Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    General Questions Thread:

    Share

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:50 am

    GarryB wrote:
    BTW the video is a little strange in that it shows an attack by an SA-4 battery, whose missiles seem to be defeated by flares. The battery is then defeated by destruction of a launch vehicle instead of the radar vehicles the launch vehicles use to target aircraft.

    Flares around here are seen by the public as that thing in Hollywood that makes missiles go crazy. As for the destruction of the TEL, apparently, DAS can see where the missile is coming from, persumeably from the missile's heat trail, which would allow them to fire a weapon at it. Although, chances are that the missile fired in the video was a SEAD weapon and thus, ARM, it appears to be GPS/TV guided.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:51 am

    GarryB , my question was with respect to DAS ability to get a 360 * LOAL capability and that too in all passive mode , a great capability in dog fight if that works as advertised.

    The lock on after launch capability is a necessity because of the internal carriage of weapons. When the new IR guided AAM is ready for the T-50 the Mig-35 and Su-35s will get it too and it will have LOAL capability, so with the Mig-35s 360 degree air to air and air to ground optical complex it will have the same capacity... that is also passive optical/IR too.

    BTW the idea of dog fighting is not to position your enemy on your tail before you fire... simply because if he is on your tail and fires too there is a really good chance his missile will hit you before your missile hits him because his missile hasn't had to pull a 180 degree turn on launch during its high energy boost phase of its rocket motor.
    The result is that he can fire at you from 20km and you can fire back at him when he is 5km or less away from you... not an advantage... more an emergency measure in case you get jumped... and if that happens you are in the sh!t.

    No aircraft till date has such capability more so in all passive mode.

    Mig-35. Only minus the lock on after launch capability... which is over rated because it means your missile is manouvering hard at a time when it should be accelerating to flight speed. This means instead of a mach 3 missile your missile might be closing your target at mach 1.
    With Thrust vector control engine nozzles a Mig-35 pilot could rack the nose of the aircraft over 180 degrees and centre the target on the aircrafts nose and launch a missile directly at the target... before he loses too much forward airspeed he can then rack the nose back to forward again and accelerate with a nose down angle to increase energy gain. If the other guy fires a missile then accelerating away might be the best way to outrun the missile.

    The PAK-FA will have a 360 * capability due to side and wing radar but its an all active approach which can warn the target early on.

    As posted by you PAK-FA will have a satellite link giving it data on aircraft in near airspace and it will spend 90 percent of its time listening with its radars rather than emitting energy.

    We haven't seen the optical setup for the PAK-FA but as Mig are subcontractors I would suspect something even better than that fitted to Mig-35 would be on the cards.

    I think they need to develop DAS like all passive capability for PAK-FA , a mini ols on the body of aircraft with wide IIR capability will be good to have on PAK-FA

    Every new Soviet and Russian fighter since the late model Mig-23s have had IRSTs, including the Mig-31, Mig-29 and all its variants, Su-27 and all its variants. The only time a new aircraft got a less capable system than a previous model was the export Mig-29s were exported with IRSTs from early model Mig-23s.

    Flares around here are seen by the public as that thing in Hollywood that makes missiles go crazy. As for the destruction of the TEL, apparently, DAS can see where the missile is coming from, persumeably from the missile's heat trail, which would allow them to fire a weapon at it. Although, chances are that the missile fired in the video was a SEAD weapon and thus, ARM, it appears to be GPS/TV guided.

    Yes, I agree, but this video is marketing... it should be aimed at military professionals. I noticed the shot at Europe with Flankers taking down a Typhoon, but what world power operates SA-4s?

    The Russians phased them out in 2007 according to the information I can find.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:38 pm

    I think they need to develop DAS like all passive capability for PAK-FA , a mini ols on the body of aircraft with wide IIR capability will be good to have on PAK-FA

    Every new Soviet and Russian fighter since the late model Mig-23s have had IRSTs, including the Mig-31, Mig-29 and all its variants, Su-27 and all its variants. The only time a new aircraft got a less capable system than a previous model was the export Mig-29s were exported with IRSTs from early model Mig-23s.

    If what you say about the MiG-35's IRST is true and that it does have 360 degree capability, then all they need to do is beef it up because it's maximum range is 45 km for a non afterburning target as compared to 90 km for the OLS-35. If an all-around awesome IRST like the OLS-35 can't be made, then they could do it just like the DAS and put a bunch of mediocre IRSTs all around the airframe for 360 capabilities.

    Flares around here are seen by the public as that thing in Hollywood that makes missiles go crazy. As for the destruction of the TEL, apparently, DAS can see where the missile is coming from, persumeably from the missile's heat trail, which would allow them to fire a weapon at it. Although, chances are that the missile fired in the video was a SEAD weapon and thus, ARM, it appears to be GPS/TV guided.

    Yes, I agree, but this video is marketing... it should be aimed at military professionals. I noticed the shot at Europe with Flankers taking down a Typhoon, but what world power operates SA-4s?

    The Russians phased them out in 2007 according to the information I can find.

    The North Koreans apparently. And you know us and Mr. Il, angry

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:25 am

    I think at the end of the day, this F-35 video probably confirms Mr Kopps opinion that the F-35 is not a dog fighter and will likely fire missiles and run than try and enter a turning fight even with a 4++ generation fighter.

    I can see how Americas european allies might become a little alarmed at this suggestion because they don't have an F-22 they can use as a primary fighter so for many of them the F-35 will not be the bomb truck. The F-35 and F-22 is like the F-16 and F-15C in US service. Both are technically fighters but the F-15C is a dedicated fighter while the F-16 is a light fighter bomber. The F-16 is the numbers aircraft so when there are only F-16s available you can use them both as fighters and as strike aircraft, whereas if you have some F-15Cs then they can only really be used as fighters.

    Problem is that the F-35 is really only a fighter against a second rate enemy and it needs its F-22 fighter big brother to look like a serious partner when facing Su-35s and T-50s...

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:25 am

    It hasn't become that obvious has it? unshaven

    America is the World Police, most of the world either don't have an Airforce or are operating second hand equipment, usually from the Cold War era and probably of MiG design. It's no secret that we plan on a shoot and scoot tactic and we don't plan to get into a knife fight as Carlo Kopp suggests, because we'd get damn slaughtered that close up. We depend on our Stealth to get close to the enemy, fire our long range AIM-120Ds, and just scoot away before the Ruskies can find us.

    Lets be honest here, the Su-35 is technically a reduced RCS fighter but it's RCS is still large enough for the F-35 to see it from a distance away, and not even necessarily at the Frontal aspect in which case the OLS-35 would spot the F-35. So with the ability of Stealth, it also gives the F-35 the initiative, allowing it when and where to attack. We'd probably have to fire more than 2 AIM-120Ds at a single Su-35 just because of their maneuverability, but with our surprise, we could always just scoot away.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:44 pm

    IronsightSniper wrote:It hasn't become that obvious has it? unshaven

    America is the World Police, most of the world either don't have an Airforce or are operating second hand equipment, usually from the Cold War era and probably of MiG design. It's no secret that we plan on a shoot and scoot tactic and we don't plan to get into a knife fight as Carlo Kopp suggests, because we'd get damn slaughtered that close up. We depend on our Stealth to get close to the enemy, fire our long range AIM-120Ds, and just scoot away before the Ruskies can find us.

