dark light

Sanem

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 545 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2197554
    Sanem
    Participant

    If Russia can liberate Raqqa. than it will make task in IraK much easier to liberate Mosul. and Turks will be thrown out from there.
    The point is too connect the region with Syrian sea ports and remove completely the importance of Turkey.

    thanks for the (on topic) reply
    so if Assad can succesfully conquer the area, it will put stress on ISIS in Iraq

    They will use Smerch/Artellery. Since Most of Ruaf fighters have electronic scanning radars. they can see the ground situation at considerable. distance.

    and what about Turkish SAM units?

    Su-35 has more capabilities than 5G fighter that are currently in service. I will call it 5+.

    agreed
    compared to the F-22, it’s technology would be at least 10 years younger
    even without the Pentagon’s budget, such a difference in age will always result in certain advantages newer technology has
    I’d guess the Su-35 has tech that’s only matched by the F-35, and in some was even surpasses that of the F-35

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2198146
    Sanem
    Participant

    Turkey says it was the Kurds, vows retaliation
    Kurds deny involvement

    Turkey has been bombarding the Kurds north of Aleppo for 5 days now
    just saying, saturation bombardment is a typical prologue to a full scale attack

    if Russia does respond to a Turkish advance (doubtful but hey), how would that go?
    does Turkey have mobile long range SAM units?

    I’m sure Turkish F-16’s and SA F-15s would fly cover, but do they stand any chance against the Su-35s?
    with their 5th gen tech I wouldn’t be surprised if those can completely jam radar and AMRAAMs
    also does the Su-35 carry missiles that outrange the AMRAAM?
    plus the S-400 on the ground gives Russia a pretty strong air space denial force

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2198310
    Sanem
    Participant

    Turkey/SA/NATO need an excuse if they want to start a shooting war with the Assad coalition […]

    even if the Turks don’t attack the Assad coalition directly, just moving against the Kurds might be enough to open up supply lines to Aleppo
    and give the rebels breathing room to operate (although I doubt they have the armour to counter-attack in open field)

    looks like Turkey just got the excuse they needed
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-blast-idUSKCN0VQ25S

    because the Kurds are going to detonate a car bomb when the Turkish army is begging for an excuse to attack them
    false flag, no other name for it

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2198833
    Sanem
    Participant

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/16/syrian-msf-hospital-kept-location-secret-to-avoid-being-bombed/

    thanks for the link
    it’s interesting that the Doctors without Borders insist that it was the Syrian or Russian air force that bombed them
    how can they know that? what makes them sure it wasn’t the NATO alliance, which also has planes operating in that area?

    in reply to: where is Western air power over Iraq? #2177363
    Sanem
    Participant

    with Russia shaping to get involved, it will be interesting to see if they can make a dent in IS where the West failed

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2177492
    Sanem
    Participant

    well I’ll bet that real cockroach is going “hey baby…”
    that said I’m not sure this is all that useful, maybe to sneak a camera into a good position, but it’s probably slow and difficult to navigate
    you can just get a 20$ RC all terain toy car, strap a wifi camera onto it you’ve got the perfect scout
    it does show the potential for UGVs, which are vastly underused IMO, they’re great for recon and delivering grenades

    have to check out an area? drive one of the around, they hard to hit, and you can see what’s behind every corner
    enemy hiding behind a corner? attach a remote controlled grenade, drive it up there et voila. in the chaos of a firefight they probably won’t realise it’s there until it explodes
    if you’re worried about jamming you can also attach wire or use IR LOS control

    something like this, really small, $35, great for room to room combat
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VZncqIvV78

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2178458
    Sanem
    Participant

    experiment to control 30 drones by just one operator
    http://www.uasvision.com/2015/09/22/swarm-of-50-drones/#more-39026

    the interesting thing is that the focus is actually to create an autonomous swarm that can dogfight 🙂

