Gollevainen, there are two words that are generally used to introduce a subordinate clause in English, “that” and “which”.

If I say

“I threw the ball at the wall, which was painted red”

I am saying that I threw the ball at the wall, and that (separately) this wall was red. This additional clause is NOT needed to understand my meaning, but is providing additional information to you.

If I say

“I threw the ball at the wall that was painted red”

I am saying I threw the ball specifically at the red painted wall. The fact that the wall was painted red is important to my sentence, and not just additional information.

People do use the wrong word sometimes in modern English. The comma is the final proof of the author’s meaning.

So in modern English I might say

“I threw the ball at the wall, that was painted red.”

Here the comma makes it clear that the second clause is a relative cause, providing supplemental information. Strictly, this is incorrect usage, but quite common.

Likewise

“I threw the ball at the wall which was painted red”

the lack of a comma indicates that the writer specifically wanted to indicate the red painted wall, despite the choice of the wrong word.

So finally, to mean what you thought, the sentence would have to be:

“That suffices to launch modern jet aircraft that have thrust to weight ratios higher than 1”

or, slightly less correctly

“That suffices to launch modern jet aircraft which have thrust to weight ratios higher than 1”

The Conway’s quote simply says that the skijump allows modern fighters (which have t/w ratio of 1:1) to take off.

It IN NO WAY says that that a 1:1 thrust ratio is necessary to take off from a skijump. It says modern fighters are necessary, and defines “modern fighters” as those with a 1:1 thrust ratio (which is true only in very specific circumstances). Essentially, it is saying that modern fighters have greater thrust than older ones, and hence can take off without a catapult in some circumstances, whereas older fighters (e.g. F-4 Phantom II) don’t have enough thrust to do it.

Clearly catapults allow launch at higher weights than a skijump. However, the STOBAR solution was an INTERIM solution pending construction of catapult equipped carriers. It allowed the Russians to gain experience in carrier operations.

Tu-160M would have had additional segments of about 4m total added to the length, in order to lengthen the weapons bays to accommodate two 3M25A Meteorit-A missiles.

According to Yefim Gordon, there was a project to modernise the Tu-160 with improved NK-74 engines with better fuel efficiency, a modern digital avionics suite, and precision guided munitions. This may be the same as the late 80s Tu-170 non-nuclear bomber project mentioned by Piotr Butowski.

I’m still not sure why Flogger thinks some ex Mikoyan designer talking on a Russian TV program about how he heard maybe that the F-117 was shot down by a MiG-29 constitutes anything more than hearsay. Yes, that was one theory, but its completely discredited and has been for years.

Mikoyan are not exactly going to be a neutral source on MiG-29 performance are they?

Actually, it is possible to theoretically detect GPS signals. Any antenna that recieves a signal will retransmit a small amount of the signal out again. That’s how the TV detector vans in the UK can find people with TVs who haven’t paid their license- they detect the TV signals re-radiated from the offenders TV aerials.

So even a passively receiving antenna could theoretically be detected.

For a conventional aircraft, the rearward position of the wingtips would adversely affect stability when the AAMs were fired. Aircraft with wingtips near the Centre of Gravity don’t suffer from this. However, in the days of FBW, this should be fairly trivial to compensate for.

Can a Eurofighter match up against the SU-37? Isn’t SU-37 twice as fast as the Euro?

This tells you everything you need to know about the poster.

Personally I’d go for Gripen. I can buy more of them than Typhoon or Raptor, its designed for low maintenance, and fitted with IRIS-T and Meteor and the latest avionics fit I have a pretty potent AA fighter.