    Lets be honest here, the Su-35 is technically a reduced RCS fighter but it's RCS is still large enough for the F-35 to see it from a distance away, and not even necessarily at the Frontal aspect in which case the OLS-35 would spot the F-35. So with the ability of Stealth, it also gives the F-35 the initiative, allowing it when and where to attack. We'd probably have to fire more than 2 AIM-120Ds at a single Su-35 just because of their maneuverability, but with our surprise, we could always just scoot away.

    That I always feared from the very start of missilization era

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:23 am

    Any Russian Equivalent to this

    http://www.defencetalk.com/eye-in-the-sky-has-the-sniper-on-target-30080/

    The last 28th Bomb Wing B-1B Lancer received the necessary modifications to operate the Sniper advanced targeting pod Oct. 18.

    The advanced targeting pod acts as a long-range camera, which can pinpoint targets for precision strikes and close-air-support missions.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:20 am

    America is the World Police, most of the world either don't have an Airforce or are operating second hand equipment, usually from the Cold War era and probably of MiG design.

    World police?
    Not really... unless you are talking about a corrupt cop that is self appointed and that really only bothers getting involved when he has a personal interest in the case and is prepared to break international law to get the results that favour him the most.

    It's no secret that we plan on a shoot and scoot tactic and we don't plan to get into a knife fight as Carlo Kopp suggests, because we'd get damn slaughtered that close up.

    Real war is not a game. Only an idiot would fight "fair". It is the survivor that writes history so fighting fair is pointless anyway.

    I mean the west managed to make Dunkirk look like a victory.
    And as for the rest of WWII I saw a documentary on the western strategic bombing campaign in Europe and how it is now undesputedly what won WWII. It is funny that it even mentioned attempts to destroy ball bearing factories that would have ground the German economy to a halt in months but despite several attempts they failed and it was a well protected target and they lost many aircraft so they stopped bothering to try to bring the German economy to its knees within months and went back to fire bombing German cities. Killing women and children.

    The huge irony is the western claim to the moral high ground... yet if we look at the efforts... the Germans killed 27 million Soviets including well over 16 million civilians yet the Soviets killed mostly German soldiers and pilots. Sure there were rapes in occupied territories but I rather doubt the number of East German civilians actually killed by the Soviets was even comparable to the number the west killed in one fire bombing air raid over Dresden.

    But it was the strategic bombing that won the war if you ask any westerner. Amazing that Britain wasn't defeated by bombing yet the Germans were...
    More amazing was that the Soviets still managed to lose so many soldiers taking Berlin from a foe already defeated by years of strategic bombing.

    Sorry, now I am ranting. I do that occasionally... just smile and nod and agree and I will shut up.

    We depend on our Stealth to get close to the enemy, fire our long range AIM-120Ds, and just scoot away before the Ruskies can find us.

    I am sorry but do you actually believe this? Do you really think a conflict between Russia and the US will in any way be effected by AIM-120s of any model or type?

    Tactical nukes exploding on all NATO airfields within flight range of Russian targets will mean "scoot" is pointless. Might as well stay and use all your ammo because the airfield you came from an everyone on it will be radioactive dust before you get back. Soon followed by most of the northern continents.

    So with the ability of Stealth, it also gives the F-35 the initiative, allowing it when and where to attack.

    You are assuming the Su-35 is not using its long wave wing mounted radar antenna. You are also assuming the Su-35 will not have ground based long wave radar and SAM sites supporting it. The enormous area of Russian Airspace means that an attacking F-35 will probably try to infiltrate the airspace between major airfields and radar bases and SAM sites so the most likely acquisition of the target will be side on rather than head on.
    You also assume that the Su-35 will never get a high power AESA radar with similar LPI operating modes that allow it to search for the F-35 without giving away its position.
    Finally you are assuming a stagnant IRST setup. With Mig revealing its rather sophisticated optronic system created by a Russian company involved in Russias space industry, it is certain that Sukhoi will try to respond with an even better system for the larger aircraft.

    We'd probably have to fire more than 2 AIM-120Ds at a single Su-35 just because of their maneuverability, but with our surprise, we could always just scoot away.

    Scoot? How many missiles will a F-35 be able to carry on its strike missions? Compared to how many for the Su-35?
    Do you think the high tech wingtip mounted digital jamming pods on the Su-35 might effect the performance of AMRAAMs at all?
    Perhaps lower performance to the point where 5-6 missiles might be needed per target aircraft?



    That I always feared from the very start of missilization era

    Missiles are certainly becoming more and more like hittiles, but that goes for Russian missiles too.

    Any Russian Equivalent to this

    Many. Platan is the simple system built in to the Su-34, but has no thermal imager, but OK for general use. The SAPSAN was supposed to be an equivelent of SNIPER but needs more funding and a lot of improvement yet. The Russian AF has chosen the French Damocles targeting pod and is licence producing it. There is the obsolete Mercury pod for the Su-25TM but it was poor. There is a pod called Solluks that is mentioned with the Su-34 but for all we know it could be the name of the Damocles in Russian service or a new Russian pod. Little is known about it in public info it was mentioned by Piotr Butowski (Spelling) in an article he wrote about the Su-34 some time ago.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:54 am

    [quote="GarryB"]
    America is the World Police, most of the world either don't have an Airforce or are operating second hand equipment, usually from the Cold War era and probably of MiG design.

    World police?
    Not really... unless you are talking about a corrupt cop that is self appointed and that really only bothers getting involved when he has a personal interest in the case and is prepared to break international law to get the results that favour him the most.

    Same job, different name.

    It's no secret that we plan on a shoot and scoot tactic and we don't plan to get into a knife fight as Carlo Kopp suggests, because we'd get damn slaughtered that close up.

    Real war is not a game. Only an idiot would fight "fair". It is the survivor that writes history so fighting fair is pointless anyway.

    I mean the west managed to make Dunkirk look like a victory.
    And as for the rest of WWII I saw a documentary on the western strategic bombing campaign in Europe and how it is now undesputedly what won WWII. It is funny that it even mentioned attempts to destroy ball bearing factories that would have ground the German economy to a halt in months but despite several attempts they failed and it was a well protected target and they lost many aircraft so they stopped bothering to try to bring the German economy to its knees within months and went back to fire bombing German cities. Killing women and children.

    The huge irony is the western claim to the moral high ground... yet if we look at the efforts... the Germans killed 27 million Soviets including well over 16 million civilians yet the Soviets killed mostly German soldiers and pilots. Sure there were rapes in occupied territories but I rather doubt the number of East German civilians actually killed by the Soviets was even comparable to the number the west killed in one fire bombing air raid over Dresden.

    But it was the strategic bombing that won the war if you ask any westerner. Amazing that Britain wasn't defeated by bombing yet the Germans were...
    More amazing was that the Soviets still managed to lose so many soldiers taking Berlin from a foe already defeated by years of strategic bombing.

