dark light

crobato

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 3,939 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Is the future 'small'..? #1794768
    crobato
    Participant

    Not exactly. Even with advancements in missile propelleant and electronics, there are always an advantage to have your missile be bigger to carry a bit more propellant, having a bigger array, and having a bigger warhead.

    in reply to: Russia-China military cooperation on the rocks #2049511
    crobato
    Participant

    are you sure about il-76? I haven’t read anything on it.

    Yes I’m quite sure. I read about it in this forum.

    in reply to: Russia-China military cooperation on the rocks #2049612
    crobato
    Participant

    If this story is true (elements of it probably are), why did Russia & China have joint military exercises a few weeks ago, watched by both Putin & Hu? (at the time it was announced russia was renewing strategic bomber “patrols”)

    If their military relationship was poor, this excerice would not have happened & Putin & Hu would not have been watching together.

    What Pinkov did was take an old issue and printed it to make it sound like its new, despite that the issues behind has been particularly SOLVED. China bought extra OLS-31Es for the IRSTs for example—it is interesting to note that the J-11s uses the uprated OLS-31E typically used on the Su-30s rather than the standard OLS-27 of the Su-27SK.

    The IL-76 issue has been resolved. China will pay the extra but Russia will throw in more features on the aircraft. A new date has been set for delivery.

    China is buying engines for the FC-1s and J-10s.

    China does not appear to have any need for any more stuff though, except probably upgrades on the two of the Sovs and the RIF-M on the 051Cs.

    in reply to: American "constant peg" MiGs #2517348
    crobato
    Participant

    If the US was ordering Chinese-built kalashnikovs from the PRC from the 1970s on, why not add a few neat agressor planes

    AK-47s from China? Do you have any info on that? I find it amazing that the States ordered rifles etc from China considering the relationship.

    They did, and it was common knowledge that the AK-47s were being supplied to the Afghanistan Mujahedeen against the Soviet invasion. China was also the conduit to help smuggle Stingers to the resistance movement.

    The F-7s can be acquired in many different ways, one of which is that of a much more recent circumstance. Many old J-6, JJ-6, JJ-5, early J-7 and early JJ-7 were in fact being sold to private collectors and importers, which brought a number of these planes to the US. Also included among these imports are Nanchang CJ-6 trainers, great for warbird enthusiasts who don’t have the millions to spend on a Mustang ($630 ea 1945 prices!).

    in reply to: Russia-China military cooperation on the rocks #2049791
    crobato
    Participant

    Parts of the article is really so bull.

    China stopped at 105 kits because they rightly perceived that the Su-27SK is so obsolete, especially for its price to continue further. There is so hardly anything advanced about the Su-27SK.

    The Type 1471 radar on the J-8IIM does not resemble the Zhuk on its back end, gimball and servo mechanisms. The software between the Zhuk and the Type 1471 is also totally incompatible, with differing weapons suites and modes.

    The copies on the naval radars seem more direct however. Still, obtaining information from systems and so on, still don’t tell your or give you the material necessary to make a copy. All it gives you is the information for its specifications, which your “copy”—using homegrown technologies—will be specified to match or exceed. That is probably true of the Sea Eagle radars. But other systems are more copied not because China asked for brochures or documentation, but because they actually bought systems of such.

    Also the story itself is a bit old. Maybe last year or so. They eked out a new agreement on the IL-76s. China will have to pay more money but Russia will add more features, and the time table is now set at 2010-2011 for deliveries. The deal on the RD-93s seems to be going through and so is more the Salut engines for the J-10, last May, followed with a co assembly agreement.

    And IRSTs are supposed to work even in inclement weather. That’s the whole point of being a military device. To be rugged and meet all conditions. And Russian equipment are supposed to have a reputation of being rugged.

    in reply to: PLAAF News, Photos and Speculation #11 #2517623
    crobato
    Participant

    Parts of the article is really so bull.

    China stopped at 105 kits because they rightly perceived that the Su-27SK is so obsolete, especially for its price to continue further. There is so hardly anything advanced about the Su-27SK.

    The Type 1471 radar on the J-8IIM does not resemble the Zhuk on its back end, gimball and servo mechanisms. The software between the Zhuk and the Type 1471 is also totally incompatible, with differing weapons suites and modes.

