dark light

garryA

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 316 through 330 (of 948 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2163640
    garryA
    Participant

    You dress up your partisan bickering as a language error to make other ppl look bad

    No i don’t. As usual you are trying to push your misunderstanding as fact. In this case it is even worse because anyone who can speak/listen English properly can see that you are wrong. The video even have caption. If you can’t understand to what he said then at least turn it on.

    Then you sneak in a reference about the F 15 when you know that the guy is comparing the F 22 to the su 30. Not the F 15.

    Alright, open the video on full screen, turn on the caption. Between 5:56 and 6:25 , he literally said F-15 with wing tank dominate clean Su-30. No one sneak anything in. It is just you either having very poor English ( which is acceptable, but turn on the caption next time) or trying to troll.

    But then garryA goes on about fuel tanks, better pilots and tactics blah blah blah.

    I talked about fuel tank and pilots because that is literally what he talked about in the video. You are just embarrassing yourself now

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2163662
    garryA
    Participant

    1] no, the area is infinite in X coordinate, it can be launched in pakistan or china and you couldnt tell the difference,
    the space based system will otoh create a perfectly round diameter

    https://image.slidesharecdn.com/09triangulation-130426074055-phpapp02/95/09-triangulation-6-638.jpg?cb=1366962094

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2164660
    garryA
    Participant

    geolocation is done by space based IR, and unlike the F-35 short sighted bubble,
    it has a top-down view and can conclude which country said missile was launched from.
    go to the nearest trigonometry teacher, buy now, pay next year

    1) Top down view or side way view is very irrelevance for triangulation. It only depending on the number of point you have and the distance between them
    2) Range of IR system depending a lot on how powerful the infrared radiation is. Ballistics missiles like Scud or long range SAM like 40N6E produce alot of heat and hence very significant amount of infrared radiation

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2165423
    garryA
    Participant

    Let me make sure its the right video but he does say that the su 30 was dancing with the Raptor.

    Then he just says”our better pilots” fought “them again. Then we kicked their a$$ brah”

    So the Raptor is a lesser trained pilot away from being in trouble against a su 30 and this is somehow a vindication for the Raptor ? I think it speaks volumes for the abilities of the su 30 and 35.

    I don’t want to be mean but both you and OP really need to learn English properly
    The general said when US does those exercise with India in the past, they only sent their operational pilot with not alot of experience while India often sent their best. So India was able to win more time in close combat. However, when they used pilots with similar experience level, US side was able to dominate with F-15 carrying fuel tank while Su-30 is in clean configuration ( not that i buy what he said but if you think this video even remotely close to support your point then ……well i have no word “.
    He did talk about an inexperience Raptor pilot being in trouble in close combat, but it is not against Su-30 but rather against F-15/F-16 in their own exercrise , he even mentioned that how they developed tactics against TVC opponents

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2167619
    garryA
    Participant

    I really don’t see how that video supports your point. At around 6:20 he literally said their F-15 unit dominate Su-30 in close combat. Language barriers?. Moreover, India doesn’t have Typhoon, Gripen, F-15, F-16 or F-18 either, probably didn’t even have rafale at that time

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2168245
    garryA
    Participant

    While we are on that subject, when India was flying their various 4th and 4.5 gen fighters with the Raptor, the USAF said that the only thing that could play with the Raptor in dogfighting was the su 30’s.

    Nah….. they didn’t

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2169222
    garryA
    Participant

    at the modest ranges that is A2A, triangulation is done accurately

    A group of Gripen with directional datalink+ triangulation can geolocate the F-22 with its radar on
    A group of F-22 with directional datalink + radar can geolocate all Gripen
    Big different there

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2169799
    garryA
    Participant

    its directional data link means a stealth fighter is forced to use radar, at which point its no longer stealth and can be detected at greater ranges. If the stealth fighter doesnt flip on radar, it still comes out second best,
    because skyward G isnt less than any other IRST, while gripen frontal cross section is less and therefore radiate less