    Sorry, now I am ranting. I do that occasionally... just smile and nod and agree and I will shut up.

    Smile

    We depend on our Stealth to get close to the enemy, fire our long range AIM-120Ds, and just scoot away before the Ruskies can find us.

    I am sorry but do you actually believe this? Do you really think a conflict between Russia and the US will in any way be effected by AIM-120s of any model or type?

    Tactical nukes exploding on all NATO airfields within flight range of Russian targets will mean "scoot" is pointless. Might as well stay and use all your ammo because the airfield you came from an everyone on it will be radioactive dust before you get back. Soon followed by most of the northern continents.

    Because no doubt Russian planes made for Russia is going to be the best of their class so if we plan for that we can defeat any export types? Please, argue the argument, and not just say, "We'll just nuke you!"

    So with the ability of Stealth, it also gives the F-35 the initiative, allowing it when and where to attack.

    You are assuming the Su-35 is not using its long wave wing mounted radar antenna. You are also assuming the Su-35 will not have ground based long wave radar and SAM sites supporting it. The enormous area of Russian Airspace means that an attacking F-35 will probably try to infiltrate the airspace between major airfields and radar bases and SAM sites so the most likely acquisition of the target will be side on rather than head on.
    You also assume that the Su-35 will never get a high power AESA radar with similar LPI operating modes that allow it to search for the F-35 without giving away its position.
    Finally you are assuming a stagnant IRST setup. With Mig revealing its rather sophisticated optronic system created by a Russian company involved in Russias space industry, it is certain that Sukhoi will try to respond with an even better system for the larger aircraft.

    1. If the location is Russia, then maybe the sides of the F-35 would be illuminated. Fly low, simple solutions.
    2. Because the Su-35 doesn't have AESA.
    3. Because Su-35 don't have QWIPs.


    We'd probably have to fire more than 2 AIM-120Ds at a single Su-35 just because of their maneuverability, but with our surprise, we could always just scoot away.

    Scoot? How many missiles will a F-35 be able to carry on its strike missions? Compared to how many for the Su-35?
    Do you think the high tech wingtip mounted digital jamming pods on the Su-35 might effect the performance of AMRAAMs at all?
    Perhaps lower performance to the point where 5-6 missiles might be needed per target aircraft?

    It would perhaps effect it, sure, 6 missiles no. The difference between the F-35 v.s. Su-35 is missile load, yes, but missile performance is a different topic. R-77 baselines have inferior range to the AIM-120C/D, so missile load for the Su-35 is of course irrelevant if you can't see your target. And perhaps not, perhaps the AIM-120D has sophisticated ECCM that won't degrade badly. 2-4 at best.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:46 am


    Same job, different name.

    Fundamentally different.

    A real world police force is bound by international law and has a duty to intervene in every case that is brought to their attention.

    What America does is much like a bully interfering when it suits them.

    The difference is that those who obey the rules have nothing to fear from a world police.

    Every country on the UNSC has a veto and is therefore above international law. Even when they make that law themselves.

    It was the US and other western powers that created the Universal Declaration of basic human rights. In other words rules set out for all humans that describe the rights they have. It doesn't give them rights, it describes they rights they have as humans.
    Ironically one of those rights is the right to privacy so the government for example can't simply listen in to them to see if they are doing anything wrong.
    The Echelon system... to which NZ is a part, directly violates that by monitoring all electronic communications.

    Funny thing is that it has been operating for years and was used by Boeing to win contracts for selling stuff, but didn't prevent 11/9 because it didn't operate in the US. Well not actually funny really.. but you know what I mean.

    Because no doubt Russian planes made for Russia is going to be the best of their class so if we plan for that we can defeat any export types? Please, argue the argument, and not just say, "We'll just nuke you!"

    The Russians have written in law that any attack on Russia that they perceive as a strategic threat will result in direct nuclear retaliation... even if the attack was conventional.

    It is the choice they will make if they are threatened... Just like the Israelis... the Russians and the Israelis know what real war is like... not some foreign adventure half way round the world, but right on their territory and I rather doubt they will choose to repeat it. They will use the nuclear weapons they have while they can under the assumption that any attack will be focussed on destroying their nuclear capacity to strike. They are therefore forced into the choice of use it or lose it... it is pretty clear they will use it.

    You might call it "Cheating to win the arguement", but I call it "the real consequences of doing something really stupid".

    Bush backed Saakashvili all the way remember.

    BTW up until the Su-35S enters service the best Russian fighters are in India. The Su-30MKI is a better fighter than the Su-34... simply because the Su-34 is a strike aircraft with some ability to defend itself. In fact it will likely operate like the F-35 in that any threat will likely be dealt with by firing a missile and leaving the area.

    1. If the location is Russia, then maybe the sides of the F-35 would be illuminated. Fly low, simple solutions.

    OTH-B radar is looking thousands of kms outwards from Russia looking for incoming targets. They can see high flying targets and low flying targets because their signal bounces off the upper atmosphere and round the curature of the earth. The addition of humint and satellites should mean that even if a first strike gets to a target area that the rest will have to penetrate defences on full alert... which is rather unlikely for the F-35.

    The result of the first explosions in Russia will be a tactical missile strike on the nearest airbase operating any aircraft that could have flown through the defences. If the Russian target hit was strategic in nature then the person responsible for the retaliation has the option of tactical nuclear weapons.

    A single strike on one thing however is rather unlikely because of the response it will initiate. A full scale attack is rather unlikely to be organised without Russian forces noticing.

    2. Because the Su-35 doesn't have AESA.

    WRONG. The wing mounted L and N band radar for the Su-35 is AESA. The longer radar wave means the elements are much larger.
    If they don't detect the F-35 directly they can detect datalink emissions and therefore determine the presence of an aircraft so other sensors can be used to find it.

    3. Because Su-35 don't have QWIPs.

    QWIPS are promising because they are relatively cheap and easier to make than staring focal arrays yet the resulting performance is similar in some ways and better in others.

    QWIP technology is now available in the US, EU and Russia

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html

    R-77 baselines have inferior range to the AIM-120C/D, so missile load for the Su-35 is of course irrelevant if you can't see your target.

    The original R-77s are only in service in very small numbers, the R-77 model being developed for the PAK-FA will have much longer range and performance. In the mean time the SD and MD versions of the R-77 and R-73 respectively are new digital models with significantly improved performance over the originals. These seem to be largely for export because all new short, medium, long and ultra long range missiles are being developed for the PAK-FA.
    There is no reason to believe these new missiles will not be used on the Mig-35s and Su-35s too.
    The short range IIR missile will also be used in a surface launched mode as a new SAM called Morfei.

    And perhaps not, perhaps the AIM-120D has sophisticated ECCM that won't degrade badly. 2-4 at best.

    Except the F-35 is not the F-22 and will lack the flight speed to increase missile range like a super cruising high altitude F-22 might.
    A low flying F-35 trying to evade radar will have serious problems engaging any fighters at long range.

    Low flying means totally subsonic.

    A high flying super cruising Su-35 should be able to catch up and attack from behind most of the time with a tail engagement enhanced by IRST tracking and engagement with long range R-27ET missiles fired from high speed and high altitude.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:48 pm


    Same job, different name.

