over GIs obvious that always in every system there will be some kind of extrapolation, for calcule, but the real thing is no way the shortway that is drawn by irkust, is mostly a polygon
over Git’s simple math, you know where the plane is, what direction it’s heading and what it’s speed is
from this you can predict where it will be in x seconds
you can then fly directly to this spot without ‘following the track’ of the plane
if the plane changes direction, fine, just update your prediction
you can always ‘cut the corner’ off the turn no matter what he does
here is a quick’n’dirty paint job illustrating what’s going on:
……………….
note that the turn of the AMRAAM is much shallower (lower-G) than the turn of the plane
Itkursk, your thinking is ridiculous, the missile does not have a cristal ball to predict where the aircraft will be , if that would be true the constant changes of “predicted” area would be a hell to a missile against a non coperative target, your logic only stands for cruiser missiles or doomy targets
modern missiles doesnt must only face that problem, but many others, not counting the rocket intrinstic problems…
Most BVR kills so far has been against pilots who has been totally unaware that they were chased by a missile. Against an enemy with modern radar and missile warners that wont be so easy.
Well, yes that is true, also most ppl confuse Amraam/sparrow kill as a BVR kill…
Either way i must read well that article, i suggest someone do some maths with the centrifuge acceleration equation (circular movement), i wont do that…loo lazy, but i guess the article is right, square acceleration..i think was the equation?, anyway thanks for the llink obligatory
BTW..what is this? ” KEDR towed decoy”
over GIt’s funny to hear people on forum’s claims that the F-35 will fly supersonic on dry thrust. Not even LM or USAF people claims that. Let me explain why:
By the way; the so-called “quoted” price of $58.7M to Norway is not quoted at all. It’s purely a budged price, as response to an RBI (Request for “Binding” Information). No one is surprised if the price has doubled in ~2013 when a contract might be signed
Best regards
Ole Kristian Holen
I seriously thought the high bypass engine concept was forgotten for thr USAF…dont know where can i confirm the data of the 135?, i dont have a lot of data about it..didnt know it had such ratio
over GClinton, Bush and Obama, didnt and will not “invest” to “upgrade” the F-22’s electronics, …maybe, because..is not needed…
You guys are confusing the civil electronics with the industrial ones (in which the military equipment has more to do),the difference is not about tests, and tests, “cerifications” ,celphones, or CPU’s come on, these are civilian electronics…
Industrial/military electronics are NOT about the processor, but the REAL time data speed, what i try to say.. ii is like the PLC’s…is more about board architecture than GHz of the CENTRAL processor
I dont know how much of the prossesor of the F-35 is needed for the complex and PC-like cockpit displays, but would not be a surprise if the difference of speed has a lot to do with it…
Yes, because for a short time frame the relative gap of capability is not widening but stays merely constant. Fortunate for Putin is further, that the thing called “microprocessor” is unknown to the majority of Russians defense equipment.
So they cannot get obsolete!
Perhaps the most stupid and ignorant post and reply combination i have read in this forum…Dr. Evil Putin smiling because the 22’s disgrace -just as planned-, surrounded by the russian cavemen engineers, great Schorsch and J Boyle you made my day…
Capability-wise the USAF could do nothing for 10 years and still be ahead of the competition by margin.
As interceptor and true air supremacy plane the f-15 is lacking a lot compared with the su-27, the f-22/35 is a real need to counter balance the physical and electronic advantages of the flanker
over GThe true figures are all classified, so everything else is speculation(be it optimistic or pessimistic).
For the f-35 i would say that, but for the 22 that is the oldest blatant excuse to say “hey..it can do more” ;), is like when the f-117’s are caught on the radar screens far, far away and then the ppl say “ahh is that because it was not on stealthy mode” 😀
Come on..
over GLet the fanboys skewer me on this one but there is no way a goirified bomb truck like the F-35 will ever be the dogfighter the Typhoon can be.