    ESM is very bad in ranging a moving airborne target so Gripen would need a way to generate firing solution and F-22/F-35 can also be linked together so only one would need to transmit

    in reply to: Best 4.5 gen fighter #2171257
    garryA
    Participant

    196 wing angle
    197 wing extension
    198 wing loading
    199 fuselage extension
    200 Power steering engine / aircraft weight
    201 deviation of the thrust vector
    202 followed by a radar target
    203 targets simultaneously being attacked
    204 points of suspension
    205 RCS
    206 maximum overload
    207 acceleration
    208 flight distance

    212 top speed
    213 cruising speed
    214 flight distance
    215 Range Radar
    216 followed by a radar target
    217 targets simultaneously being attacked
    219 RCS
    220 range missiles “air – air”

    223 efficiency / cost
    225 generation

    Your value is so strange, how come F-16 , F-18E , Typhoon has less radar range than Su-27 but Mig-35 has longer radar range ?
    Where exactly are those RCS value come from ? they do look very random
    The cruise value doesn’t make any sense either. How come F-16 , F-18 , Rafale , Typhoon all has the same cruise speed as Su-27 but Su-35 is about 40% faster (while we know that Typhoon can supercruisequite fast) ??????
    Same goes for acceleration row : is bigger number mean better or vice versa ? If bigger mean better then there is no ways F-18E get better acceleration than Su-27. However, if smaller mean better then that doesn’t make sense either because F-16 can actually accelerate better than Su-27.
    The missiles range air to air is also very controversial, what missiles are we talking about here ? R-27ER ? Meteor ? Aim-120D ?

    There seem to be so many random value in the table without proper references

    in reply to: Should Iraq have bought the Su-30? #2178027
    garryA
    Participant

    Loaded weights, ~12 ton for the F-16C, ~15 ton for the MiG-29.. All things combined and assuming similar aerodynamics

    They do not have similar aerodynamic, not by a long shot
    https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-d0b7d25aa88c94db01f1b64cd0911f60

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2181670
    garryA
    Participant

    Post like this make me seriously worry about the sort of mental images that people have about the how war is conducted.

    It seems me that you have still this decades old idea of SAM system like something that have to be in the open before the attack so to allow the attacking aircraft to organize themselves in order to attack them in a timely, ordinate and fashionably manners.
    Do you have an idea about what “pop up” mean?
    It’s almost from the end of the first gulf war but for what SU/Russia is concerned almost from the eighties, that the AD system are organized to stay mostly covered and deploy only after the enemy attack is begun so to be able to engage them at the moment they seem best to inflict damages.

    Attack formation would not so know from what direction and in what moment the SAM systems would enter battle, the only system that would operate continuosly would be some very long range AEW radar systems like the NEBO, situated hundreds of kilometers inside enemy territory (P.S.and a lot of passive systems also) while also very long range system like S-400 and S-300 V would start hidden and pop up during the attack.
    Now, we have had the proof of how a similar tactics work with even updates versions of of missiles from the sixties, let’s imagine with actual systems developed ab initio with this tactics in mind

    So, excuse me, don’t just get angry with me but reading back what you, in all intellectual honesty i’m sure, have written is for certain verses even funny.
    That idea of a SAM system that not only sit happily in the open waiting for the enemy to organize itself into the best manner to bomb it but that once the attack starts try to manoeuvre to outflank the enemy aircraft is just soo absurd… :highly_amused:

    Yes , i do understand what pop up mean. What iam trying to say is that, SAM , even the mobiles one are still ground assets. They can move but no where as fast as an aircraft.So once their location is discovered their only course of action is to shoot down anything launched at them ( unlike an aircraft which always can descent below radar horizon and runaways).This make a big different because that mean any SAM transmitted or launch their missiles will become target .Second point is that strike packet doesnot really care about SAM. Their main objectives most of the time are often important infrastructures like air base, command center , Hydroelectric dam ..etc. If there is no short range SAM defense those location, the important structure will be ruined by cruise missiles and bomb pretty quickly.In other words, SAM are defensive weapon, you can hide them to keep them safe but then they would not be doing their job .So it could be expected that at least there are many short range defense system near target location.
    Long range radar system like NEBO will also be attacked by loads of cruise missiles given their massive size and lack of mobility. So it could be expected that there are many short range SAM defending them too.
    Overall, the SAM location is not as unexpected as you would think.It is basically a hide and seek game where one side have much lesser mobility.
    There is jamming to deny communication too.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2182784
    garryA
    Participant