    Fundamentally different.

    A real world police force is bound by international law and has a duty to intervene in every case that is brought to their attention.

    What America does is much like a bully interfering when it suits them.

    The difference is that those who obey the rules have nothing to fear from a world police.

    Every country on the UNSC has a veto and is therefore above international law. Even when they make that law themselves.

    It was the US and other western powers that created the Universal Declaration of basic human rights. In other words rules set out for all humans that describe the rights they have. It doesn't give them rights, it describes they rights they have as humans.
    Ironically one of those rights is the right to privacy so the government for example can't simply listen in to them to see if they are doing anything wrong.
    The Echelon system... to which NZ is a part, directly violates that by monitoring all electronic communications.

    Funny thing is that it has been operating for years and was used by Boeing to win contracts for selling stuff, but didn't prevent 11/9 because it didn't operate in the US. Well not actually funny really.. but you know what I mean.

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    Because no doubt Russian planes made for Russia is going to be the best of their class so if we plan for that we can defeat any export types? Please, argue the argument, and not just say, "We'll just nuke you!"

    The Russians have written in law that any attack on Russia that they perceive as a strategic threat will result in direct nuclear retaliation... even if the attack was conventional.

    It is the choice they will make if they are threatened... Just like the Israelis... the Russians and the Israelis know what real war is like... not some foreign adventure half way round the world, but right on their territory and I rather doubt they will choose to repeat it. They will use the nuclear weapons they have while they can under the assumption that any attack will be focussed on destroying their nuclear capacity to strike. They are therefore forced into the choice of use it or lose it... it is pretty clear they will use it.

    You might call it "Cheating to win the arguement", but I call it "the real consequences of doing something really stupid".

    Bush backed Saakashvili all the way remember.

    BTW up until the Su-35S enters service the best Russian fighters are in India. The Su-30MKI is a better fighter than the Su-34... simply because the Su-34 is a strike aircraft with some ability to defend itself. In fact it will likely operate like the F-35 in that any threat will likely be dealt with by firing a missile and leaving the area.

    You're a funny man. I wonder why Georgia did not sink to the ground in 2008. Or maybe it was because Georgia were not the attackers? Huh. But remember, Russia and Israeli knows real wars. That's why they give their best planes to countries thousands of miles away.

    1. If the location is Russia, then maybe the sides of the F-35 would be illuminated. Fly low, simple solutions.

    OTH-B radar is looking thousands of kms outwards from Russia looking for incoming targets. They can see high flying targets and low flying targets because their signal bounces off the upper atmosphere and round the curature of the earth. The addition of humint and satellites should mean that even if a first strike gets to a target area that the rest will have to penetrate defences on full alert... which is rather unlikely for the F-35.

    The result of the first explosions in Russia will be a tactical missile strike on the nearest airbase operating any aircraft that could have flown through the defences. If the Russian target hit was strategic in nature then the person responsible for the retaliation has the option of tactical nuclear weapons.

    A single strike on one thing however is rather unlikely because of the response it will initiate. A full scale attack is rather unlikely to be organised without Russian forces noticing.

    Of course, assuming OTH radars are used to track low-RCS crafts. They're much too busy tracking civilian air travel or incoming ballistic missiles. Also assuming we don't Suder the Russians.

    2. Because the Su-35 doesn't have AESA.

    WRONG. The wing mounted L and N band radar for the Su-35 is AESA. The longer radar wave means the elements are much larger.
    If they don't detect the F-35 directly they can detect datalink emissions and therefore determine the presence of an aircraft so other sensors can be used to find it.

    Yeah right, not seeing any wing tip AESA here.

    It won't detect MADL.

    3. Because Su-35 don't have QWIPs.

    QWIPS are promising because they are relatively cheap and easier to make than staring focal arrays yet the resulting performance is similar in some ways and better in others.

    QWIP technology is now available in the US, EU and Russia

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html

    Yet, still, the Su-35 doesn't have QWIP.

    R-77 baselines have inferior range to the AIM-120C/D, so missile load for the Su-35 is of course irrelevant if you can't see your target.

    The original R-77s are only in service in very small numbers, the R-77 model being developed for the PAK-FA will have much longer range and performance. In the mean time the SD and MD versions of the R-77 and R-73 respectively are new digital models with significantly improved performance over the originals. These seem to be largely for export because all new short, medium, long and ultra long range missiles are being developed for the PAK-FA.
    There is no reason to believe these new missiles will not be used on the Mig-35s and Su-35s too.
    The short range IIR missile will also be used in a surface launched mode as a new SAM called Morfei.

    Yes, which doesn't handle my point; AIM-120C-7 on a F-35 can catch a Sukhoi/MiG farther than a R-77 fired from either of those, except when PAK-FA's come out, which isn't happening too soon.

    And perhaps not, perhaps the AIM-120D has sophisticated ECCM that won't degrade badly. 2-4 at best.

    Except the F-35 is not the F-22 and will lack the flight speed to increase missile range like a super cruising high altitude F-22 might.
    A low flying F-35 trying to evade radar will have serious problems engaging any fighters at long range.

    Low flying means totally subsonic.

    A high flying super cruising Su-35 should be able to catch up and attack from behind most of the time with a tail engagement enhanced by IRST tracking and engagement with long range R-27ET missiles fired from high speed and high altitude.

    If the F-35 is flying low and avoiding radar. If it's against something like Iran, we wouldn't even have to fly low with F-35s, fly high, launch long range missiles, go home. But again, the Su-35 won't detect a F-35 in the first place, so suggesting that a Su-35 would even do all that is ludicrous.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:47 pm

    @IronSightSniper

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    Ok; are you blind or am I?? Total bullocks; your statements represents 100% hypocrisy; mind if you watch this >>u liberators

    http://www.mediafire.com/?nxjm31aj4it

    Regarding AIM-120C & R-77 the latter has high speed & greater range; wouldn't it make R-77 a better missile

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:05 am

    nightcrawler wrote:@IronSightSniper

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    Ok; are you blind or am I?? Total bullocks; your statements represents 100% hypocrisy; mind if you watch this >>u liberators

    http://www.mediafire.com/?nxjm31aj4it

    Regarding AIM-120C & R-77 the latter has high speed & greater range; wouldn't it make R-77 a better missile

    Yeah, I've seen that documentary before. This is a better one. You do understand that the United States of those days and the United States of today are not the same entities?

    No, the R-77's range is heavily disputed, both by Russians and non-Russians alike. That is because the range of 80 km is supposedly the R-77's a-pole range, which is, the most optimal range possible (or the true the definition of maximum range), the ranges given by the AIM-120 are usually either conservative estimates or real range trials.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:38 am

    IronsightSniper wrote:
    nightcrawler wrote:@IronSightSniper

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    Ok; are you blind or am I?? Total bullocks; your statements represents 100% hypocrisy; mind if you watch this >>u liberators

    http://www.mediafire.com/?nxjm31aj4it

    Regarding AIM-120C & R-77 the latter has high speed & greater range; wouldn't it make R-77 a better missile

    Yeah, I've seen that documentary before. This is a better one. You do understand that the United States of those days and the United States of today are not the same entities?

