Page 36 – Key Publishing

Srbin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 1,678 total)

← 1 2 3 … 35 36 37 … 110 111 112 →

Author

Posts
October 14, 2004 at 3:15 pm in reply to: Best of new generation of AJTs #2629563

Srbin
Participant

Yes but if you give the Yak-130 litening or something like sapsan wouldn’t it be able to acquire it’s own targets and such? The Hermes too can be integrated on the Yak-130, and it’s a rather light missile(100kg) with long range(something like 20-40km).

I love the Su-39, but honestly, I’d rather keep my stuff at medium-high altitude and stay away from low altitude trashfire.

October 14, 2004 at 3:10 pm in reply to: AFM on the Iranian Azarakhsh #2629569

Srbin
Participant

the original Mig-29A airframe had very little fuel compared to the two engine sthat sucked it up and the heavy airframe.

October 14, 2004 at 2:25 am in reply to: AFM on the Iranian Azarakhsh #2629897

Srbin
Participant

And not to mention how fuel thirsty those RD-33s would be compared to the old F-5’s engine despite the RD-33 being a turbo fan, it’s still a much more powerful engine. Not only that but it’s a much bigger engine than the existing F-5’s engines, not to mention also F-5’s existing fuel capacity is low and it’s range sucks, give it the much thirstier RD-33s and it’s range will be like who knows how much lower. I hightly doubt they gave it RD-33s.

October 13, 2004 at 6:34 pm in reply to: US-India Cope Exercises #2630154

Srbin
Participant

1)As every single article points out those F-15Cs were not the AESA equipped
2)It’s very clear Su-30MKIs were not used by Su-30Ks
3)A lot of confusion is surrounding what type of missiles were used on the aircraft, did the F-15C uses AIM-7M or AIM-120, most articles point out that it was the AIM-120. We’ve also seen pics of it using the AIM-120 and not the AIM-7M
4)As for Su-30Ks for IAF, some articles point out that only R-27s were used and others point out R-77s were used. Can someone post some pics of Su-30s and what they were exactly carrying.

October 13, 2004 at 6:31 pm in reply to: MiG-31 #2630157

Srbin
Participant

So if R-37M only has a booster to extend it’s range by another 100km and retains everything from teh R-37, is there a need for hte R-37 then? Are they both going to be used?

October 13, 2004 at 4:25 pm in reply to: US-India Cope Exercises #2630272

Srbin
Participant

AFAIR the Indian aircraft did not use R-77 and they used R-27. At least thats what all the early reports mentioned.

October 13, 2004 at 4:14 pm in reply to: Best of new generation of AJTs #2630280

Srbin
Participant

And I think the L-15 has an advantage of also being supersonic, the requirement is something like ma1.4 I think. We will see how it turns out.

October 12, 2004 at 9:32 pm in reply to: Best of new generation of AJTs #2630855

Srbin
Participant

I exactly do not like the Mig-AT, it’s similar to the Yak-130 but has much lower performance, considering it has a 2000kg payload compared to Yak-130’s 3000kg, it’s French engines suck and I don’t think theres hope of RD-1700 or whatever to being ever made and put into it, not to mention the Mig-AT is slower than the Yak-130. I’d rather get the L-159B which is more comperable to Mig-AT but is single engined and has similar performance, still however imo uncomperable to the Yak-130.

If you do not like the Eastern Yak-130, go for a Western equivelant of M-346 or even the A-50. I may have been wrong about the A-50 but it’s very hard to find info on it, so far it will have a radar(forget which version) and weapons like AIM-120 and JDAM, though it has a lot more performance than M-346/Yak-130, it’s significantly more expensive.

October 12, 2004 at 4:31 pm in reply to: MiG-31 #2630942

Srbin
Participant

So is R-37M going to supersedethe R-37? Considering that it only has a longer range and thats aboyut it.

October 12, 2004 at 2:37 am in reply to: Build your own Airforce #2631190

Srbin
Participant

Come one, lets see who really can think outside te box.

October 12, 2004 at 2:05 am in reply to: Hordes of LWF or Few Hi-Tech Heavy Fighters #2631204

Srbin
Participant

How you assume that in 1:1 Su-30MKI has advantage over FC-1. FC-1 can lock 3sqm target at 100KM. just think about 25sqm target. Similarly FC-1 is coming with 100deg offboresight WVR and HMD so no advantage there. disengaging means running away from BVR which is impossible. once you are locked and missile is fired in no escape zone there is no running away.

Yahoo you are all right, and were from the beggining :rolleyes:

Everyone stop arguing with him.

October 11, 2004 at 9:51 pm in reply to: S-300PMU-1 #2055643

Srbin
Participant

It takes more than 5 minutes to do so (SAM-10 mobile). To shut-down all running systems.
Deevelate launchers, radars, pillars. Disconnect communic. and power lines.
Putting camo away.
To come back into a successfull firing modus it will take an even longer time.

For a much more mobil SAM 12 complex this can be achived in a staged exercise perhaps. Put time for first firing again is longer too.

And you have to know, where to go in advance. To fed data of the new place into your computers, all systems in GPS-like position, without delay.
If it is not flat terrain. You need much more data, to get the best from your radars, otherwise severve limitations by terrain.

I am not sure but thats what I read in a few articles. I know the older Russian SAMs were very mobile, in Allied Force, after the war despite being obsolete most of the Russian made Serbian SAMs were still operational because of constant moving to escape ARMs and very few did take any.

October 11, 2004 at 9:47 pm in reply to: Hard points on variable geometry aircraft #2631309

Srbin
Participant

I don’t think the Tomcat ever had a need for underwing hardpoints so you never see them. It can still carry a full 8 missile loadout without underwing hardpoints.

and how is that achieved?

October 11, 2004 at 8:17 pm in reply to: Best of new generation of AJTs #2631340

Srbin
Participant

The Hongdu L-15 seems to be in many ways similar to the Yak-130, externally the Yak-130 might’ve influenced it and also considering that there is a significant Yakovlev involvement in the programme.

October 11, 2004 at 8:14 pm in reply to: Surface to Surface Ballistic Missiles #2055649

Srbin
Participant

My knowledge of Ballistic Missiles is rather limited.

Once they fire a missile from a launcher, how long usually does it take it to replace it with another missile on average?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 1,678 total)

← 1 2 3 … 35 36 37 … 110 111 112 →