed by a carrier landing had turned nearly every missile tested into a dud. I think that may have been what happened to the missiles on the SU27, they were left on the rails for lord knows how many months or possibly even years, add to that, the average Russian pilot gets only a handfull of actual flight hours per year, their landings are probably going to be a little on the rough side due to lack of actual practice.

[@16rumpole]

Missiles, aside, do not underestimate the Flanker series. In the mid 2000s the US and India had military exercises. India won over 80%of simulated dogfights. India has a ton of Su-30s and Mig 29s. Luckily, Russia has crappy pilot training and inferior weapon systems.

[@notapound]

Thanks for the comment. I've gathered a lot of early 90s material on the Cold War Flanker and am planning a video. Listening to F-15 pilot interviews, you can see that it changed the game in a way that the MiG-29 didn't. I'm planning to try and look into whether it would have been enough to gain air superiority in a European war in the '80's.

[@lllordllloyd]

It's a shame their SAMs work well against civilian Malaysian Air Lines flights.

[@Farweasel]

HANG ON RAF crews may have been trusting / gullible enough to fly the lethally lousy Nimrod BUT Do you *really* think they're so gormless they would climb into a Rivet Joint - which has all the stealth, agility and fleetness of foot of an airliner - and amble into range of potentially hostile forces if it *doesn't* carry ECM? Be beggerd (typo) if I would ! Would You?

[@notapound]

Yeah, I think that's a fair statement. I don't have any information about what sort of ECM they might have. The Sword/ Alamo combination is supposed to be able to work in an ECM environment but it is 40 year old technology now. Maybe one day we'll find out!

[@Orbital_Inclination]

This is precisely what they did do, as the MoD didn't think Russian forces would be stupid enough to directly engage the aircraft of a nation they're not at war with. RJ crew wear "Flanker Bait" patches on their arm for a reason, because they know they'd be the first thing to get hit if Russia suddenly changed its mind. Following this incident, they now fly with escorts. It was incredible luck that no lives were lost that day.

[@threestars7561]

Or the pilot could have reconsidered his decision and cancelled the track.

[@notapound]

I did think about that, but he would have had to do it twice. And the flight time at that range was about 10-15 seconds from trigger pull. Most indecisive Russian pilot?

[@simon199418]

Let's routinely fly our expensive reconnaissance assets right next to the border of our biggest most powerful adversary. Gets intercepted: Surprised Pikachu face.

[@davidrobertson5700]

Missiles do usually use solder, or the kind you are thinking of. Sorry national secret. Signed a guy feom Great Britain

[@marshalljulie3676]

So the second pilot saved the spy plane by throwing a fit 😂😂

[@TheShorterboy]

well it's also an E-war plane so magic maybe

[@majorborngusfluunduch8694]

Its not an Electronic Warfare plane. Its a surveillance plane. Hence why its called "RC-135" and not "EC-135" (Thats the E-3 btw).

[@enscroggs]

The myrmidons of AI ought to watch this video and re-think their expectations.

[@sasha022]

Russian fighter pilots are obviously poorly trained. Recently there was an article in Novaya Gazeta about a pilot who accidentaly fired live rounds instead of simulated ones during a training dogfight, shooting down other two guys in Su-30SM. He was piloting a Su-35S, which is given only to the best of the best pilots. This happened on 22 Sep 2020, the pilot shooting down his colleagues is major Saveliev. Saveliev by the time of accident was 34 years old and was a flight commander. That said, easy calculations tell us that he had around 17 years of service provided that he became a cadet at 17 (typical age). And in this time he only flew 904 hours, including only 100 on the Su-35S. Imagine what level of training do lieutenants and captains have, if this is a major.

[@jaws666]

Why did it fail?....because its Russian build quality (both missile and aircraft).🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@SweetVids2010]

Russian can make good stuff but then they dont maintain or look after it. The corruption is insane and trickles down to the guys maintaining these things dont give a shit because there boss treats them like slaves and steals too

[@jaws666]

@@SweetVids2010 and thats my piont...for example even the poorest of countries can buy modern fighters but buying them is only the start...no piont buying them if you cant afford to maintain, fuel,arm or fly them

[@pjotrtje0NL]

@@jaws666I believe that recently, some African country stopped second hand Su-27* deliveries because the aircraft were junk, mainly due to poor maintenance. * = or derivatives, I can’t remember

[@jaws666]

@@pjotrtje0NL exactly again my piont...its all good and well having them on the airbase sitting there looking impresive but looks can be deceptive...if they are junk ,as you say,then its piontless having them

[@StudSupreme]

Why is it frightening? Consider: when the soviets were supporting North Korea during the war by flying sorties for them, US F-86 Sabres attacked a Soviet air base just north of the border. And it was NO ACCIDENT. The result? Russia stopped overtly flying sorties over NK. They kept sending pilots to NK but made every effort to hide that and to this day don't admit that their pilots were flying for the NK air force during the war. It's just a matter of time before the Russians attack some NATO asset close to the Ukraine war zone. They'll claim it was a mistake and apologize profusely, but will insist that NATO keep all their assets far away from the front. And NATO will comply.

[@billscott1601]

You should compared missile use of the Israeli Air Force for accuracy.

[@Tjecktjeck]

Interesting historical point, but there's somenthing that doesn't add up. If we look at modern or even relatively modern SAM missiles, their hit probability against non-evasive targets is ~90%. Therefore moden air-to-air missiles should be more or less on par. I tend to belive this incident was a dud. Russians ain't that crazy to shot down NATO craft in international space.

[@Ostenjager]

“Arab airforces trained by Soviet pilots took a dim view of their instructors” I never knew that, and I think it is telling. As someone who has attended (and given) hundreds of hours of military instruction, I can tell you that students will know when they have good, competent instructors who are SMAs in their area of instruction, and when they have some yutz on their hands who is “winging” it or has no clue. I would not discount or dismiss arab pilots coming from military cultures developed from tough lessons dished out to them by skilled Israeli pilots fighting with very good equipment.

[@erictaylor5462]

6:45 How can it miss? It's Russian.

[@railgap]

This happens all the time tho. It is Rivet Joint's _mission_.

[@InsufficientGravitas]

One suggestion ive seen for the second missile is that it was aborted mid launch, but i'm not even sure thats possible and don't know how you'd find out.

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

And the world lucked-out of WWIII _again._