    No sir I don't see any difference. BY THE WAY you look a person with good knowledge; admire your contributions much like that of GarryB

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:59 am

    Ah who am I kidding, we're an Empire Neutral





    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:15 am

    How did Kazakhstan get on that map?

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:32 am

    It's a map of countries that hosts U.S. bases, troops, or allows the U.S to use their military facilities, so Kazakhstan got lumped in too.

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:51 am

    IronsightSniper wrote:It's a map of countries that hosts U.S. bases, troops, or allows the U.S to use their military facilities, so Kazakhstan got lumped in too.

    They are not allowed to use Kazakh military facilities. They have overflight and transport rights for non-military supplies the same as Russia provides. The map of stationed US military personel would be much smaller.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:02 am

    After some looking around, I'm quite sure the guy that made that actually just painted everything black on the original.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Nov 21, 2010 9:03 am

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    The problem here is the definition of right. Invading Iraq and killing lots of Iraqis is right because all the damage you do will be paid for by the Iraqis and they will pay for that damage by pumping oil which reduces the global price of oil which is good for the US economy.
    The fact that you sleep at night knowing your country killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqs for no reason... well lets say most of the rest of the world sees this and does not agree with you.

    It is interesting that the US states that Russian Aggression in Georgia should not be tolerated, because a short while back the US invaded Grenada because it thought 200 American students might be threatened. The Russians only entered South Ossetia because the Georgian army was murdering Russian peacekeepers... what a weak excuse!
    Of course the US just wants to bring peace and democracy to the world like Haiti. The US delivered democracy in the 1990s and it has been democracy and peace and prosperity... or has it stayed a Sh!thole it always was but with pro US goons in power instead of anti US goons. An earthquake and Haiti is leveled while the other half of the Island has no problems. Luck? Probably. But also building codes.

    You're a funny man. I wonder why Georgia did not sink to the ground in 2008. Or maybe it was because Georgia were not the attackers? Huh.

    Georgia was not nuked because it was no threat at all. Even the Abkhazian forces pushed them back on their own with Russian forces just watching. There was a reason the Georgians took on the South Ossetians, because they were in no condition to defend themselves.

    No one can deny now that Georgia was the aggressor. Well no one outside of Georgia and the US.

    But remember, Russia and Israeli knows real wars. That's why they give their best planes to countries thousands of miles away.

    They gave nothing. They sold. Using the money and the work to keep some parts of their MIC working and to modernise where they could.

    They knew as long as they had and have nuclear weapons they would be safe from external aggression.

    Of course, assuming OTH radars are used to track low-RCS crafts. They're much too busy tracking civilian air travel or incoming ballistic missiles. Also assuming we don't Suder the Russians.

    You are assuming you could, and also that they don't do it to you too. You are also assuming that you could mount an attack on a soverign country that is not communist. How are you going to justify that? Any airfield that has F-35s will be monitored by human beings. Lots of plane spotters and a few in the pay of certain orgs.

    A Low RCS will stand out like a sore thumb and the OTH-B radars are designed to spot all sorts of threats including cruise missiles which already have small RCS.

    Yeah right, not seeing any wing tip AESA here.


    It won't detect MADL.

    Why do you think that? It might have trouble jamming it, but it should be able to detect it.

    Yet, still, the Su-35 doesn't have QWIP.

    The Mig-35 has its IRST developed by a company that makes optics for Russias space industry. Sukhoi have already promised to improve the Su-35s IRST because of that. If you believe Kopp then they have the technology already as per my quote above and assuming he is right what do you think the main application would be for such technology? T-50 and Su-35.

    Yes, which doesn't handle my point; AIM-120C-7 on a F-35 can catch a Sukhoi/MiG farther than a R-77 fired from either of those, except when PAK-FA's come out, which isn't happening too soon.

    The Russians acknowledge the R-77 has shorter range than they hoped but they have very few in service. The current model is the RVV-SD which has significantly longer range that might be quite comparable to AMRAAM. There is also an R-77M in development, and the R-37 and R-37M also in development that will likely out range AMRAAM.

    Using max flight range just makes the job of evading the missile easier.


    If the F-35 is flying low and avoiding radar. If it's against something like Iran, we wouldn't even have to fly low with F-35s, fly high, launch long range missiles, go home.

    Iran doesn't have Su-35. Flying high in a plane with stealth optimised for the front is not a smart thing to do.

    But again, the Su-35 won't detect a F-35 in the first place, so suggesting that a Su-35 would even do all that is ludicrous.

    Hahaha... so what is the point of the F-22s? The first attack by an F-35 will lead to tactical nuclear strikes on all NATO airfields the attack could have come from. Only NATO has F-35 at the moment so any attack by any NATO country can be considered an attack by all.

    How did Kazakhstan get on that map?

    It's a trick... everyone knows Americans can't read maps... Ask the Chinese embassy in Serbia.

    After some looking around, I'm quite sure the guy that made that actually just painted everything black on the original.

    Even that map is not right. In New Zealand there is the top secret base at Waihopai and Tangimoana in theory run by the New Zealand GCSB, but actually just a front for the American NSAs Echelon spying system.
    There is also the US contingent at Christchurch Airport that support US operations in Antarctica.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 2:57 pm

    Sometimes the laws need bending to do what's right. We're not bullies, we're liberators.

    The problem here is the definition of right. Invading Iraq and killing lots of Iraqis is right because all the damage you do will be paid for by the Iraqis and they will pay for that damage by pumping oil which reduces the global price of oil which is good for the US economy.
    The fact that you sleep at night knowing your country killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqs for no reason... well lets say most of the rest of the world sees this and does not agree with you.

    It is interesting that the US states that Russian Aggression in Georgia should not be tolerated, because a short while back the US invaded Grenada because it thought 200 American students might be threatened. The Russians only entered South Ossetia because the Georgian army was murdering Russian peacekeepers... what a weak excuse!
    Of course the US just wants to bring peace and democracy to the world like Haiti. The US delivered democracy in the 1990s and it has been democracy and peace and prosperity... or has it stayed a Sh!thole it always was but with pro US goons in power instead of anti US goons. An earthquake and Haiti is leveled while the other half of the Island has no problems. Luck? Probably. But also building codes.

    So why hasn't Russia apologized to the rest of the Eastern bloc, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, etc?

    You're a funny man. I wonder why Georgia did not sink to the ground in 2008. Or maybe it was because Georgia were not the attackers? Huh.

    Georgia was not nuked because it was no threat at all. Even the Abkhazian forces pushed them back on their own with Russian forces just watching. There was a reason the Georgians took on the South Ossetians, because they were in no condition to defend themselves.

    No one can deny now that Georgia was the aggressor. Well no one outside of Georgia and the US.

    An attack is an attack nonetheless. And it's even written in law. Or maybe Russians are not honorable enough to follow through their laws and nuke the aggressors?

    But remember, Russia and Israeli knows real wars. That's why they give their best planes to countries thousands of miles away.

