dark light

seahawk

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 976 through 990 (of 3,269 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Iranian single seater stealth Ekranoplan #2601180
    seahawk
    Participant

    Sure it is stealthy, some palstic flying over the waves powered by a mini engine.

    Here is a picture of the even more advanced ship version.

    http://www.killermann.de/seerose/images/big/stb-240a.jpg

    in reply to: Super Hornet "kills" Raptor #2601199
    seahawk
    Participant

    Could have happened. Low Speed knife fight. The SH is quite good at pointing the nose.

    in reply to: Air Superiority with a F-22 / F-35 combo? #2602262
    seahawk
    Participant

    Yes, but they alone show that Rafale is never ahead of EF.

    in reply to: Air Superiority with a F-22 / F-35 combo? #2602267
    seahawk
    Participant

    SOC, m8

    don´t make the mistake and judge the RCS by the looks whe ncomparing Rafale and EF. I have seen both close upfront and looked into both intakes. I know which has much more in common with an F-22 and which not. S-shaped is the key.

    in reply to: My Very Interesting Day #2602710
    seahawk
    Participant

    Now I am really envious.

    in reply to: Air Superiority with a F-22 / F-35 combo? #2602712
    seahawk
    Participant

    Why should the F-22 / F-35 combo not work. A7 and F-14 worked pretty fine for the USN. 😀

    in reply to: Iranian AF #2602727
    seahawk
    Participant

    I would not bet that your opinion about the pilots is right.

    in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2602734
    seahawk
    Participant

    NOW Serbia in 99 had almost all of their SA-2/3/6’s opperational, and if U.S. lost F-15’s and F-14’s in Desert Storm to Iraqi SA-2/ other IR SAM’s then Serbia deffenatly shot down 300+ Planes and UAV’s, NOW you’ll claim Serbia didn’t ahve their SAM’s operational, but thats not true, U.S.A. is the one spreding that rumor so the evidence would not prove NATO MUST be lying about thier losses, In 2005 that western News finally reported the Serbian Soilder’s story on how he shot down the F-117 with his SA-3 6 1/2 YEARS LATTER, THIS CLEARLY SHOWS nato CAN block STORIES FOR LONG PERIOD’s OF TIMES, just like for over 30 years Serbian Gen. Mihailovic’s Award by your President Truman was covered up until the 70’s despite Gen. Mihailovic was Time Magazine’s 1943 “MAN OF THE YEAR” so don’t convince your selves that it’s impossible for Governmets to Cover stories up for years.

    Your figures are mich too loew. Remember the the North Vietnamese used the SA-2 and the SA-7 as their SAMs, which are even older then SA-3 and SA-6, and killed thousands of american warplanes with it. So when they were abel to kill thousands with SA-2, the Serbia must also have killed thousands of NATO airplanes. That is why F-4 production, Tornado production, Mirage F.1 prodction and espcially F-14 production was re-opened after the conflict and most NATO airbases saw no flying for a dew years.

    in reply to: Exciting trip to Manchester 01/4/06 #582506
    seahawk
    Participant

    Are those back-lit ?

    in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2603312
    seahawk
    Participant

    HAHAHAHA!!! Your answer here says it ALL,it says = (“I SOC, Know where “CLEAR WAR” is going with this, and so inorder for me not to be disproven let me not directy answer his question.”) HAHAHAHA so I’m a gonna ask again, How many of the 38 U.S. Planes shot down over Iraq were down’d with the “ROLAND”.

    Few if any porbably. 2 Tornado IDS are credited to Rolands. However as the USAF prefered to operate at medium levels and the Roland being a low alltitude system this makes sense. The RAF operated at low level during the opening sorties of the conflict.

    in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2603314
    seahawk
    Participant

    The problem is that most Serbian claims have been verified as false. All German Tornados are accounted for, all German F-4Fs are accounted for. All B-2 are accounted for. Every Aviona F-16 (except the O grady) is accounted for. As is every B-2, F-117 (except the shot down). The battle damaged A-10 is identified. Tehre were spotters at every european base involved in the conflict and TV crews filmed the take-off off every single sortie. Even diversions were noticed within few hours. On the other hand there are no hard facts to support the serbian claims. No crash sites, no POWs, nothing. Only fragments of know crashes, drop tanks and UAVs. There are even no offical claims. Onyl some Russian sources and Venik tralk about NATO losses over and over again.

    in reply to: MiG-29`s combat record #2603405
    seahawk
    Participant

    Not again !!

    The F-117 was shot odwn because :

    – NATO used the same egress routes
    – Serbia knew the time the F117 woud be coming
    – an old radar was able to get weak returns from the F117 every now and then
    – the F117 flew straight and level
    – EO guided SA-3 came close enough to fataly damage the aircraft

    in reply to: F-22 "downed" 5 F-15C #2604117
    seahawk
    Participant

    Surely the nozzles were not designed with IR reduction in mind, however that does not mean that there is nothing that can be done. And they do not need a breakthrough, if they just achieved to improve on exisitng knowledge from A-12 and SR-71 and were able to fit it into a smaller fighter design, that could be pretty enough.

    in reply to: Sunny Newcastle 29.03.2006 56k beware #587049
    seahawk
    Participant

    The CRJ looks excellent

    in reply to: F-22 "downed" 5 F-15C #2604125
    seahawk
    Participant

    Detection range should vary with the angle towards the obejct. If you are looking directly at the exhaust, then it might be 40-50 kms under ideal conditions. If you are looking at the nose it will be much less and even less from the side. LM has experience in the field of IR signature reduction like no other aviation firm on the planet. They started with that when they built the A-12. That and the ammount of money spent on the F-22 make me believe that they might have achieved another brakthrough or at least have reduced the IR-signature to a surprisingly low level. Why they are not talking about it. Perhaps it is because those technics could be more easily adapted to exisiting designs, then the reduction of the radar crosssection. And with TVR engines there are ways to even reduce the IR signature of the engine.

Viewing 15 posts - 976 through 990 (of 3,269 total)