dark light

Scar

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 615 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2132112
    Scar
    Participant

    DIRCM?

    I thought that was part of the EOT System :confused:

    These balls are KS101-O – DIRCM.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2132364
    Scar
    Participant

    In the Russian sistem design bureau (now NAPO)…

    NAPO isn’t a design bureau – it’s a Novosibirsk Aviation Production Plant.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2133065
    Scar
    Participant

    [/U][/B]

    Where did you get this?

    I posted a screenshot with official specs datasheet.

    Do you seriously think RusMoD would replace Granit with Onyx if the latter did not have the increased parameter(s) to address the reason why Granit needed a successor?

    No need to speculate if you know the history and objectives of the Onyx program. Onyx is utilizing completely different philosophy than Granit – it was supposed to be a much more compact ASM able to be fitted on the very different platforms, be it a light attack-boat or cruiser or SSGN. Furthermore, in practice there was a huge problem with providing the initial targeting designation for large ASMs as Granit or Vulcan/Bazalt on their full range.

    Effective range is one of the most important of parameters when discussing AShMs, it literally decides survivability and effectiveness of carrying platform.

    I do not believe RusMoD would be so stupid

    Yeah, the keyword is effective here. MoD isn’t stupid – it’s just realised these large ASMs aren’t as effective as they supposed to be due to the problems with targets detection and designation at range of more than 500km – in reality the system Legenda was working not very well.

    Do you think Admiral Nakhimov or Yasen-M truly have a lower effective engagement radius than their 80s counterparts? Do you think that represents an improvement?

    This is reality – if you know the facts.

    Ignore that picture Scar, it was made and brought to to you by the people that brought you X-101/K-77-1 and other examples of little in-service surprises.

    No, i won’t ignore it coz numbers from this picture were confirmed by the designers of Onyx in the famous(in Russian military Internet) conversation with them at airbase.ru that happened 9 years ago.

    You know, some people have actually believed that Onyx did not have land-attack capability before its usage in Syria seen recently.

    I don’t care what other people believe. Beliefs better to leave in the church.

    India-Russia agreed to extend range of BrahMos to 600km. A system intended for export and use by and for India and based off Yakhont.
    Do you really think that BrahMos development reached such a point where suddenly effective range doubled?

    Who said? Some Indian paper? For what version? With what modifications? It’s just a rumours – better tyo leave them in the same place where beliefs.

    Oh yes, the same way Iskander-K is “limited”.

    Iskander-K is limited by the INF treaty, while Onyx is limited by its size and ability of the fleet to provide effective target designation at ranges longer than 400km.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2133231
    Scar
    Participant

    It is mind-breaking to suggest that the replacement for Granit, by which requiring a replacement due to Granit range no longer being optimal, possesses a shorter range than its predecessor.

    Where did you get this? Onyx always was supposed to be a more compact and lightweight ASM with a shorter range.
    http://nevskii-bastion.ru/kartinki/BASTION_SEVASTOPOL_160223_19.JPG

    Scar
    Participant

    The nozzles of the engines are identical! Therefore, the power loss in these nozzles are close! That’s all I wanted to say

    Then choose the words more carefully – they’re SIMILAR in their general triple-section swivel configuration, but F135 nozzle ISN’T a COPY of R79 nozzle.

    Scar
    Participant

    Read what I wrote again. I’m starting to doubt your adequacy

    You wrote Rolls-Royce nozzle is a COPY while it’s NOT. Yeah, now say something (out of your @$$) about adequacy again.

    The nozzle F135 – a copy of the nozzle engine R-79

    Scar
    Participant

    The nozzle F135 – a copy of the nozzle engine R-79

    Шурик, завязывай с этими сказками про родину слонов. Не поверю, что Флатерик не просвещал тебя насчет того факта, что впервые трехсекционное поворотное сопло было разработано Роллс-Ройсом для движка под немецкую вертикалку VJ101.
    http://s019.radikal.ru/i643/1204/eb/1c65e9cc07c3.jpg
    http://i847.photobucket.com/albums/ab35/bobro15/VJ101E_zps66c80c37.jpg~original

    Enough of these fairy-tales.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139887
    Scar
    Participant

    I havenot look at the rest of your post but this video is just ******* stupid.
    The specific video you uploaded is one of their Mannequin challengevideo to raise awareness, it cannot be used as an evidence of staged rescues
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3975698/Syrian-White-Helmets-rescue-group-upload-Mannequin-Challenge-video.html

    Yeah, sure. Just another one “peacful and harmless mannequin of the innocent civilian victim of the Bloody Regime”.
    https://wtf.jpg.wtf/00/72/1480007313-0072ef1de01d229a36be33dccc934631.jpeg

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2142525
    Scar
    Participant

    First launch of Idz 30?
    In what way? On the Su-30 flight test laboratorium or on the T-50-8?

    At the ground testing facility, of course. Who, in their right mind, will install the newest engine on the airplane, right from the start?

    Scar
    Participant

    I know this is not a good news for Russian jet fanboys, but this is life.

    Please, don’t mix your speculations with a real life.

    Scar
    Participant

    MAKO was the AT-2000 program from the late 1980’s between Aermacchi and Dornier. Aermacchi left the program and developed the joint venture between itself and Yakovlev, opting for a twin-engine planform. Aermacchi once again broke away from the partnership with Yakovlev and evolved their joint work into M-346.

    Cool story, yeah: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?133501-USAF-T-X&p=2341959#post2341959

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2149044
    Scar
    Participant

    Seems like a new pod adapted on Yak-130 for the new strike missions!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]249775[/ATTACH]

    http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/85880/

    You mean a gun-pod? It’s old as ****.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2151781
    Scar
    Participant

    What about AH-178? Does it contain our Russian components and systems?

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2152065
    Scar
    Participant

    Most likely no, so that 5000km is a very theoretical estimate.

    Every type of payload, probably except ECM pods, should have the ability to be jettisoned.

    Scar
    Participant

    Have sound when firing torpedoes or missiles from submarines ? the sonar system could detect them?

    Yes and yes.

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 615 total)