    They gave nothing. They sold. Using the money and the work to keep some parts of their MIC working and to modernise where they could.

    They knew as long as they had and have nuclear weapons they would be safe from external aggression.

    Ah, so, I see Russia's logic. Send in old equipment to fight new wars, threaten people with aging nuclear weapons, but never actually use them, while selling new equipment to countries instead of using them for ourselves. Brilliant political move.

    Of course, assuming OTH radars are used to track low-RCS crafts. They're much too busy tracking civilian air travel or incoming ballistic missiles. Also assuming we don't Suder the Russians.

    You are assuming you could, and also that they don't do it to you too. You are also assuming that you could mount an attack on a soverign country that is not communist. How are you going to justify that? Any airfield that has F-35s will be monitored by human beings. Lots of plane spotters and a few in the pay of certain orgs.

    A Low RCS will stand out like a sore thumb and the OTH-B radars are designed to spot all sorts of threats including cruise missiles which already have small RCS.

    Ah, but we could! Israelis made a copy of ours (and we all know by the experience of the Chinese that copies are bad) and they made Syria go blind. Russia scrambled in to kiss them tender but that will do no good in a war. I make no assumptions because Russia has done nothing public to display that they can handle suder, nor can they deliver something similar.

    Perhaps you don't know what low RCS means. F-35 RCS estimates for the X-band frontal aspect: .001 m2. The RCS of a small cruise missile is equivalent to about .1 m2.

    Yeah right, not seeing any wing tip AESA here.

    I thought you said AESA? I smell hybrid.

    It won't detect MADL.

    Why do you think that? It might have trouble jamming it, but it should be able to detect it.

    Ah, that should be argument. Right place, right time, maybe.

    Yet, still, the Su-35 doesn't have QWIP.

    The Mig-35 has its IRST developed by a company that makes optics for Russias space industry. Sukhoi have already promised to improve the Su-35s IRST because of that. If you believe Kopp then they have the technology already as per my quote above and assuming he is right what do you think the main application would be for such technology? T-50 and Su-35.

    Still not seeing QWIPs.

    Yes, which doesn't handle my point; AIM-120C-7 on a F-35 can catch a Sukhoi/MiG farther than a R-77 fired from either of those, except when PAK-FA's come out, which isn't happening too soon.

    The Russians acknowledge the R-77 has shorter range than they hoped but they have very few in service. The current model is the RVV-SD which has significantly longer range that might be quite comparable to AMRAAM. There is also an R-77M in development, and the R-37 and R-37M also in development that will likely out range AMRAAM.

    Using max flight range just makes the job of evading the missile easier.

    lol, why are you firing anti-AWAC AA's at fighters?


    If the F-35 is flying low and avoiding radar. If it's against something like Iran, we wouldn't even have to fly low with F-35s, fly high, launch long range missiles, go home.

    Iran doesn't have Su-35. Flying high in a plane with stealth optimised for the front is not a smart thing to do.

    Count the countries that actually have the Su-35. Flying high is better than getting shot at by Iglas, amirite?

    But again, the Su-35 won't detect a F-35 in the first place, so suggesting that a Su-35 would even do all that is ludicrous.

    Hahaha... so what is the point of the F-22s? The first attack by an F-35 will lead to tactical nuclear strikes on all NATO airfields the attack could have come from. Only NATO has F-35 at the moment so any attack by any NATO country can be considered an attack by all.

    Ha, the nuclear option, both in your argument and is the argument itself. It's even dumber to assume Russia will use nuclear weapons against a superior Air force. I mean come on, you can't be that idiotic to assume that they would? So please, argue the argument, the Su-35 will never see a F-35.

    How did Kazakhstan get on that map?

    It's a trick... everyone knows Americans can't read maps... Ask the Chinese embassy in Serbia.

    No need for maps, we have only operational GPS system, Russia just needs better space program.

    After some looking around, I'm quite sure the guy that made that actually just painted everything black on the original.

    Even that map is not right. In New Zealand there is the top secret base at Waihopai and Tangimoana in theory run by the New Zealand GCSB, but actually just a front for the American NSAs Echelon spying system.
    There is also the US contingent at Christchurch Airport that support US operations in Antarctica.

    If it's Top Secret, how would you know?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:53 pm

    So why hasn't Russia apologized to the rest of the Eastern bloc, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, etc?

    Apologise for what?

    Stalin was from Georgia... if anyone needs to apologise it is them.

    An attack is an attack nonetheless. And it's even written in law. Or maybe Russians are not honorable enough to follow through their laws and nuke the aggressors?

    The laws do not state any attack will be met with nuclear retaliation.
    An attack on something of strategic value is required to qualify.
    A nuclear power plant or command centre or significant HQ.

    Only an idiot would shoot a fly that landed on his nose.

    Ah, so, I see Russia's logic. Send in old equipment to fight new wars, threaten people with aging nuclear weapons, but never actually use them, while selling new equipment to countries instead of using them for ourselves. Brilliant political move.

    No. Russia has made it through at least three economic collapses since 1990. It really had no money to try to rebuild the Soviet military force and would be stupid to try. The solution it adopted largely based on its situation of lots of equipment that is not the latest but good enough for some things. It also has plenty of nukes.
    The very sensible decision was to use existing material but reduce force sizes and base national defence on the threat. A significant threat like NATO or China will be dealt with using nuclear weapons. Minor border skirmishes can be handled by out of date equipment because countries on Russias borders that aren't China are generally very small and either friendly or part of NATO and there fore justifying nuclear response.
    Once they have downsized their forces they will then rearm with new equipment over a 10-15 year period. Not too ambitious but the international climate is not that threatening ATM.

    Ah, but we could! Israelis made a copy of ours (and we all know by the experience of the Chinese that copies are bad) and they made Syria go blind.

    And what works on Syrias AD system that was largely put together by European companies including French companies will not likely work on Russian systems... unless Russian experts have put a "kill switch" in their entire air defence network especially for the US.

    I make no assumptions because Russia has done nothing public to display that they can handle suder, nor can they deliver something similar.

    Actually I would suspect all Russian AD systems for export will have a kill switch and back door to allow Russian assets to "get through" during war time.

    F-35 RCS estimates for the X-band frontal aspect: .001 m2. The RCS of a small cruise missile is equivalent to about .1 m2.

    No, .001m2 is F-22 stealth, the F-35 is .01 which is still very good, but means nothing in the IR band nor the long wave bands OTH backscatter radars operate. The Aussie OTH radar was reported to have tracked a B-2 on its way to a conflict area from the US and tracking wasn't an issue. OTH radar rarely sees a target nose on due to its angle of emission.

    I thought you said AESA? I smell hybrid.

    What do you think AESA is? An antenna made up of an array of emitters used to create a virtual antenna.

    Still not seeing QWIPs.

    You used Carlos as a source here. He states that Russia has QWIP technology. I linked to it above somewhere.

    lol, why are you firing anti-AWAC AA's at fighters?

    Why not if the opportunity is there. Also it would be useful if an E-3 turns up and starts supporting the enemy fighters.

    Count the countries that actually have the Su-35. Flying high is better than getting shot at by Iglas, amirite?

