More commentary and perspective regarding the relative inefficiency of some American air to air missiles of the Cold War period, and even beyond.
In particular that AIM-4 Falcon again.
That AIM-4 as found to be ineffective by Colonel Robin Olds in Vietnam the AIM-4D? NOT worthy as a weapon for dogfighting aerial combat, mano-a-mano!
"The final version of the original Falcon was the GAR-2B (later AIM-4D), which entered service in 1963. This was intended as a fighter combat weapon, combining the lighter, smaller airframe of the earlier GAR-1/GAR-2 weapon with the improved IR seeker of the GAR-4A/AIM-4G."
INFRA-RED GUIDED BUT PECULIAR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MISSILE MAKING IT OF LIMITED USAGE! WARHEAD WITH EXPLOSIVE "STUFF" OF THE AIM-4 INADEQUATE FOR THE TASK TOO?
This comment by an acknowledged aviation authority;
"AIM-4 Falcon the combat record poor! Wasn't made for fighters, but for interceptors flying straight and level at targets--bombers--flying straight and level, too. But would the 'hand grenade' [the bang warhead stuff of the Falcon] have done enough damage to kill a big bomber? Not unless it flew up the tail pipe of a jet engine, and even then, one engine out might not bring a four engine (or more) bomber down."
Artist rendition from the Cold War period of AIM-4 Falcon in the air defense role blasting Soviet long-range bombers out of the sky with impunity. This is not how things would have been? Additionally those Soviet bombers do not correspond to any known warplane ever in the Soviet arsenal either deployed or as a prototype!!
And just keep saying to yourself, nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong!
coolbert.