dark light

MadRat

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,296 through 2,310 (of 4,651 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Tornados – Now and the future #2335056
    MadRat
    Participant

    According to public sources the GR.1 was the version with two cannon. The reconnaissance version, GR.1A, did not have either cannon. GR.1A were later converted to GR.4A. All ECR versions have both guns removed, too, to make space for the sideways looking infra-red sensors and emitter locator equipment. All ADV versions had the left cannon removed for the retractable refueling probe. The EF.3, being an ADV variant also did not feature the left gun because of its retractable refueling probe and because of it’s external RWR was able to retain one gun. The GR.1B, a revised GR.1 for the maritime attack role, had the left cannon removed for a retractable refueling probe. GR.1B were later converted to GR.4B. When the RAF GR.1 aircraft were converted to GR.4, the FLIR sensor replaced the left hand cannon.

    MadRat
    Participant

    I always wanted to see Foxbats in formation with Eagles.

    Edit: Found Hornet with Foxbat, but not the same…

    http://images.suite101.com/222717_f18mig25fy5.jpg

    in reply to: Dassault Rafale #14 – News & Discussion #2337950
    MadRat
    Participant

    No Rafale probably cools off any chance of upgrading their Mirages. With Brazil being closely aligned with Italy in joint aerospace ventures it would make more sense to go Typhoon, perhaps even a Typhoon lease and a small Gripen buy. Sell off the Mirages and move on. With a move towards the EF they might be more inclined to work other deals with Germany and the UK for their needs.

    I had a bad feeling that when this thing got strung out it would fall apart altogether.

    in reply to: RAF Tornado retirement set #2337993
    MadRat
    Participant

    It’s not like ALARM is Tornado specific.

    Typhoon equipped with ASRAAM, ALARM, Storm Shadow and GBU-16 weapons
    http://www.deagel.com/library/Typhoon-equipped-with-ASRAAM-ALARM-Storm-Shadow-and-GBU-16-weapons_m02006120700276.aspx

    Tornado equipped with ALARM, Brimstone, drop tanks, and counter measure dispensers looks good, but nowhere near as menacing as my last Typhoon link.
    http://www.deagel.com/library/Tornado-equipped-with-Brimstone-and-ALARM_m02006120700319.aspx

    in reply to: RAF Tornado retirement set #2338251
    MadRat
    Participant

    So can anybody compile numbers and versions left? I assume no ADV versions are around save for what the Saudis have. It sounds like just some IDS/GR, F.3—>GR conversions, and ECR remain.

    in reply to: MiG-29 kontra F-16 (aerodynamics…) #2339686
    MadRat
    Participant

    MiG-29 was the best the iron curtain countries fielded. The Soviets leaned on Flankers more than Fulcrums.

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread 9 #2339695
    MadRat
    Participant

    MAKS 2009 had some brilliant combinations. Three vantage points of the same display…
    http://i.pbase.com/g1/52/413652/2/116450273.yzOfcRnz.jpg
    http://gallery.photo.net/photo/9828257-md.jpg
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/SSJ-100%2C_Su-30MKI%2C_Su-35%2C_MiG-29OVT%2C_MiG-35_on_the_MAKS-2009.jpg/800px-SSJ-100%2C_Su-30MKI%2C_Su-35%2C_MiG-29OVT%2C_MiG-35_on_the_MAKS-2009.jpg
    One of these days I’m getting there.

    in reply to: MiG-29 kontra F-16 (aerodynamics…) #2339741
    MadRat
    Participant

    F-15A and C provided air superiority, not F-16A.

    in reply to: MiG-29 kontra F-16 (aerodynamics…) #2340632
    MadRat
    Participant

    Back in the late 80’s it was all about ‘frontal aspect’ heatseekers and ‘true lookdown-shootdown’ radar guided missiles.

    in reply to: Tornados – Now and the future #2340962
    MadRat
    Participant

    What was this load out?
    edit: righthand outer station appears to be BOZ-101 Chaff/Flare Dispenser Pod & lefthand outer station appears to be Cerebrus ECM pod
    http://www.deagel.com/library1/medium/2006/m02006120200268.jpg

    Interesting that in the mid-80s the design goal was three ASRAAM outboard of each wing and four Sky Flash for bomber destroyer duty.

    Tornado with Maverick is interesting…
    http://images.wikia.com/acecombat/images/e/ea/Tornado_GR.4.jpg

    http://www.holloman.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/web/110708-F-QE361-089.JPG

    HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. — German Air Force Tech. Sgt. Jens Feddersan, crew chief, pushes an AIM-2000 air-to-air missile toward a Tornado, July 8, 2011, during a quarterly load crew competition. During a competition, each member has a set of tasks to carry out and work in teams of three or four, depending on the aircraft. The GAF crew chiefs were competing for the first time against the 49th Maintenance Group for the title of “Best Load Crew.” (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Joshua Turner/Released)

    AIM-2000 = IRIS-T

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2012 #2341285
    MadRat
    Participant

    I like that set of pictures. Beats the pictures awhile back with Iranian Tomcats escorting the demonstration team of Flankers. About the only thing that would trump it is a picture with Su-27 or Su-30 or Su-33; Su-34; Su-35; MiG-29A or MiG-29M; MiG-35OVT; F/A-18A or F/A-18C; and F/A-18E altogether. That would truly rock it more, but that won’t ever happen even in Photoshop.

    in reply to: Serbian AF: Future Equipment #2342349
    MadRat
    Participant

    I suppose as long as MB-339A’s are flying the G-4 will have engine parts available. (The two share the same Viper turbojet model.) But something so light and underpowered doesn’t even have the speed to overtake a fair slice of airliners at their cruising speeds. And if they sling a load underneath it’s probably unsuitable for the role at all.

    It doesn’t sound like their Fishbeds have any hours left.

    in reply to: Typhoons evenly matched with F-22's #2343290
    MadRat
    Participant

    Missiles slung externally underneath, whether on a pylon or streamlined, suffer the effects of airflow and their relative vibrations. Even internally held missiles will vibrate because they too rest on the end of a moment arm. It’s impossible to say which one vibrates more or less than the other from public data.

    in reply to: Serbian AF: Future Equipment #2343709
    MadRat
    Participant

    I don’t dispute that Serbia is better off with MiG-21, but is is impractical. There is a large vacuum for fighters in that class, which is why I think a modern F-5 derivative with an F125 engine is a good filler for struggling economies.

    Btw – Poland has a thousand years of history that pretty much excludes itself from Slavic origins. It’s language is definitely a Slavic derivative, but not really it’s culture at this point. Russians have a strong sentimental bond with Serbia, very different from it’s relationship with Poland.

    in reply to: Serbian AF: Future Equipment #2344451
    MadRat
    Participant

    Serbia is majority Slav. Russia will never let Sino influence permeate Serbia. They will sooner gift them MiG-29s than allow them to acquire JF-17.

Viewing 15 posts - 2,296 through 2,310 (of 4,651 total)