    The only F-35 in service at the moment is the F-35 Draken... except it is out of service... last AF to use it was Austria that retired it in about 2005 or something.
    Su-35s will be in service next year. About 3 years before the F-35 makes it to service.

    Flying high is certainly better than operating down near the Iglas and tunguskas and Pantsirs and TORs... but you suddenly become more visible to longer band radars.

    Ha, the nuclear option, both in your argument and is the argument itself. It's even dumber to assume Russia will use nuclear weapons against a superior Air force. I mean come on, you can't be that idiotic to assume that they would? So please, argue the argument, the Su-35 will never see a F-35.

    If aliens started attacking the US and started taking out its airforce with lasers and sht and the US couldn't stop them do you think they might use nuclear weapons?

    If NATO was attacking Russia using stealth aircraft if we assume Russia had no defences against these stealth aircraft and they were knocking down Russian fighters as quickly as they took off do you really think the Russians would just sit back and wait for those NATO forces to start sending in the tanks? Do you think they would think that there is no way NATO would attack my nuclear ability to totally annihilate them in return and just be nice?

    Wake up man! If NATO or US or Israel or Georgian F-22s are cutting a swath through the Russian airforce and shooting down all its aircraft and melting all the ground radars it comes across with its super AESA death rays don't think for a heart beat that the Russians would know that Russian nuclear weapons would be on the top priority destroy list... and once they are destroyed NATO or US or Israel or Georgia will start dictating surrender terms.
    You think they wouldn't nuke NATO or US or Israel or Georgia in a heartbeat?

    Ask Vlad.

    If the Soviet Union had won the cold war and all of Europe and Canada was now in the Warsaw Pact and the F-22 and F-35 were still on the drawing board and the B-2 was a hangar queen because there is no way the US could afford one let alone 20 and the T-50 which has been in service for a decade is swatting F-15s and F-18s from the skies like flies are you telling me you wouldn't approve of your government firing tactical nukes at the airbases the T-50s are operating from with a threat that if the attack does not stop immediately you will launch all your strategic nukes at the enemy?

    No need for maps, we have only operational GPS system, Russia just needs better space program.

    That is just ignorant. Glonass is not mm precision accurate but it does exist and is working fine. You do realise that the ISS is actually MIR 2 in design? The way the ISS is put together with modules is copied directly from the MIR 2 design and developed from experience with MIR. The latest US spacesuit is a direct copy of a Soviet suit. With the soviet suit the backpack opens like a door and you basically jump inside and close the backpack and then check the seals. It takes about 45 minutes. The US suit has separate joint components that took about 7 hours to put on including all the joint seal tests. The toilet and washing facilities on the ISS are Soviet/Russian designed... and there is a reason that Space shuttle crews used to go through to the space station to do their business rather than use the facilities on the shuttle.

    If it's Top Secret, how would you know?

    Its work is top secret, not its existence or what it is for.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:39 pm

    So why hasn't Russia apologized to the rest of the Eastern bloc, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, etc?

    Apologise for what?

    Stalin was from Georgia... if anyone needs to apologise it is them.

    Oh you know, eradicating Afghani villages just for the sake of defense. Oh you know, the sins of our father and the such. Oh you know, oppression of political believes and the etc that I will put at the end of the sentence.

    An attack is an attack nonetheless. And it's even written in law. Or maybe Russians are not honorable enough to follow through their laws and nuke the aggressors?

    The laws do not state any attack will be met with nuclear retaliation.
    An attack on something of strategic value is required to qualify.
    A nuclear power plant or command centre or significant HQ.

    Only an idiot would shoot a fly that landed on his nose.

    You said it yourself: "The Russians have written in law that any attack on Russia that they perceive as a strategic threat will result in direct nuclear retaliation... even if the attack was conventional." I'm sure that Russia saw that Georgia could of freed the EU from the chains of their Energy monopoly, which would severely deplete Russian funds for military projects.

    Ah, so, I see Russia's logic. Send in old equipment to fight new wars, threaten people with aging nuclear weapons, but never actually use them, while selling new equipment to countries instead of using them for ourselves. Brilliant political move.

    No. Russia has made it through at least three economic collapses since 1990. It really had no money to try to rebuild the Soviet military force and would be stupid to try. The solution it adopted largely based on its situation of lots of equipment that is not the latest but good enough for some things. It also has plenty of nukes.
    The very sensible decision was to use existing material but reduce force sizes and base national defence on the threat. A significant threat like NATO or China will be dealt with using nuclear weapons. Minor border skirmishes can be handled by out of date equipment because countries on Russias borders that aren't China are generally very small and either friendly or part of NATO and there fore justifying nuclear response.
    Once they have downsized their forces they will then rearm with new equipment over a 10-15 year period. Not too ambitious but the international climate is not that threatening ATM.

    And yet no thought has come into actually stimulating the economy and making some actual Economic changes instead of selling old crap and kinda new crap to other people while taking away the best of the best from their boys on the front line? Those Tu-22M3 wouldn't have been shot down if maybe they had some functional UAVs in theatre.

    Ah, but we could! Israelis made a copy of ours (and we all know by the experience of the Chinese that copies are bad) and they made Syria go blind.

    And what works on Syrias AD system that was largely put together by European companies including French companies will not likely work on Russian systems... unless Russian experts have put a "kill switch" in their entire air defence network especially for the US.

    You've mistaken, Russian radars went berzerk. Keyword: Russian.

    I make no assumptions because Russia has done nothing public to display that they can handle suder, nor can they deliver something similar.

    Actually I would suspect all Russian AD systems for export will have a kill switch and back door to allow Russian assets to "get through" during war time.

    LOL, what are you, a conspiracy theorist? If Russian AD systems had a kill switch for export, you'd assume the ones passed down and later sold like those Buks that were sold to Georgia would also have a kill switch yet that Tu-22M3 still went down, along with a bunch of Su-25s.

    F-35 RCS estimates for the X-band frontal aspect: .001 m2. The RCS of a small cruise missile is equivalent to about .1 m2.

    No, .001m2 is F-22 stealth, the F-35 is .01 which is still very good, but means nothing in the IR band nor the long wave bands OTH backscatter radars operate. The Aussie OTH radar was reported to have tracked a B-2 on its way to a conflict area from the US and tracking wasn't an issue. OTH radar rarely sees a target nose on due to its angle of emission.

    Uh, check your numbers again, .001 m2 is F-35 frontal aspect, F-22 is .0001 m2. That's because the F-35's frontal RCS is estimated at -30 dbs and the F-22's at -40 dbs.

    I thought you said AESA? I smell hybrid.

    What do you think AESA is? An antenna made up of an array of emitters used to create a virtual antenna.

    An AESA =/= Hybrid ESA.

    Still not seeing QWIPs.

    You used Carlos as a source here. He states that Russia has QWIP technology. I linked to it above somewhere.

    No QWIPs on Su-35s if you didn't remember the argument. Still not seeing it.

    lol, why are you firing anti-AWAC AA's at fighters?

    Why not if the opportunity is there. Also it would be useful if an E-3 turns up and starts supporting the enemy fighters.

