Page 2 – Key Publishing

ohadbx

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 92 total)

← 1 2 3 … 5 6 7 →

Author

Posts
October 31, 2004 at 11:38 pm in reply to: Egyptian Tu-16 Pictures? #2619634

ohadbx
Participant

Are they still in service with the EAF?

September 17, 2004 at 3:24 pm in reply to: Israeli Superweapon? #2057327

ohadbx
Participant

Erez- well, I dont.
If you want to compare believing in Israel having nukes to believing in god you are just prooving my point. Maybe Israel has a “Holy Nuke”? 🙂

September 16, 2004 at 10:54 pm in reply to: Israeli Superweapon? #2057361

ohadbx
Participant

Erez- if all those sources had ANY type of access to this kind of information I would have considered listening to them. But they dont…. so why bother?
Israel did not denay nor confirmed this information and no hard facts has been published by anyone- so how can you (or me) as a mere simple man can say true or false?

September 11, 2004 at 1:03 pm in reply to: Future of USAF F-15s #2651338

ohadbx
Participant

External armament and fuel tanks can be jettisoned in a second.
Both the E and C can carry CFTs, and these can be taken off on the ground- and anyway it is said that they very little effect on the plane’s performance (except the extra range).
So what’s your point?

September 11, 2004 at 12:12 pm in reply to: Israeli Superweapon? #2057600

ohadbx
Participant

Erez- Israel having nukes is currently only a rumor- with no hard facts to support it. There is no point of discussing it, as you might as well be discussing about Sumalia having a Klingon spaceship. (Actually Im really surprized that someone like you is making such a statement so blindly).

As for the weapons- the information given is wayyy too general to make any assumptions. It could also be the guided MLRS or other stuff like that.

September 11, 2004 at 12:07 pm in reply to: Future of USAF F-15s #2651353

ohadbx
Participant

Wouldn’t one assume inferior air-to-air capabilities in the strike/bomber version of the eagle? I neam after all, the F-15E is no F-15C when it comes to air combat. Have the Typhoon and F-15C ever gone at it?

Nope, The E has pretty much the same performance in A2A as the C.
If any, the E has the upper hand, since it is a 2-seater (useful in dogfights when the WSO can watch for the enemy).

September 11, 2004 at 12:01 pm in reply to: Future of USAF F-15s #2651356

ohadbx
Participant

Wouldn’t one assume inferior air-to-air capabilities in the strike/bomber version of the eagle? I neam after all, the F-15E is no F-15C when it comes to air combat. Have the Typhoon and F-15C ever gone at it?

Nope, The E has pretty much the same performance in A2A as the C.
If any, the E has the upper hand, since it is a 2-seater (useful in dogfights when the WSO can watch for the enemy).

August 30, 2004 at 8:17 pm in reply to: IDF F-15s #2659748

ohadbx
Participant

Oh, how much longer will they be called navigators? 🙂
BTW i dont know if anyone already noticed (didnt read the entire topic) but this picture is fake http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=13610&stc=1
1. EW antenna on the tail the F-15I doesnt have
2. navigation stripes the F-15I doesnt have
3. poor photoshop job on the IAF symbol on the nose.

the original picture is of a strike eagle.

August 30, 2004 at 4:21 pm in reply to: Picture request- F-22 using TVC #2660171

ohadbx
Participant

Thanks.
checked it out, really nice.

August 28, 2004 at 1:42 am in reply to: Su-30 Fans Cheer On! #2662097

ohadbx
Participant

All that fancy-shmency cobras and hooks wount help him a bit against a fighter with modern/next generation AAMs (Pyhton 4/5, AIM-9X, maybe R-73 and ASRAAM) with HMS.
And I agree, most of those diagrams are based on 1 perticular assumption on the actions of the non-sukhoi pilot. If the enemy pilot knows what hes doing he can avoid it,

August 27, 2004 at 5:49 am in reply to: Israeli Arrow missile fails to hit target in California test #2059103

ohadbx
Participant

well someone (cant remember the name or position) in the project spoke on the morning news and said that this test was to simulate a capability that could be available in FUTUE BMs, but no BM currently has it.
He also said that the reason for the failure was a pure technical probelm in the missile itselft, not a problem in the design or performance.
He also mentioned that in real war conditions in a case like this a second missile would be launched, and of course the probability that 2 missiles will fail is low.

The info released on the subject says the system identified the real warhead and sent the missile to its direction, but at some point the missile failed.

So I guess all the stuff you said here is not very true.

August 26, 2004 at 4:41 am in reply to: Australia to get cruise missiles #2059173

ohadbx
Participant

souce of this information?

August 25, 2004 at 4:02 am in reply to: Wuich Dron is that? #2664707

ohadbx
Participant

its looks very similar to the Bird Eye 500 from IAI.
2 problems- 1. the one in the photos has a bit of a higher wing
2. I dont recall the Bird Eye 500 being operational or bought bu the US.

August 23, 2004 at 10:20 pm in reply to: a few questions about the Su-35 #2665725

ohadbx
Participant

Is Su-35 801 in a tandem or arm-by-arm configuration?

August 22, 2004 at 9:22 pm in reply to: a few questions about the Su-35 #2666677

ohadbx
Participant

Thank you all for your answers.
One more thing- this picture is from flymig.com and its says this is a Su-35 at MAKS 2001. http://www.flymig.com/maks_2003/images/su-35.landing.jpg
but flaknker man said that 04 was 87, and that the two-seater is 801, so what is going on?
BTW it look like it lacks the straight esges of the single seat Su-35.
Could the site have it all wrong and this is a Su-30 or something?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 92 total)

← 1 2 3 … 5 6 7 →