SOCOK, the nuke incident was bad, and for Minot to blow their inspection on top of that was even worse. But that alone would not have been enough to kill the very top level of USAF leadership. Here are my theories:
1. Something was discovered during the GAO’s investigation of the tanker deal
2. I’ve heard rumors that Moseley has been suspected of padding his bank account
3. If you want to clear up money in the defense budget so that you can waste it on Iraq, what major program could you potentially axe with its biggest supporters out of the picture?
SOCInteresting. I haven’t seen a scatter done in that format before. How do you read it? What was the frequency? Azimuth/elevation?
I’m not sure that this has anything to do with RCS. It looks more like an IR signature display to me.
SOCHey, at least India isn’t making a mockery of the aerospace industry concept by reconfiguring the F-5 and passing it off as something to be feared! 😀
SOC15. On this basis, the FFT could conclude that, owing to the distinctive twin-fin configuration of the jet aircraft and the location of the air intakes, the aircraft seen on the video is either a MiG-29 “Fulcrum” or a Su-27 “Flanker”. It was not possible to decide between the two aircrafts because the quality of the video did not allow to ascertain the angle of the fins, or to determine whether the missile was launched from an outer pylon below the wing, characteristic of the MIG-29, or from a wingtip launcher, characteristic of the SU-27.(…)
Edit: after looking at it a few more times from different sources in different quality, it could be a MiG-29. I looked at some FULCRUM images and from the right angle a missile shot from the outer pylon could look like it left from closer to the wingtip than you might think. But, I’m not convinced. I still think some aspects make me think FLANKER.
And how did you guys miss this?!? 😮
“The Russian military, which had claimed that all of its pilots were on vacation the day the drone was shot down”
That’s awesome. “No, we didn’t do it. Everybody was out that day. Now go away or we’ll go on vacation again while things mysteriously explode.” 😀
SOCTime to start a new thread, folks.
SOCHave you upgraded to the newest version? I’ve had the “spot right in the middle of the screen” problem before. The way to fix that is to go to File->Server Log Out or whatever. Then go into Tools->Options and delete your cache file (the imagery cached to your hard drive to speed loading). Then log back into the server and the problem should be resolved. That’s just an issue of the imagery not loading right is all.
SOCDepends what you mean by short legged. The Mig-29k and the newer Mig-35 versions have a range exceeding 2000km on internal fuel. If the light fighter can meet the specs then being cheaper and easier to maintain it would make a lot of sense to russians. US is not a small country by any means yet they have no problem buying F-35’s?
The US takes fighter jets and parks them next to places it likes to bomb. Russia doesn’t do too much of that. At any rate, Russia initially wanted a JSF-sized aircraft, but changed their minds and went for an F-22 sized aircraft for PAK-FA. Clearly they already thought about the smaller fighter option. There is still no real reason to pour money into developing another aircraft and procuring it when the Su-35 and PAK-FA will be in the inventory.
SOCYet another reason to hit the Langley AFB airshow this year: the F-4 demo! Saw it last year here in New Jersey and it is still awesome. The flying photos I posted earlier came from that show.
SOCBut that second platform should be the Su-35. Give them 10 years, and you’ll see Su-27SMs and Su-35s. 5-10 more years, and the Su-27SMs will give way to PAK-FAs. It’s the PAK-FA which should benefit from engines and systems trialled and potentially inducted on the Su-35, keeping ITS cost down some. Russia has a lot of territory to cover. A large fighter makes sense. A shorter-legged fighter really doesn’t anymore. It did when they put MiG-29s all over the WarPac nations to counter NATO, but now it doesn’t.
SOCPrecisely the reason countries like India, Brazil and South Africa have shied away from buying US goodies despite being democracies and having a lot in common with the US. No country wants to be held hostage to another countries whims and fancies.
