Page 80 – Key Publishing

mig-31bm

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 1,759 total)

← 1 2 3 … 79 80 81 … 116 117 118 →

Author

Posts
January 24, 2015 at 3:01 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230652

mig-31bm
Participant

Mig-31bm, the apache carried the ground fire acquisition system on the wintips:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_lru9On2u4
at 12:00

So it seems it wouldn’t be able to carry AAMs.

Geez, the Z-10 looks awesome. But I doubt its missiles are as good as the hellfire. Do the chinese have laser guided rockets in the works?

HJ-10 is basically a AGM-114 with ability to hit both air and ground target

January 24, 2015 at 3:00 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230655

mig-31bm
Participant

Apache has been tested with the Starstreak missile in the AA role as well – don’t know what’s become of that project, though.

to be fair i dont know what make startreak a better AAM than LOGIR, DARG, Cirit or APKWS?

January 24, 2015 at 2:58 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230656

mig-31bm
Participant

My No.1 candidate.

But it is pointless to talk about the air-to-air abilities of gunships – like all slow, ugly and heavily loaded strike aircraft they are easy targets unless they have good air escort from fighters and their potential targets have been dealt with by DEAD/SEAD assets.

yeah, they are all slow and ugly, but i think they can deal with short range SAM like tor-m1?, and they can still shot down other heli?
oh i just realised another advantage of AH-64, Mi-28 , Ka-52 if iam not wrong only they can carry a radar mass at the top, other like T129, AH-1z, Tiger cant do that?

January 24, 2015 at 12:43 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230717

mig-31bm
Participant

to be fair the Z-10 with it’s HJ-10 missile is pretty impressive

January 24, 2015 at 12:37 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230721

mig-31bm
Participant

They can carry the AIM-9 and stinger, but I don’t think they usually do. I also believe that the AH-64E has sensors or DIRCM on the wingtips so in can’t carry AAMs there.

yeah they seem to carry agm most of the time , i think the only heli with DIRCM sensor on wing tip is T129 and tiger and they really cant carry anything there, would be quite stupid for AH-64E to lost it’s AA capabilities because of new DIRCM

January 24, 2015 at 12:26 pm in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230745

mig-31bm
Participant

AFAIK the apache and the cobra don’t usually carry AAMs ( although I believe they can on their wingtips ). Has the hellfire been tested against helicopters? It flies at mach 1.3 so it should be fast enough.

if i remember correctly the AH-1, AH-64 both can carry 2 aim-9 on their wing tip, or 4 stinger ( also on their wing tip)
ka-52 can carry R-73, AT129 can carry mistral and stinger
i think rocket guider laser such as cirit, vikhr, apkws, DARG, AGM-114L all can be used again helicopter

January 24, 2015 at 8:00 am in reply to: Su 27 Flanker intercepting a Portuguese P-3 Orion #2230788

mig-31bm
Participant

i like this color more

January 24, 2015 at 7:52 am in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230792

mig-31bm
Participant

Though I am from Turkey and not 100% objective about this comparison but:

Air to air:

T-129 is the smallest, lightest of 5. It also has relatively modern engine which was originally developed for RAH-66. All of this should translate to least IR signature. It also has the highest Power/weight ratio, which should translate to quicker climbs and accelerations than others, and better maneuverability than all but Ka-52. It will also have AIM-9X capability so it puts it to #1 in my list.

Anti-armor:

Depends. Ka-52 has excellent airframe performance and Vikhr has good penetration and range, 2 additional pylons for rockets are an advantage.

Mi-28 on the other hand can carry 16 ATGMs and still have 2 free pylons, 2xS-13 pods will be deadly for tanks.

Though biased as I am, I admire T-129’s flexibility; 2x Quad launchers on outer pylons. They can hold 8 UMTAS missiles. They are potent ATGMs, and passive IIR seekers are an advantage as it doesn’t warn the target vehicle. What is unique is that each one of the missiles can be replaced with Quad Cirit launcher, totaling up to 16 missiles per pylon. Internal pylons can carry 12 Cirit missiles each, so a single T-129 can carry 56x laser-guided anti-armor missiles, which are good for APCs/IFVs. Any combination is possible (5 UMTAS + 36 Cirit etc), and for a pre-assesed target group, very effective.

AH-1Z is the fastest one i think , it cruise at top speed of other heli

Never exceed speed: 222 knots (255 mph, 411 km/h) in a dive
Cruise speed: 160 kn (184 mph, 296 km/h)

on the other hand
China Z-10 is the one with highest climb rate > 15 m/s
KA-52 is very unique as it the only one with ejection seat

January 24, 2015 at 7:47 am in reply to: Best helicopter in air to air , anti tank role ? #2230796

mig-31bm
Participant

Ka-52.

Coax >>>>>

Also unlike Mi-28, it has been flying with DIRCM and radar for several years now.