    The copies on the naval radars seem more direct however. Still, obtaining information from systems and so on, still don’t tell your or give you the material necessary to make a copy. All it gives you is the information for its specifications, which your “copy”—using homegrown technologies—will be specified to match or exceed. That is probably true of the Sea Eagle radars. But other systems are more copied not because China asked for brochures or documentation, but because they actually bought systems of such.

    Also the story itself is a bit old. Maybe last year or so. They eked out a new agreement on the IL-76s. China will have to pay more money but Russia will add more features, and the time table is now set at 2010-2011 for deliveries. The deal on the RD-93s seems to be going through and so is more the Salut engines for the J-10, last May, followed with a co assembly agreement.

    And IRSTs are supposed to work even in inclement weather. That’s the whole point of being a military device. To be rugged and meet all conditions. And Russian equipment are supposed to have a reputation of being rugged.

    in reply to: Three questions about radars #2517927
    crobato
    Participant

    I won’t weep about it either. Its a system that can be defeated by relatively cheap devices. Protective goggles, everyone?

    in reply to: Three questions about radars #2517951
    crobato
    Participant

    Something to consider though, back in the 80s or 90s the US (and probably others) were testing a device to detect optical devices. It only saw you if you were looking at it but it apparently could do a sweep of a battlefield in a matter of seconds and detect things like binoculars, optical sights, eyes. . .that last is kinda creepy. Also read that the idea was to fry optical sights with a mid-power laser.

    You could if the optical device is illuminating you through a laser. As for the laser zapping, that’s old news. All the top of the line Chinese tanks have this device. Usage of a similar system is frowned upon in the West due to humanitarian concerns.

    in reply to: Russia 'renewing bomber patrols' #2518127
    crobato
    Participant

    Armed with long range ASMs, thats enough bombers to take out a regional European fleet. And besides, what’s a little fuel usage to a country that drills lots of them and has the largest oil reserves in the world. If Putin sez so, these these planes are going to get their allocations. Add to that, turboprop planes like the Bears are not gas guzzlers to boot.

    in reply to: General Discussion #303966
    crobato
    Participant

    The last movie I watched was the Last Legion. I thought it was a little corny. Was the legendary sword of Julius Caesar the Crucia Mors (Yellow Death), and not this “Sis Caliburnus” as the movie purported to make?

    in reply to: The Last Film You Saw…. 2!!! #1926576
    crobato
    Participant

    The last movie I watched was the Last Legion. I thought it was a little corny. Was the legendary sword of Julius Caesar the Crucia Mors (Yellow Death), and not this “Sis Caliburnus” as the movie purported to make?

    in reply to: Russia 'renewing bomber patrols' #2518133
    crobato
    Participant

    You’re assuming they don’t have the money to put things in working order. I assure you they do now.

    in reply to: Russia 'renewing bomber patrols' #2518136
    crobato
    Participant

    True.
    But I don’t think they’d do it just to ****-off people.:D

    Of course not, but they’re probably reading off the signals from the Valiant Shield exercise for their intel use.

    in reply to: PLAAF News, Photos and Speculation #11 #2518141
    crobato
    Participant

    Hmmm … new H-6U unit ??? Can anyone help me out ?

    Cheers, Deino

    Hard to say, with the radar digitally marked out. Also the cover extends in such a way it covers the first digit, which could have led us to identify if this was a PLAAF or PLANAF unit. 9th Division PLANAF however is a strike and fighter plane division so its probably PLAAF. I just noticed it also has a refueling probe. It would have been any of the divisions that end with -8, 8th, 38th or 48th, since, the 18th and the 28th are fighter and attack divisions.

    in reply to: PLAAF News, Photos and Speculation #11 #2518142
    crobato
    Participant

    I think this is a J-11 backseater. No reason for him to be wearing a helmet with HMS.

    Actually, the back seaters also wear the same helmet as in the front guy for the sake of uniformity.

    We have enough pictures of both pilot and second officer carrying helmets to know that the 2nd officer doesn’t carry a helmet differently from the first.

Viewing 15 posts - 736 through 750 (of 3,939 total)