peshoYou mention the Second World War, but in this war the most widely used combat aircraft were never chosen for their manoeuvrability, you know, all those 2 and 4-engined bombers, the Il-2 Shturmovik and other attack types
I tought that we talk about fighters,not bombers.
And in the non-missile era agility was equally important as speed and armament.That is one of the reasons why Me-110 failed as fighter and became successful as nigh-time interceptor as you mentioned.And in Eastern front where most of the aerial combat was in the low-middle height,agility was very important.And if you forgot agility showed how superior is engine with direct injection.
peshoEvery piston engine fighter can outturn a jet fighter with ease.
Sens my post was about this line “Agility has never been that important in the entire history of aerial combat”
Btw i still own you an apology if you feel that my post about BIP was too rude.
peshoYou are lucky totoro.There was times in this forum when you can be torn to pieces if you say anything against that marble size figure.
peshoAdd to that the Leclercs significantly more compact power pack (the UAE Leclerc had to be extended to take the Euro-powerpack, an installation that actually leaves considerable space in the Leopard!) and its use of an autoloader in place of a crew member and it becomes apparent that the type is actually very well balanced, in reality it is just as well protected as any other western MBT it is just lighter becouse it is a more modern design.
The power pack is very good,but also suffer from overheating.I’m big fan of Soviet/Russian tanks and now is obvious that if western tanks want to lose weight and reduse their size,they must trow out the loader.Some facts for comparison.Abrams have 21 m3 of volume that need to be armored,Leopard have 19.6 ,Leclerc only 17.5 and T-90 with…11.04.So even with lower weight the armour level can be almost equal..Also the front panel is 2.7 m2 for Abrams,2.2 fo Leopard and 1.6 for Leclerc.
The problem for the Challenger was in part the choice of the 1200hp power pack, where the 1500hp pack was much more suitable.
The problem with the 30 degree slope was not with the power.There was simply not enough friction.
And there is speculation about Leopard armor level.
In Greece Leopard turret was subjected to 120mm fire during acceptance testing. Of 5 rounds fired frontally, 2 penetrated near or through the gunners sight. Greek army was not impressed as the Germans had promised that the change in the sight location from the A4 to A5 would improve that “weak spot”.
peshoThe Leclerc has been positioned at a much lower weight category than its contempories, such as the Leopard 2, Challenger 2 and Abrams. This nowadays has little benefit, but does limit its ability to use heavy armour.
How is Leclerc in “much” lower weight category,when he weights 54 tons,Leopard 2A4 is 55 and M1A1 Abrams is 57.And the benefit of lower weight is always big.On the Greek trials Challenger was unable to climb the 30 degree slope test,Abrams was unable to stop,Leopard 2A5 also failed to climb.Afer they change the tracks of Leopard the test was passed,but required another track change.
peshoAgility has never been that important in the entire history of aerial combat as far as I can see, certainly not the decisive factor.
There was something called World War 2,and yes the numbers won the war but undermining agility just lead to greater losses in both planes and more importantly pilots.
peshoGood one Rodolfo.
Here is something on the theme:http://picasaweb.google.com/BelShooter/JYjqAB
53t6 is certainly bigger but its warhead can be bigger too. Unfortunately we can’t measure speeds based on these videos.
I put the video in an editor and found that the missile travel 1 time its lenght in around 1 frame.The video is 25 fps,so that mean the speed is 250 m/s,if the missile is 10 meters long as stated in some sites.That is 900 km/h,but don’t forget that is in the first 23 frames or less than second.
peshoRelax.I was dead serious when i was reading,but when i searched and found “BIP , a Colombian reggaeton band”….
It can be a lot easier if you just describe the acronym,but i know it is part of your attitude.
And btw this is english language forum,not German or any else,so you cannot see me typing БВП instead of GDP.
peshoI am helpfull always. Please type BIP into GOOGLE and you will find the following:
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=…le-Suche&meta=The next time you can try it yourself.
Results in German!Wow,very impressive.And we all must know it right?
