Ridley Scott was contemplating that for Alien 5. I guess if AvP does well at the box office, then we may see an Alien 5.

original plot by ridley scott was the space jockeys created the aliens to fight off another species (the predators)? But this movie just throws that theory away.

That bit on the Alien taking a part of the host’s DNA is not appreciated by the community, hence Anderson did a major cockup. If you have a Predalien through merely implanting a Pred, then how about a GorillaAlien, SnakeAlien, RhinoAlien and what the fuk not? 😡

Dont pay any attention to what happens in the movie if ur alien,predator fan it just throws something established in previous movie out of the window spoiler
*(like how fast aliens can come out of humans and how easily humans with no military experience can kill aliens with 21 st century weapons :rolleyes: ).

Here is good link on the Xenomorph heiarchy. What truely is badass is the newborn (half ripley8 and half alien).
http://www.anchorpointessays.com/essays.html

JonS

I was suggesting that a IR seeker could be combined with the active radar seeker of a Meteor like missile.
Anyway, if a defending ship turned off its radar to defeat a Armiger it would have to rely on decoys, EW and passive guided weapons to defeat other types of threat further reducing its survival chances.

or the vessel could just try to get out of the location were it was targeted by armiger with IIR the pilot has to search for the vessel if the vessel happened 5 or 6 km away it would impossible to find it. As for IR + active seeking is little too much since if u have one u dont need other only missile that has such configuration is russians Styx variants.

i have sosna brochure a pdf file and photo of it looks exactly like that. Anyway Palma’s AO-18KD uses the GSh-6-30KD gun which is updated version of GSh-6-30K used by kashtan. KD has muzzle velocity of 960 m/s for HE and 1,100 m/s for armor piercing rds as opposed to 890 m/s for HE by the GSh-6-30K gun. That brings its muzzle velocity pretty close to GAU-8. GSH-G-30KD is also used by kashtan-M.

Scooter

4 smaller carriers may cost more than 2 large carriers, but having 4 smaller carriers would have the following advantages-

Easier to build, industry capable of this size ship without major ship yard improvements.

Dispersal of forces, one ship out of action=25% loss of capability.

4 carriers=4 areas of operation.

More relaxed training and maintenance possible due to higher number of carriers available for deployment.

problem with 4 small carriers is that 4 small carriers wont give sortie rate equivalent 2 cariers twice the size of it, according to BAe designed showed that doubling the tonnage neeted in more than thripling the sortie rate. CGI models have shown that Ideal size for a carrier is around 50000+ tons anything less is inefficent in terms of price thats why such requirement was choosen for CVF.

Well technically it was GRISON and probably now SOSNA.

(ie SA-19 missile from the Tunguska, and Naval versions SA-N-11 plus SOSNA).

Sosna is just cheap Laser guided version of 9M311 (missile used in Tunguska and SA-N-11) its not used by either of those systems. Its meant for towed sosna ADS and for palma naval system.

please! go and look at the pics of 168 again and find one surface that is perpendicular to the water that isnt a missile launchrail or blastshield for the missile launchrail.

168 hull is angeled somewhat but no to the extent of lafayette also the sheet metal for the superstructure just seem to pop up and doesnt seem to smoothly incoporated into design.

just think about it, what is the point in making a warship’s structure clean without meaning it to be stealthy? commerical cruise ships want to look nice to attract passengers, but what does a warship have to gain from a clean structure besides stleath?

It reduces the RCS somewhat making it somewhat easiar to decoy missiles away with EW/ECM . Clean design helps for the crew to operate = efficency, it also helps with damage control.

also, if what you say is true, then one warship from china doesnt have stealth features at all, but another warship built in china a few months later has stealth features? what does that mean? that china has suddenly made a quantum leap in stealthy ship design in a couple of months?

question should what is definition of stealth feature? because there is lot more to stealth than just design with small rcs, u also need to worry bout heat and noise. These days every single navy seem to be building vessels with small rcs even many coast gaurd cutters have angeled superstructure and everthing but the question is how many vessels out there are indeed stealthy in all aspects.

the design of the hull is actually quite stealthy, its all the domes, missile launchrails and rocket launchers that spoils the effect. the reason for it is that china probably dont have the ability to design compact, stealthy sensors and VLS

they are not supposed to be stealthy in first place they are supposed to be clean design as opposed to 054 ffg if u notice the superstructure for both ddgs is not angeled at all how is it gonna reflect any radar waves unless china some sort of radar cancellation or RAM coating on it? Just because a vessel has clean layout doesnt make them stealth I have seen a lot civilian vessels that have hulls similar to this doesnt exactly mean those vessels are stealthy.