dark light
Airliner World
Combat Aircraft
AeroPlane
Flypast
Airforces
Aviation
Pcpilot
Air

sealordlawrence

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 5,730 total)
1 2 3 … 49 50 51 … 380 381 382
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 20, 2008 at 10:06 pm in reply to: A-A kill over Ossetia? (Su-27 vs Su-25) #2454256
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    What fail! Hahaha . . . video evidence of Flankers. . . yeah right!

    :D:D

    I didn’t know CAP ran at 150M altitude, as flex mentioned. :rolleyes:

    Video evidence is perfectly plausible.

    October 20, 2008 at 7:41 am in reply to: A-A kill over Ossetia? (Su-27 vs Su-25) #2454724
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Their mistake number one was a naieve belief that US would actually care about Georgia when it gets hot.. Why should they?

    If they were not grossly incompetent they would not have needed the US.

    October 20, 2008 at 12:12 am in reply to: A-A kill over Ossetia? (Su-27 vs Su-25) #2454812
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    The Georgians made so many mistakes it is unreal, having an air force was mistake number one………of many.

    October 19, 2008 at 7:40 pm in reply to: CVF #2065582
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Well you could present a good case for it meaning either, after all VLS, additional stores space and larger hospital that they wanted has to go somewhere.

    I have not seen a single source stating that the external hull imensions would have differed.

    October 19, 2008 at 7:37 pm in reply to: A-A kill over Ossetia? (Su-27 vs Su-25) #2455050
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Oh come on!!!

    Be reasonable. How unbelievable is it that FLANKERs were deployed to the theatre? Why must such a claim be backed up with photographic evidence? What are you after exactly, a photo of a FLANKER flying nap-of-the-earth with a sign saying “South Ossetia” in the background. Please.

    Hardly an absurd request, we have plenty of images of Su-25’s in action. Secondly I see little point in the deployment of Flankers given the poor state of the Georgian Air Force.

    October 19, 2008 at 4:46 pm in reply to: A-A kill over Ossetia? (Su-27 vs Su-25) #2455125
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Just for the clueless:

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw081808p2.xml&headline=Georgian%20Military%20Folds%20Under%20Russian%20Attack

    because that settles the debate, I assumed that you had photographic or video evidence.:rolleyes:

    October 18, 2008 at 11:34 am in reply to: CVF #2065834
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Most of the material I’ve read on the PA2 suggests it would of been 75,000 tonnes, which suggests it would of been larger and therefore have more space.

    PA2 was to be more extensively equipped, not neccesarily larger.

    October 18, 2008 at 1:01 am in reply to: CVF #2065866
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Something that intrigues me. As far as I am aware the French maintained fantasies of giving PA2 the same defensive armament as the CdG, that would be 32 Sylver cells. Did this ever get reflected in the CVF design, ie is their space available?:confused:

    October 18, 2008 at 12:08 am in reply to: CVF #2065880
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Three or four, according to Mr Beedall, i.e. an additional one or two.

    Damn I missed that!:o

    An interesting side note, although entirely academic and really utterly pointless, is that the BMT F5 design specifies 3 MT-30’s providing nearly the same propulsive power as a CVF.

    October 17, 2008 at 10:59 pm in reply to: CVF #2065898
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    You could add pods under the hull to boost drive power and there is room for more MT30s…

    This is all about running a STORL (rolling landing) carrier as cheaply as possible within a tight build budget. That’s where the cutting edge is, on the budget.;)

    How much room is there for MT-30’s? I mean how many?:confused:

    October 17, 2008 at 10:58 pm in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread #2065900
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Yeah right. 😀

    Got mathematical evidence / situational-realistic for that non-sense?

    Count the VLS cells on an AB.

    October 17, 2008 at 8:01 pm in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread #2065947
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Yeah, which is only potentially 210 more missiles to deal with. :rolleyes:

    Couple fleets worth of scrap there.

    So yes, the US Navy would care. You wouldn’t, but no one really cares what you think anyway.

    Only one destroyers worth of ESSM and SM-6, nothing to cause any concern.

    October 17, 2008 at 7:31 pm in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread #2065949
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Who cares?

    If this thread was 4 years down the line, would you ask? I didn’t think so.

    Brahmos or Yakhont, they are being slated for service as we speak.

    We all care, for that matter how many will be in service in four years time? The answer is 70 in a best case scenario by 2015.

    October 17, 2008 at 7:30 pm in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread #2065963
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Yeah but with the important difference that the Su-34 is totally immune to missiles:eek:

    What? Please tell me that comment was just a bad joke?

    October 17, 2008 at 7:29 pm in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion Thread #2065967
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    You clearly don’t know a thing about Russian weaponry.

    The Su-34 is also in full scale production now. It also happens to be able to carry some massive anti-ship weapons like the Yakhont and Moskit.

    The Su-25 is the “A-10”

    The Su-24 is a tactical bomber, not an CAS aircraft!

    How many Su-34’s, Yakhonts and Kh-41’s are actually in service?:rolleyes:

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 5,730 total)
1 2 3 … 49 50 51 … 380 381 382