The F-16 was a bomb truck…
The f-22 fans feel the f-35 is the reason why there will be only 200 raptors..the f-35 fans (not many due the great media campaign based again on gossips and speculations against the 35) think it will supercruiser because it great thrust…others with the stealthy childhood fantasy think there is not need of a good dogfighter, and everything is becoming BVR…
A lot of pessimism, for an aircraft that still in development, a lot of optimism too for techs that still are not reliable from the other side..is hard to take a balanced position..
over GSomeone can tell me, in which LCA design field the Boeing advisers were assigned?
over GLM and the USAF are also trying to sell/get more Raptors
IMO there is a campaign against the F-35 right now, to order more F-22’s….IMO..-IMO :D-, Boeing is behind that…
over GI don’t think the g-limit problems of the LCA are due the engine, we should be reading about nice inst. 9 g’s test.. i might be wrong of course, i thought the low g-limit was sustained (in which the engine performance has a lot to do), inst. g-limit has to do with initial energy conditions and airframe..and i think the LCA can reach inititial good condititons (M>0.5)
BTW which recomendations gave the Boeing team…and actually…what they did??:confused:
with some stealth features
I dont think “stealty” was a LCA goal, please stop that rubbish, every go damn thing arround has now “stealth” features…ohh man
Now the high percrntage of composites on the aircraft did not affect it overall performance?, again, i dont think the lower g limits are due the engine…seriously
over Gbut I have reservations about their ability to mass produce such an aircraft, due to the cost.
I doubt it’ll be a full-blown stealth aircraft like the F-22 or F-35. More because of cost than ability.
Not defending the russians here and seriously i have not idea about how good will be the pakfa BUT just because the f-22 was plaged by mistakes and missconceptions from the begining it doesnt mean the pakfa program will do the same errors…you guys think the f-22 development was slow and hard due the complicated tech involved, that is not true, it was due mistakes done in the design, mistakes done in the production plan, and being overoptimist with some key technologies
However to suggest that it will be a Flanker with supercruise and basic reduction in RCS as alike super bug, is bit daft.
I’m guessing it’ll be something like a Flanker with supercruise and some RCS reduction along the lines of the Super Hornet
You guys are clearly underrating the su-27, i would love to see the Superbug doing 1700 km/h in a 1000km circuit…i bet even the f-22 can’t do it..i guess im wrong, it will do… but of course only in gossips and tales ;)..i hope it will be a stealthy su-27, that should do the job..
Such a scenario would I feel, lead inevitably to a further large order from the USAF for the Raptor
Perhaps better would be to start a new development for a better design…the f-22 is becoming more and more in a f-104 program, just a bunch of aircrafts in a pre-operational service…that will be scrapped at the end, better to start with something else, something better, yes LM and Boeing wont like it, but better resolve the problem while you only have 120 airframes…
over GOn tests to set new world records the USAF used their elder RF-4 roadrunner as an event before they went draw out of service, we must remember that the f-4 and f-111 were the USAF roadrunners before the f-22 got into service, the world record set was (for that aircraft weigth class) 900-1000 km/h on a circuit of 1000 km, of course is problematic to reach higher speeds on a close circuit, specially a long one..
The russians tried it with a Su-27, the plane set an average velocity of 1700 Km/h on a 1000km circuit, now..if it was done on AB or not, seriously it doesnt matter, really, odf course we read a lot of babbling of the f-22, EF, Rafale supercruiser capacities trash talk…funny there is not even a objetive data about how well is done, meanwhile the su-27 (not an P-42) has set records that say a lot about it performance…but nobody is talking about it 🙂
The Flanker is a completelly different beast, compared with the F-15, russians never left the concept of a fast plane, something that the USAF forgot, and even cursed in the 70’s -80’s, is normal that the teen pilots will praise the f-22 great physical performance
Supercruiser doesnt mean effective way to reach a speed, AB can achieve lower fuel consume in some envelopment than a dry power, and can be actually have less IR signature, SC should be better been defined as the effective way to cruiser on supersonic regime, than been flying w/o AB
One last recomendation, guys dont start with the “russia has mor money” crap, that will turn this thread in a endless econ-social flamming discusion with out any sense
over GI am not in the “pro” or “anti” Apache camp at all. But I was wondering if someone would be willing to explain to me that if the Apache is the be all and end all of American attack helicopters and is best for virtually any scenario, then why do the US Marines persist in using and upgrading the AH-1 Cobra family instead?
Would it not make sense to support one platform than two? The Brits have “marinized” the WAH-64 I believe with folding main rotors and have ensured that their electronics work on ships, so a marine Apache would not be a stretch.
Looking forward to your collective thoughts.
The Apache is hard to keep flying, it maintenaince is problematic the Cobra fits better for the Marines, since is a more reliable machine. The Apache in the Army is nice, but the logistic problems for naval based aircraft are a bit different..