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2180983
    Sanem
    Participant

    presumably most of the difficult work (control software, mission packages, sensor integration…) was done with the Mantis UCAV, which was less risky because it was unstealthy (a lot more room for corrections and redesign)
    so the 200M£ is mostly for the Taranis aircraft itself. for a flying wing with a stealth coating that seems about right
    so you should see the Taranis and Mantis programs as one, or at least as one and a half program, but I can’t find a price quote on the Mantis
    asuming 100M£ for Mantis, you’re paying about 70M£ for software etc, so the Taranis would really cost about 270M£

    but for this I’m guessing you possibly get a fully mission capable stealthy UCAV
    as strange as it sounds, that’s because this isn’t difficult to do, once you get the mission software (which you can basically take from any UAV currently flying or a cruise missile), you just need a vehicle to put in
    kind of like making an F-117 unmanned. wouldn’t be surprised if that’s exactly what they did, it would explain why the USAF kept their Nighthawks flying

    if it is operationally capable, I’d say you can build these for about $50 million, with the first aircraft finished by 2018

    in reply to: Is the J-20 the least maneuverable 5th gen? #2181973
    Sanem
    Participant

    I don’t think it matters, because the J-20 doesn’t need to be maneuverable
    it needs to be stealthy, have a long range, and carry a lot of weapons. and be affordable enough to be fielded in useful numbers
    it’s a stealthy F-111, a big F-117 or a small B-2. it’s a specialised bomber, not a multi-role fighter

    its purpose is to take out vital long range targets, like carriers, air bases, radar installations, AWACS and tankers
    all of which are heavily defended. the whole point of stealth is that you can avoid those defences. sneak over the castle wall if you will, rather than try to besiege it
    take out those targets, and its defences will be a lot easier to destroy too, because they run out of fuel or have no radar support

    another vital future role for 5th gen aircraft will be to act as a forward controller for UAVs
    again, maneuverability is not a vital aspect here, having a lot of fuel and room for communication systems is
    a bigger weakness is the lack of a two-seater version

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2183015
    Sanem
    Participant

    more info on the Zephyr, fascinating concept (and also funded by my own government of Flanders, before the company ran off to the UK :highly_amused: )

    price is said to be $44 for 7 + 1 control station
    does that suggest they can all be controlled from one station?
    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/NAVAIR-Orders-7-Zephyr-Ultra-Long-Endurance-UAVs-05426/

    wiki page
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiq_Zephyr

    take off video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60G7niBZldw

    edit: concept explained
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwfbEMe5a4I

    any idea of what it can do exactly and how it compares to a satellite?
    a low flying satellite that can stay in place and return to earth for maintenance for just $6 million is certainly dirt cheap

    in reply to: older jets with new equipment #2185894
    Sanem
    Participant

    well how about

    – outdated Mig 21 of your flavour
    – 2020 Israeli helmet display (maybe a Google Glass type display, doesn’t have to be anything fancier)
    – 2020 Derby 2nd generation medium range missile, can be linked to external radar guidance or Python’s seeker
    – 2020 Python 6+ with 300 degree dual IR/optical seeker that can independantly recognize, track and engage even stealth aircraft
    – 2020 Israeli EW pod
    – 2020 Israeli data link and small computer that links all these systems, plus (thigh) mounted new display

    http://i1151.photobucket.com/albums/o629/fischerzoo/CessnaPanelAfter1_zps0fabdb2f.jpg

    let’s say the Mig can carry 2 Derby’s with hypothetical range of 150 km, and 2 Pythons with 25 km hypothetical range

    http://radioviceonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/square-mig-21.jpg

    at long range the Mig doesn’t have a new radar
    but instead it relies on external data from AWACS, ground radar, other forward operating aircraft, satellites, ground intel… to get target data
    all of which is connected via the data link to the Derby’s