The problem isn’t the US itself, but the fact that our entire political landscape can change every two years when House and Senate seats are up for election. India is a great trading partner, for example, but what if the Democrats propose a pro-Pakistan agenda and take control in the next election? Might hurt the defense relationship. I don’t blame anyone for not buying American if they don’t want to, they have to do what’s in their best interests to mantain their defensive capabilities.
SOCSo Yemen decides to be helpful in the war on terror and stumps up enough for 5 F-35s in 2022. Will Congress let them continue to buy spares and support if they decide to attack Pakistan? Or Saudi Arabia?
There is a food chain. The US promised to protect central and south american countries from outside aggression at one time in the past. When Argentina and Britain had a small disagreement in the early 80s the US had to choose and it seems it did not choose to support Argentina. It follows that if your war is with somone further up the food chain than you… dont’ expect the US cavalry to come save the day… in fact expect the software in all your fancy stuff to fail at the worst time.
There is a logistics chain, yes, and a “food chain” (pretty accurate analogy, actually, good thinking) like you described WRT the Falklands. But there isn’t a magic “turn off” switch that Congress or the DoD can activate via satellite to make the aircraft unusable. That’s the part people keep talking about, and yet they have never offered a single shred of evidence to support the idea…
I think he probably means this or similar case:
OK, the Black Shaheen example is a potential misuse of the MTCR, I’ll admit that wholeheartedly. If the UAE already had the weapon in its possession, then any future deals would have to take that into account. I.E., the MTCR wouldn’t apply anymore, as they already had a 300km+ weapon system.
Belov: I assume the one heavy fighter (now being developed by Sukhoi,) will not fulfill all the tasks now before the Air Force
His opinion might matter if he wasn’t the HEAD of RAC-MiG! With the apparent abandonment of the MiG-29SMT upgrades and the focus on upgrading Su-27s and buying Su-34s and Su-35s the RusAF has clearly chosen to focus on long-range, heavy fighters. With a mix of 400 Su-35s and PAK-FAs they have no real need for a lighter fighter (yeah I made the number up, but you get the point). I’d like to know just what role the PAK-FA isn’t supposed to be able to perform that RAC-MiG feels justifies the production and procurement of a whole new aircraft? Export is one thing, but he’s talking about domestic use here, which is a whole different issue.
SOCOK, I’ll bite. Prove to all of us that a foreign F-35 won’t be able to be used in combat by the purchaser. And that the Congress has operational control over them.
SOCA final flight took place on my birthday (February 4). On 4 Feb 1969, XB-70 A/V-1 #20001 made it’s final flight to Wright-Patterson AFB for display at the USAF Museum.
I do share my birthday with a few notable aviation personalities, namely Clement Ader and Charles Lindbergh.
Loofahboy, I’ve even got a similar event to yours: Yasser Arafat became PLO chairman on 4 Feb 1969!
SOCA new bomber, even given that this time the order will be for more than 21, is going to be expensive. The reason I’d guess this is being done in the black world is to protect the new RCS-reduction methods as they are developed and refined.
SOCa burst of 50 flares to the left of the aircraft could simulate the IR mass of an aircraft much more rapidly than any dedicated flare launcher
Won’t work. IRCCM works by using an indicator to activate a certain anti-flare countermeasure. The main indicators are spatial (rapid separation of flare from aircraft, waiting until a certain amount of separation is reached), kinematic (rapid separation of flare from aircraft), time-based (sharp rise in IR energy over a short period), and spectral (fancy stuff like two-color seekers, etc). When an indicator tells the missile that a flare is in the seeker FOV, it does something specific to avoid being tricked. An example is called “seeker push”. When an indicator is detected, the missile forces the seeker to push towards the original target, effectively forcing the flare out of its FOV. That’s very basic and I purposely left a whole lot of it out, but you can see why using a rapid-fire cannon to dispense flares is a stupid idea. Hell, the gun itself will probably fire the flares right through the missile’s FOV, negating their effect. Chaff rounds are a good idea as the engagement dynamics are very different for radar-guided missiles, though.
Sign In
