dark light

Otaku

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,111 through 1,125 (of 1,246 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2512171
    Otaku
    Participant

    Small PAK-FA……:cool:
    [ATTACH]159961[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Super Hornet buy to be reconsidered. #2515168
    Otaku
    Participant

    This is probably gonna wreck Boeing’s Malaysian SH tender too…..ah who cares? Viva Su-30MKM follow-on order!!:cool:

    Aussies to weigh-up Russian warplanes? Who’d have thought it…..

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2515645
    Otaku
    Participant
    in reply to: Su-34 with centreline tank #2517176
    Otaku
    Participant

    Thanks ARA662!! nice video, loads of new stuff including the definitive cockpit & GPS/GLONASS test bomb drop[06:21]…there’s no way this kick-ass warplane weighs in at only $36million.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2519481
    Otaku
    Participant

    PAK-FA engine test-bed (quite literally).
    [ATTACH]159719[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2519524
    Otaku
    Participant

    -the Russians are giving up their “famous” lattice fins used in R 77, replacing them with conventional ones ?????? OMG!!! So this revered aerodinamic design is not so great ????? Blasphemy!! :p :p :p

    …or (a previous) inability to produce sufficiently small actuator motors.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2520115
    Otaku
    Participant

    Information is from russian official sources, also from russian forums.
    Pure Delta design is not very probable, but somewhere was mentioned that PAK-FA is more like YF-23 than F-22…

    Zdarova hexpop, from the sources you mention can we assume:

    ‘diamond’ shaped wing planform,
    two sharply inclined ‘ruddervators’ (but no horizontal stabilizers)
    two widely-spaced TVC engines (hence no serrated aft profile)?

    Kinda explains the OTT secrecy and officials pulling a mock-up from MAKS’07.

    PAK-FA weapons:
    http://www.ato.ru/rus/cis/archive/17-2007/def/def3/

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2520706
    Otaku
    Participant

    Indeed, but I had to stand on my friends shoulders and he had to run really fast 🙁

    You must’ve been standing on the shoulders of Giants, crushing the Interior Ministry troops at Bilyarsk AFB underfoot like ants…we salute you.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2520767
    Otaku
    Participant

    YAAAAY first flight already!!!!! How’d you get aboard the chase plane? Lucky Devil.

    in reply to: Ability of RuAF and Russian Navy to destroy US CBG #2520796
    Otaku
    Participant

    Why would a UCAV be any different to any other aircraft, the same rules applie. UCAV’s dont change anything.

    If a flying Chinese dustbin can knock out a modern Israeli destroyer (as occured off Lebanon a couple of summers ago) then think of what a swarm off stealth UCAVs with their miniscule RCS will do to a CV BG, evading LR CAPs and AEGIS PAs, delivering their payload with next to no early warning- or were you betting on a Tu-22 surviving long enough with it’s barn door RCS?

    Maybe you’d prefer the UCAVs to play Wagner’s ‘Ride of the Valkyries’ to signal their aproach to ‘even up the rules’?

    As for Kirov, that anti-CBG/ SSGN combo is totally outmoded, from the 1970s.
    Peter the Great is more of a liability than a credible anti-carrier platform, how many keels that have been laid-down since Pyotr Veliikii evoke the Kirov ethos? -zilch.
    The key word is OBSOLESCENCE. It happens, now let it go & get on with your life.

    in reply to: Ability of RuAF and Russian Navy to destroy US CBG #2520802
    Otaku
    Participant

    In the coming decade, the proliferation of UCAV technology & it’s deployment in the anti-shipping role must present a major headache for US Navy (and other blue-water navies) planners.

    UCAVs with a decent range & payload targetting the AEGIS specifically or the BG at random, with minimal reaction time is going to severely dent the BG’s role as principal tool of power projection- especially when you consider that a disabled CVN is going to pose bigger problems than one lying at the bottom of the sea.
    It appears history repeats itself from a hundred years ago with the ‘Dreadnought’ & U-Boat to the CV BG & UCAV.

    in reply to: Ability of RuAF and Russian Navy to destroy US CBG #2520854
    Otaku
    Participant

    How’s about a dozen PLAN ‘Skat’-type UCAVS, stuffed full of those zig-zaggin’ ‘Sizzlers’ engaging a CV BG in the S. China sea…major headache for planners huh? & surely more lethal than any ‘Backfire’.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2520856
    Otaku
    Participant

    The YF-23 PAK-FA rendition [c/o franc] looks fantastic!!…..will no doubt fuel the rumour mill, with official RuMOD denials that any artwork is accurate & internet chatter speculating (double/’diamond’) delta wings.
    [ATTACH]159692[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]159693[/ATTACH]
    Regarding, small vert. stabs.- if you recall MiG considered these for their ‘Skat’ UCAV, but opted instead for an all-wing design- regardless they’d still be viable in conjunction with TVC.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2525542
    Otaku
    Participant

    Recent picture of S-37 exhibiting new fuselage mounting:
    [ATTACH]159578[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2529386
    Otaku
    Participant

    If the avionics are also finalized, then the PAK-FA may have lesser Indian input than even the Su-30 MKI.

    An official Sukhoi company announcement is good news, but I think the avionics are far from being finalised & will be integrated with a ‘rolling’ programme extending well past EMD/LRIP and into series production. Besides, I think the Indians- especially DRDO, have much to offer the PAK-FA, whether RusAF or MKI.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,111 through 1,125 (of 1,246 total)