    at medium range the Mig pilot can use the same external target data as that for the Derby to launch the Python’s beyond visual range
    or he can use the Python’s seeker data to launch the Derby’s
    or he can use the Derby’s seeker data to launch the Pythons (not sure what the detection range it is)

    at short range the Python seeker functions as passive short range sensor, sending target images to the pilot’s helmet display or his external display
    WVR the pilot just has to look at the target and tag it, using the Python seeker. the computer will then show an enhanced image of the target on the helmet (or thigh) display, and a make a suggestion of what type it thinks it is
    then the pilot launches a missile of his choice at the target

    the EW pod is important to jam enemy radars and incomming missiles
    it can also be used to passively detect enemy radars, and launch the missiles against them, like the A2A equivalent of HARM missiles

    the point is that this way, anyone with some old Migs lying around and pilots qualified to fly them, can turn this weapon into something that can match off against 4.5 gen aircraft, and stealth aircraft when within visual range
    all for the price of the systems and the missiles
    and because it’s an independant add on system (you wouldn’t change anything to the Mig itself, and most connections would be wireless), you can install that equipment onto any aircraft you want, so you can reuse it if you buy new aircraft later on, like you would reuse a good scope and quality bullets on a different rifle

    in reply to: unmanned attack helicopter #2186985
    Sanem
    Participant

    But how do you have a helicopter UAV fly NOE just above the trees. That sounds kind of hard to do.

    seems feasable, here’s an experiment from 2012 with an unmanned Blackhawk
    not NOE but it’s doing pretty well
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F7L0fIgPwU

    in reply to: unmanned attack helicopter #2186989
    Sanem
    Participant

    this classic design would also work 🙂
    http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpxdk4fihE1qlsg97.jpg

    well the question is how do they compare in usefuleness and cost to manned attack helicopters and armed UAVs

    they seem interesting compared to armed Army UAVs (Shadow, Grey Eagle) mostly because they don’t need a runway
    meaning you can launch them from forward positions, from inside of buildings or vehicles
    so if there’s a sudden engagement, you can flip open a nearby bunker/building/truck roof and send one of these out to give immediate fire support and an eye in the sky. they could get there in minutes
    and they wouldn’t have to carry much fuel either, as they’d just have to fly over, shoot their weapons, maybe stay a while for other UAVs to take over, and then fly home
    or just land nearby and wait for a unit to pick them up, they don’t necesairily need to fly back home, so that’s another fuel saving
    and if it’s light enough and empty of fuel and ammo, a few soldiers could load it onto a truck or jeep manually and bring it back to base

    the big advantage compared to manned helicopters would be cost and expendability
    meaning they can act as forward scouts, relaying target data, forward shooters using targetting data provided by attack helicopters or any other assets, they could laser up a target allowing the manned assets to shoot from a safe distance…
    hell, you could even deploy these from a transport aircraft or helicopter (if you can figure out how, with the rotors and all)

    in reply to: older jets with new equipment #2187989
    Sanem
    Participant

    well to put it differently, what if you gave the F-15 and F-16 AESA and DAS and the latest in ECM, sensors and weapons? how would they fare against the F-22, F-35, J-31 and T-50?
    certainly if said equipment is from say 2020, which would be a generation younger than what’s in the F-35, and certainly the F-22

    in reply to: Wing Loong UAV (Chinese Predator) #2188000
    Sanem
    Participant

    well there’s no certainty on its price and performance, just the info out there
    then again data on US AUVs are also rather vague, because equipment and system price tags and effect on performance greatly varies

    that said China is known for its low prices on copied equipment, by replicating foreign production lines in China, or outright industrial espionage
    possibly they’re giving such cheap prices with the sole goal of pushing up production to cut costs on their own aircraft (just as is being done with the F-35) and getting a foot in the door for future sales
    if they managed to copy the Predator design and software, they’ll certainly cut out a large design cost
    plus UAVs are a lot cheaper today in terms of software, hardware, sensors… it’s all cheaper to make, but more performant

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 545 total)