EDIT: Also, that is a horrible pic you used for Mi-28. Someone’s desktop? 😀

And no pic of Ka-52, the meanest looking of the bunch!

i like the ka-52 too
Mi-28 on the other hand soo ugly , it literally look like mickey mouse

January 21, 2015 at 2:37 am in reply to: Aegis vs Ashm #1788123

mig-31bm
Participant

Wikipedia is not a reliable source

ok fixed now , i was just being lazy

and some of those missile approach heights seem questionable. For example, Exocet flies at around 100m until it gets to within seeker range of the target. Once it has lock-on (perhaps around 15-10km from its victim), it descends to some 10-15m above sea level, and only gets down to lower heights in the final part of its run.
That final approach can be anything from 8 – 2m,

from what i understand earlier version of exocet (before block III ) used rocket engine so quite limited in range , it was also designed in the time that radar wasn’t very good at detect , track missiles at long distance that why it could afford to cruise at relatively high altitude to saved fuel
modern subsonic missiles dont have that problems because they have quite long range (around 200-400 km )

depending on sea state.

totally agreed , if the sea is calm (sea state 1-3) then missiles can cruise lower , if there was alot of high waves (sea state 5 and higher)then they will have to go much higher for sure
even a relatively old missile like gabriel mk ii can fly at 1-3 meter depending on sea state
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Y8kePYFK1L8C&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=gabriel+mk+ii&source=bl&ots=hOB7EHugwa&sig=OPGA1ENlz1h3AjJx4YlMzWktFdw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jA2_VNLsMMPVaviQgIgC&ved=0CFwQ6AEwDA#v=onepage&q=gabriel%20mk%20ii&f=false
it kind of making me curious whether calm sea or high sea state is better for ASM , obviously low sea state equal low cruise altitude equal shorter radar horizon , on the other hand high sea state mean a lot high waves with significant radar return , thus can create strong clutter to mask the missiles

btw Kongsberg said unlike normal ASM their NSM ,JSM capable of wave adapt super sea skimming , does it really means anything special or just mean lower altitude ? ( i think their missiles by using IIR sensor along with radar altimeter can take advantages of high waves just like penetration bomber use mountain to mask themselves , but surely that is just speculation ) http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2014PSAR/albright.pdf

January 19, 2015 at 4:53 pm in reply to: Fiber optic towed decoy #2232783

mig-31bm
Participant

The expendable “shuttle” consists of transmitter(s), antenna and finned housing for stability. It is connected to the aircraft by a long, long tether which provides electric power/ground and data cable (FO or copper).

The aircraft end of the tether is connected to a techniques generator which provides commands to the transmitter(s) within the shuttle. The techniques generator receives inputs from other sources such as RWR. The commands issued by the techniques generator provide the highest probability of defeating the incoming missile based on missile type, missile emissions, and approach angle and elevation. Noise, DFRM, RGPO, RVPO, or a couple dozen other techniques can be used.

Its called a “towed decoy” for a reason. Its “last resort” job is to lure the incoming missile to it and away from the aircraft. The length of the tether assures the probability of damage to the aircraft is minimal. The time from detection of the incoming threat, to TD deployment, to TD emission is pretty fast. If the TD shuttle is damaged by the missile, the tether is cut and another TD is prepared for deployment.

“TWT” is traveling wave tube. TWTs are typically designed to operate over a small part of the RF spectrum. To cover a wide range of frequencies, multiple TWTs would be used.

so are the antenna inside Towed decoy transmit in all direction or just backwards, forward? ( i kind of think it only trasmit backwards because other wise it will overwhelm the aircraft own RWR)
btw is there 1 or more TWT inside a FTOD? , if they can only operating in short range of frequency then why some FOTD advertised that they can do board band jamming?

January 19, 2015 at 4:43 pm in reply to: Cutting the engine in flight #2232807

mig-31bm
Participant

is it better if you simply just dive into the cloud? wasnt they block both infrared and Mk1 eye ball?

January 19, 2015 at 4:36 pm in reply to: Lessons from Textron Scorpion… #2232810

mig-31bm
Participant

well more complicated aircraft will required more development time, all aircraft consists of many LRU that can be replaced and upgrade f-35 is not exception for that, another things is most if not all aircraft become heavier and often sacrifice part of their kinetic performance for EW capabilities ( adding more electric equipment) further down the road ( example could be F-16, F-15, F-18.. etc) but they can also get upgrade in engine thus regain it
about DEW, what if you can zap the missile aircraft down from sky as well? then maneuverability would be quite useless is it? all you need to do is detect enemy and then zap

January 19, 2015 at 4:22 pm in reply to: why cannon on aircraft are so inaccurate ? #2232818

mig-31bm
Participant

on a ship, your canon is mobile, so you can compensate for ship’s movements. on a aircraft the canon is fixed on the airframe, so, if the airframe moves one way, so does de canon. your computer can tell you where your shells will go, but can’t do anything to compensate your aim

concerning spread:

1/ if you’re on a strafing run… having some spread allows you to saturate a zone with shells, can be useful

2/ if you’re in A2A combat, spreading your shells all over the place while you try to shoot down a single small moving target is not good, as you have to count on a certain amount of luck to get some hits (he can be straight ahead of you and still just watch your shells pass around him)

on helicopter you can hovering and move cannon around too, it still very inaccurate
btw wasn’t spreading round is better to defeat maneuver target? ( cause you dont know where the target be next)
also for the A-10 For example, wouldn’t it be better for it to have more concentrated firing? ( cause it have to attack tank, how is it different from fighter attack another fighter?

January 19, 2015 at 3:11 pm in reply to: Cutting the engine in flight #2232874

mig-31bm
Participant

some how this remind me of the Ateam
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 1,759 total)

← 1 2 3 … 79 80 81 … 116 117 118 →