Apache was designed to hide behind trees and shoot Helfires at soviet tanks from miles away
That is an old tactic developed from the first AT missiles, the same can be done with Hinds, Cobras, etc.. , but for that you need skilled pilots, is not true that the Apache was designed for very low level penetration , specially when it lacks TFR, that “feaure” become famous in the GW, but was mainly due the Iraq topology is friendly, Europe is another song, dont know if the latest 64’s has it, like subvariations of the longbow
I would say the first low penetration specializated choper is the Mi-28, i dont know about it reliability and maintenaince, would like to know more about it…but then just mount a TFR on the mil-24 (which has more growth potential) and you get your low level intruder.. dont know if the 35’s has TFR..
over G7. Russian fanboys will proclaim “it PWNS the F-22!!! F-22 SUX!!!” even if Sukhoi rolls out a Sopwith Camel with “PAK-FA” painted on the side. (That would be a hilarious April Fool’s.)
note: Funny how nobody is saying Sukhoi will come up with something original but are bracing for the “inevitable” claims of copying. Sounds like even the fanboys have doubts. :diablo: Being original *is* possible- Northrop did it after all.
Ohh look!, a brilliant begining!, she has come with all her typical glamour! , of course is the great Queen of Trolland!, great opening post!
Anyway…
With Sukhoi becoming in the leader of the military airspace industry, i wonder what will happen to designs, concepts and dogmas like the Mig-31, i doubt the 27/35 could replace the old fast high stratomaster 31, cruiser missiles are a more problematic issue than X-band reduced RCS planes..
I might be wrong, but if i remember well the russian AF was not so intested in the Su-35, because was/is more a multirol plane, and seems the ruskis (at least for domestic use) dont like multirole planes (neither me -multirole planes are nice in small AF though).
There are plans to mount the Irbis on Foxhounds?
Lets see what happens with the Pkfa, since is an aircraft that will weight between 14-15 tons im not so confident about a bomb bay larger than the f-22..but, well, lets wait and see
over GThere are radar guided Hellfires available for the AH_64 Longbow.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/HellfireII/index.html
” The LongbowTM HELLFIRE missile (AGM-114L) has a millimeter-wave (MMW) sensor and a HEAT warhead, providing fire-and-forget and adverse weather capability against armored targets.”
Is a fire and forget,that is nice, the ah-64 use it because seems it doesnt have any beam riding capacity, costly missile for sure..and uneffective also…
Again, where is the combination of systems that go into the Apache, not there is the answer. Try reading the thread next time.
“combination of systems”?, FLIR/IR opticals, AT missiles, rocked pods, IR jamming supression, i think the mi24 has all them, what is lacking is in a big radar, that is nice, but what is the use of a searching radar? for a low level attacker, with problems of ground clustering? (btw the AT-9 is guided by *edit* RADIO -a bit bussy right now-:D riding system, with optical target acquisition)…radars are not a critical feature for these missions, can even been counterprodutive…now, of course TFR is other thing..
over GAgain, where is your WAH-64 equivilant?:rolleyes:
Mil Mi35?, i know you will say “impossible that old junk!?”, but the mil in some ways is better than the apache, for example their weapons are not so succeptible to been jammed as the hellfires..remember hellfires are guided by laser, laser can be jammed by smoke the original idea of the helfires was to been guided with TV, it failed, so they moved to the unreliable laser, the AT-9’s are guided by radar
In first place, a combat helo must have some transport room,dening the advantages of an helo as transport is overlooking the main feature of the helo itself, an a-10/su-25 can kill tanks better than an AH-64, and f-16’s/mig-27’s can do better strike missions than the apache/mi-28, hovering and patrolling an area over a possible danger becomes in a trap for helos, since they are completelly uneffective against infantry, the only answer against infantry is, well…infantry, specially in difficult zones. Is perhaps because of that the russian army found their mi-24 much better than ka-50’s or mi-28’s.
An helo must be a “dirty job” machine, ready for the service, without a lot of dependence of mainteinance, so in that field the 24 would be better
I dont know about the safety/protection levels of the mi-24 ah-64, but the AH-64 does not seems a lot safer, there are cases of Apaches downed by small gun fire, and for example the electronics are suited in places that just scream “shot at me”, without any kind of protection (im talking about the electronic boards, not the optictronics)
Im not saying the AH-64 is better than the Hind , or the Hind is better than the 64, but i agree , the 64 has a lot of overkill capacity
BTW, can machineguns be mounted on the Hind doors?
Sign In