    Desert storm statistic? I? What? Who?Where? When? Why?

    it was obligatory but alright

    About the second leg of your post, again: we were talking about highly mobile pop up systems, not SA-2 like system you know the position days in advance.
    If you put the SEAD/DEAD escort forward they would strike in the rear, if you put them all around they would concentrate them on just a side to overload it.

    In any case, for those missions, Growlers/Tornado ECR all the time!

    Even the most mobile pop up SAM are still ground assets. Their speed/mobility is no where comparable to an airplane. In other words, they have to get in their location before the strike platforms come. Once the strike mission starts, let say if stealth aircraft are in the front, non stealth in the back. Your mobile SAM cannot move behind the aircraft formation to flank them.Moreover, once discovered the SAM battery have to fight back, they can’t out run a missile or bomb.
    In terms of tactical flexibility, aircraft really take the cake here

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2182882
    garryA
    Participant

    You are keeping to put into equation systems that are actually still in development and compare it against system like Sa-2…

    Comparison were between system actually existing and in operational use.

    Desert storm is over 27 years ago, various systems that were used in desert storm either been heavily upgraded or will not be used in future. If you want to judge the capabilities of future cruise missiles from Desert storm statistics, then it would only be fair to judge capabilities of SAM through previous conflicts.

    Neither my point is changed, we are discussing there about F-35 used like an escort for 4gen strike pack, so before the two bombs from the first F-35 (because they would be in different places in the case given, not in a single pack launching them all together) came halfway, half the escorted ones have received their own present.

    If F-35 working as escort for 4th gen, it would either work as a stand in support jamming assets or a SEAD/DEAD assets that fly much closer to the threat compared to the strike formation.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2182967
    garryA
    Participant

    nah…a glide bomb like SDB goes around half the speed of a powered subsonic speed missile,
    or can be higher depending on descending rate

    JSM , SPEAR both have engine
    Anyways , even if SDB II move at Mach 0.6 only, it doesnot change my point that much.

    i think you should read up on GAO summery of desert storm,
    the cruise missiles had so rotten accuracy so the entire text was censored out
    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?126574-GAO-summary-of-Desert-Storm

    AFAIK, SAM and AA cannon have rotten accuracy too, Ex: in Vietnam war , SAM accuracy was something like 3%

    in reply to: The Russians and Chinese have learned from the F-14 ? #2182978
    garryA
    Participant

    Well its to the embarresment to US and kudos to USSR that Tupolev did it right.
    Pretty sure Tupolev looked at the B-1 and said: – hey, not a bad idea!

    The B-1B was not only too slow, but too small for any NC deterrence mission. Not big enough weapons bay for carrying any serious clubs.
    The B-1 was supposed to be a jack of all trades in both convential and NC missions, but instead became quite limited in both camps

    The speed of B-1B was a design philosophy rather than US incapable of producing high supersonic bomber. The original B-1A with variable inlet can actually reached top speed of Mach 2.2 . However, USAF varius studies shows that with the development of SAM , high supersonic bomber would be no more survivable than the old subsonic B-52. Which indicate in the change of B-1B design, fixed inlet instead of variable inlet for RCS reduction and structure re enforce for low altitude mission below radar horizon.

    The original B-1 also intended to have external weapon pylon for nuclear missiles too( another 22000 kg of payload if i recall correctly), however, that is restricted by START I treaty
    http://i57.tinypic.com/20f4yuf.png
    https://s28.postimg.org/mq7886snh/b1pyl.jpg

Viewing 15 posts - 316 through 330 (of 948 total)