dark light

MadRat

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 4,651 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2136855
    MadRat
    Participant

    With all your new found spare time, Mercurius, we don’t want to see a JSR run your patience out or you off

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2138613
    MadRat
    Participant

    I was hoping for Liberator.

    Wouldn’t have minded something from a WW2 fighter, like Mustang or Thunderbolt

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2138829
    MadRat
    Participant

    Keep your grubby decimals off my desert

    MadRat
    Participant

    Realize the USAF was seriously looking at YF-12A long before using F-111 as anything but a bomber, I think you would compare the F-111/AIM-54 (Phoenix) combination to F-12A/AIM-47 (Super Falcon). It’s pretty obvious that MiG-31 was more along the F-12A concept than trying to mimic F-111.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139096
    MadRat
    Participant

    Come January support for rebels will likely shift to true moderates, not the phoney baloney moderates we support today. Syria is messed up with so many evil elements, I’m looking forward to the coming stability

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139717
    MadRat
    Participant

    Lesson learned by Syria is heed the warnings. There may have been reason for an accident when supporting our ghosts

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2140266
    MadRat
    Participant

    I never really notice before now, but the MiG-29K has extensible flaps underneath its LERX…

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2141155
    MadRat
    Participant

    Good god, you’re dense to believe anything less than djcross posted. Iran was allowed to replace existing centrifuges for modern ones a huge exponential leap in capacity. You would be emphatically stupid to make comments contrary to reality.

    in reply to: Frankenplane Prototypes #2141162
    MadRat
    Participant

    Better picture from the previous link… F-22-ish NATF
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]248223[/ATTACH]

    Boeing’s A-10 replacement based off the T-X proposal
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]248224[/ATTACH]

    MadRat
    Participant

    Telescopic capabilities of F-14 outclassed anything on F-15. And until the Cold War was practically over IFF technology was pretty weak and overly burdensome to use in multinational air campaigns

    MadRat
    Participant

    Actually, you really should just do everyone a favor and stop talking. You are wrong and any reasonable person wouldn’t say anything like you have said.

    MiG-21 had twice the powerplant available to it and plenty of capacity for alterations. The chinese variants are still being made today and they are based on the less powerful Tumansky R-11F-300 turbojet engine, not too far off the version flown during the war over Vietnam. IIRC, the most modernized MiG-21’s were based on the MiG-21bis, fitted with the Tumanskiy R25-300 turbojet engine; the biggest, strongest, and fastest version. And MiG-21bis had the R25-300’s emergency injection to boost its thrust a considerably higher amount – 25% or better – than the F-11F-300 ever could push. And Bison were upgraded with modern MFD screens, HOTAS controls, helmet cued missiles, RWRs, a modern jamming suite, Kopyo-M radar, and BVR Capability. F-5, not so much.

    You can’t even distinguish that Su-33 is superior to F-14A due to the inaccurate necessity to fly Su-33 off a carriership. Sorry, but Su-33 – like F-14A – flies just fine off Terra Firma.

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2144938
    MadRat
    Participant

    Speaking of which, where… The Nose looks to short and behind the cockpit is not just shapely but also has an aerial fin before blending up into the tail.

    The T-50 had to move the same aerial from an almost identical location

    MadRat
    Participant

    a comparison of all the us and russian equivelant aircraft and which was better

    F-5 > Mig-21
    F-4 > MiG-23
    F-4 > MiG-27
    F-106 < MiG-25
    F-15 > Su-27
    F-16 > MiG-29
    B-1B > Tu-160
    F-14 > Su-33
    A-10 < Su-25

    MiG-21 evolved better than F-5
    F-4 > Su-15
    F-106A > Su-11
    F-15 > MiG-25
    F-14A < Su-33 < F-14D
    F-16A <> MiG-29
    B-1A < Tu-160 <> B-1B

    MadRat
    Participant

    McNamara was a fool, there is no doubt there. However, his push for the F-111 over continued production of the F-105 was not an error. His push to standardize the F-111 across the military was a huge mistake, no doubt about that. The F-111 does not get the credit it deserves. It was the singular best strike fighter in the world for 20 years (sorry the Su-24 did not have laser designation and precision weapons capability, the “F” did). The F-111D had the world’s first digital bombing navigation system (note to the SVP-24) when it worked. There were huge design flaws- it could really only carry two LGB and still have full low level sprint capability. But, the F-111F and D might have been the most survivable strike aircraft from the 1970’s to late 1980’s. One could argue that the F-111 was as effective as the F-117. There were few fighters that could catch it on the deck, and paired with the EF-111, it made a difficult deep strike/interdiction target.

    Let’s face it, post Cold War the iconic Western weapons systems that threatened classic Third World despot dictators – save for maybe B-52 – we’re all pretty much retired. F-111 could literally reach out and touch them at range with high precision at the time. A good chunk of the Navy – really the crown jewels of western culture – was cut and immediately scrapped. The large dumb bomb stocks were recycled. The mini nukes were decommissioned. Much of our strategic missile force, especially the Peacekeeper, was scrapped. The cuts to the manpower and bases. The merchant marine corps. Everywhere.

    MadRat
    Participant

    MiG-23 technically could have been a better option for the Russians than MiG-29 after the Cold War entered. But only if they had spent time to share engines with the Flanker, carried a cannon using the same ammunition, shared radar and missile technology with Flanker, etc. Basically fix the design to fit the multi-role niche like F-16 and try to maintain less logistics footprints common between Flankers and Floggers. A new FBW set of controls would have helped. Instead they tried to mate Flankers and Fulcrums. Fulcrum imho is too big for the LO – and too small for the HI – in a HI-LO combination. MiG-23MLD was a good first step in that direction. They just didn’t make good strategic moves by using a turbojet design from the 60’s and not mating a good FBW to help the pilot. That, and it never had good ergonomics

Viewing 15 posts - 361 through 375 (of 4,651 total)