Other searches revealed:
Bip may refer to:
* BIP (band), a Colombian reggaeton band
* Bip (channel), an Israeli channel
* bip! (initial lowcase), the name of the contactless smartcard fare system used in Transantiago and Santiago Metro
* Bip Roberts, an American baseball player
* Bip, a famous character of mime Marcel Marceau
* bip is a usual pronunciation of the dimensionless unit bp
BIP as an acronym may refer to:
* Biotechnology industrial park
* Botswana Independence Party, a political party in Botswana that existed from 1964 to 1994
* British International Pictures (later Associated British Picture Corporation), a British film production company active from 1927 until 1970
* Bip IRC Proxy, an application for Unix-like systems
* Business Improvement Plan
* BiP or Binding immunoglobulin protein, an endoplasmic reticulum molecular chaperone.
So next time be more helpfull and decribe it.You can try yourself.
peshoThe proper PGM targets are the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the Council of Experts and the barracks of the Revolutionary Guards (enforcers of the Supreme Leader’s will).
How clever.It’s like there will be no new leader in just one week.And to target Khamenei…It’s very easy to talk from distance.You are not grunt in Iraq,you are not civilian in Iraq,you are not even close to this region.If you think that killing few leaders(with the same success to kill Saddam) and some soldiers will solve the problem,well…you just play too much video games.
Too bad no westerner has the will to do what it takes to win.
If there is such leader,i’m going to the gas station to prepare for the next record high oil price.
peshoWhat exactly do you mean?Are you using the english version or the russian one?Put one screenshot if you can.
peshoAlso, If Krutshev wouldn’t have been on power, it would have been likely that the Soviets wouldn’t have invested so much on Submarines, and that correlates directly to the heavy ASW orientation in Western fleets. I think we would have seen lots of intresting desings in the ASuW role.
I doubt that.Soviets learn their lessons from WW2 and also analyse the way submarines were used by Germans,USA and Japan.Even before the war,they build up their submarine force steadily.Stalin prefered as was said large surface,artillery ships,but was forced to live with the reality,that they were expensive and slow to build.Submarines on the other hand,were much easier thing.Building submarine in Leningrad,and transporting it to Pacific fleet was something regular.But the official(Stalin) line was in favor of battleship fleet.There is a story how the second-in-command of RKKA Marine forces Ivan Ludri,wrote an article in february 1936,where he “throw away” battleships as main naval force.Later he “correct” himself with new article in wich:”submarines and naval planes cannot replace battleships”.But this was too late to help him.1937 he was repressed.
USSR submarines performed poorly in WW2,despite their large numbers in the beggining.But the reasons behind that were well known to soviet experts.They also got some of the “tastiest” captured and then divided by the winners German subs and for good or bad,they were main influence for a long time.But subs proved to be good asymetric response for carriers.
And here is the main Krutshev role.Krutshev loved missiles.I think you all know the story that,according to him,VVS mean Vse Vas Sokratit(You all will be fired).So soviets found that submarines are good launch platform for missiles.Hidden and in large numbers,they compensate for the poor accuracy of the missile and for small numbers of surface ships.
On the other hand,they were forced to concentrate on subs for another reason.Lack of good naval bases for large ships,and lack of suitable not freezing base.
peshoIn Norway related to season, you have no daylight, iced runways, mountain terrain, fog, snow a.s.o.
And you think that they will be clear for takeoff/land in such conditions?
Even than it is still misleading, without related missions, weather conditions and related infra-structure.
The same case with Indian MiG-21’s.All the blame is thrown on the plane.
peshoWhile googling for “f-22 overweight” I found these two presentations by Pierre Spey and James Stevenson. Good read.
Good read?The second is very bad.Just for example.They assume that because F-22 is larget,it will be the first to be detected.
Just red the first one.He state because an bomber and missile interceptor,armed with BVR missiles have smoky engines is crap.Maybe he want 0.50cal armed F-86,based on the stuff he wrote.
peshoFor example, some RAF Jaguars have retired with up to 6000 hours on the airframe – I’d love to see a Su-17 or MiG-23/27 with that sort of milage…
So basically you are comparing aircraft maintained with the money RAF have,with ex-communist country,short on money,unable to even give proper shelter or repair their planes,now find “useless” by the new democratic goverments.Or in the case of some countries,use second hand or expired parts.
Sign In
