You don’t even have to target the FCR! If you’re homing on an air search radar, for example, a decent warhead will likely damage all sorts of things sticking out up there, which will usually include the FCR as well. Phased arrays placed on the superstructure will likely be better off, however. But an ARM pointed at one of those will cause a lot of other problems like damaging the superstructure and potentially injuring critical crew members.

isn’t your site itself the very proof fixed sam sites are outdated relics? mobile sam sites such as S-400 is where its at.

Gotta take it in context. The primary SAM systems that have large-scale fixed sites are old, legacy systems like the S-75, S-125, and S-200. There are “fixed” S-300P sites, but these are mobile systems and can be relocated with no problem (well, except for the S-300PT, that one is a bit more problematic due to retarded TEL design). Older systems weren’t going to fit in containerized launchers, so they relied on large fixed launch rails. Hence the fixed sites. The S-200 is one that really had to rely on a fixed site as the launch rail and missile were huge to begin with!

Places likely to see an air war in the next 20 years?

I think you guys have all missed what is probably the most likely of all, the USAF vs. Pakistan.

China/Taiwan will never happen.

Israel vs. XXX is just a continuation of Israeli policy of unilateral action in the Middle East if they don’t like you that day, so it isn’t really a new scenario.

Greece/Turkey is interesting but not very likely given the NATO connections.

UK/Argentina is also interesting but only likely if Argentina is feeling suicidal (again).

Since the US doesn’t have the stones to do something productive like seal the southern border with Mexico, I’m sticking with USAF vs. Pakistan.

[color=red]People have been warned about this before. Any further images posted in this or any other thread that do not follow copyright rules will be deleted and the user will be given a 2 point infraction. For those of you who are curious, here’s how this works:

-Images saved from someplace like Airliners.net may be reposted here provided they retain the copyright markings. Editing out the copyrights is a really big no-no.

-Images found on a website may be hotlinked using the IMG tags (i.e. you are not posting the file as an attachment). In that case no source is necessary, right clicking on the image and selecting Properties will display the website where the image is being linked from. This is the way to go if you are trying to share an image that does not have a watermark or other copyright notation. Linking to an image that has no copyright information which you have saved in photobucket or imageshack is not, however, a way to get around this.

-Posting scanned images from publications is NOT ALLOWED.

-Posting your own images is perfectly fine, but make sure you state that the images are your own property. Otherwise, I might think that you’ve posted an image without a copyright and become unduly irritated.

Any questions, feel free to ask. And yes, I’ll be going through here again and deleting the images that do not follow the above guidelines.[/color]

Looks like a taxi test, the engine cowling appears to have been partially removed.

Leatherheads. For those of you who think football is played by actors running around faking injuries to gain an advantage before unleashing a scorring barrage resulting in an overwhelming two points, you may or may not enjoy it 😀 But I thought it was a very well made period piece, thoroughly enjoyable and actually hilarious at points.

I thought plastering involved obnoxious amounts of Jagermeister?