    Because it's not designed for maneuverability. But AA-13 range is irrelevant because again, a Sukhoi or a MiG wouldn't see a F-35 coming.

    Count the countries that actually have the Su-35. Flying high is better than getting shot at by Iglas, amirite?

    The only F-35 in service at the moment is the F-35 Draken... except it is out of service... last AF to use it was Austria that retired it in about 2005 or something.
    Su-35s will be in service next year. About 3 years before the F-35 makes it to service.

    Flying high is certainly better than operating down near the Iglas and tunguskas and Pantsirs and TORs... but you suddenly become more visible to longer band radars.

    In which case JASSM would do the trick. They already out range the non-existent 40N6 missile that the S-400 uses.

    Ha, the nuclear option, both in your argument and is the argument itself. It's even dumber to assume Russia will use nuclear weapons against a superior Air force. I mean come on, you can't be that idiotic to assume that they would? So please, argue the argument, the Su-35 will never see a F-35.

    If aliens started attacking the US and started taking out its airforce with lasers and sht and the US couldn't stop them do you think they might use nuclear weapons?

    If NATO was attacking Russia using stealth aircraft if we assume Russia had no defences against these stealth aircraft and they were knocking down Russian fighters as quickly as they took off do you really think the Russians would just sit back and wait for those NATO forces to start sending in the tanks? Do you think they would think that there is no way NATO would attack my nuclear ability to totally annihilate them in return and just be nice?

    Wake up man! If NATO or US or Israel or Georgian F-22s are cutting a swath through the Russian airforce and shooting down all its aircraft and melting all the ground radars it comes across with its super AESA death rays don't think for a heart beat that the Russians would know that Russian nuclear weapons would be on the top priority destroy list... and once they are destroyed NATO or US or Israel or Georgia will start dictating surrender terms.
    You think they wouldn't nuke NATO or US or Israel or Georgia in a heartbeat?

    Ask Vlad.

    If the Soviet Union had won the cold war and all of Europe and Canada was now in the Warsaw Pact and the F-22 and F-35 were still on the drawing board and the B-2 was a hangar queen because there is no way the US could afford one let alone 20 and the T-50 which has been in service for a decade is swatting F-15s and F-18s from the skies like flies are you telling me you wouldn't approve of your government firing tactical nukes at the airbases the T-50s are operating from with a threat that if the attack does not stop immediately you will launch all your strategic nukes at the enemy?

    Yeah, now you're talking about Aliens. I thought we were in Reality.

    lol, the Soviet Union was always behind us in Economic strength, they didn't win the Cold War if you didn't know. And, we never conquered them, so why are you assuming NATO being assimilated? Or is that because that's what the Soviet Union does? Attack and absorb countries? I personally like America's Economic empire better.

    All in all, I thought you said Russia was smart. If they were, disarmament is the only option for the world.

    No need for maps, we have only operational GPS system, Russia just needs better space program.

    That is just ignorant. Glonass is not mm precision accurate but it does exist and is working fine. You do realise that the ISS is actually MIR 2 in design? The way the ISS is put together with modules is copied directly from the MIR 2 design and developed from experience with MIR. The latest US spacesuit is a direct copy of a Soviet suit. With the soviet suit the backpack opens like a door and you basically jump inside and close the backpack and then check the seals. It takes about 45 minutes. The US suit has separate joint components that took about 7 hours to put on including all the joint seal tests. The toilet and washing facilities on the ISS are Soviet/Russian designed... and there is a reason that Space shuttle crews used to go through to the space station to do their business rather than use the facilities on the shuttle.

    Maybe you're lost, here's my GPS-equipped iTouch. Or do they just not have our fancy technology out there?

    If it's Top Secret, how would you know?

    Its work is top secret, not its existence or what it is for.

    Then obviously someone has to pay attention to New Zealand before they turn into a Red Superpower.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  GarryB on Mon Nov 22, 2010 5:13 am

    Oh you know, eradicating Afghani villages just for the sake of defense.

    Like the Americans in South Vietnam... the Soviets were invited. If Russia must apologise for that then so must the US for giving all that money to the Pakistani ISI who then used that money to later create the Taleban... a group the Pakistani government actually thought was a good thing for Afghanistan. Communism would have been better even if it didn't end in the early 1990s like it did in Europe.

    Oh you know, oppression of political believes and the etc that I will put at the end of the sentence.

    Oppression of political beliefs? The American policy of better dead than red is clearly oppression of communism. And before you say communism is evil you are in bed with the Chinese economically to the eyebrows. If you had treated the Soviet Union like you treat China there wouldn't have been a cold war. It had nothing to do with communism... it was about the colonial power of Russia... but being a colonial power yourself and your allies in Europe you had to focus on something else so you picked the fact that only communist party members get to vote in elections in communist countries.

    You said it yourself: "The Russians have written in law that any attack on Russia that they perceive as a strategic threat will result in direct nuclear retaliation... even if the attack was conventional." I'm sure that Russia saw that Georgia could of freed the EU from the chains of their Energy monopoly, which would severely deplete Russian funds for military projects.

    Russia has an energy monopoly to Europe because Europe is too cheap to buy it from countries that charge more. They buy Russian gas and oil because it is cheaper and there is already delivery pipes in place since before the cold war ended. The only problems with delivery have been created by the new country of the Ukraine that has been pinching gas that was paid for by Europe. Russia is now building alternative pipelines to solve that problem. The gas pipeline through Georgia may never be competitive. If it was then Russia is already building pipelines to supply China and South Korea and possibly Japan.

    If all the pipelines were suddenly blocked as Medvedev said they can simply build a plant to convert it to liquid natural gas and ship it... and charge more because LNG is more expensive.

    And yet no thought has come into actually stimulating the economy and making some actual Economic changes

    Half their economic problems came from the privatisation in the Yeltsin years where the rich and powerful few Russians had the funds to buy up everything cheap. These people that buy British newspapers and soccer teams that the west loves so much because of their money... they had the power, money and connections to buy up all the ex soviet industries cheap because they are the high ranking communists the west hated a few years before. The reason the military coup against Yeltsin failed was because the powers that normally would crush democracy realised how much money they could make and just let communism fall.
    They bought up factories and what do you know the equipment is old and obsolete... but the workers pension funds are fat and juicy. Fire most of the workers sell off anything that is worth anything and then pinch the retirement money of all those workers and put it in offshore bank accounts. Then declare the factory worthless and sell it for more than you paid for it. Millions of Russians saw their economic security disappear to the west to buy soccer clubs.
    Then Putin got into office and all of a sudden the west started demonising Russia again... it had committed the same crime Iran did with the fall of the Shah. Nationalise parts of its industry to prevent foreign ownership and exploitation.

    2008 was a wake up call that reminded the Russian military that when you don't buy new stuff for 20 years problems can become fundamental. I rather doubt they thought their role in Georgia would be any more than peacekeeping, for which their forces were more than adequate.

    ...instead of selling old crap and kinda new crap to other people while taking away the best of the best from their boys on the front line?

    They took nothing away from their boys on the front line. The MIC and Armed forces are two separate things. A sale of T-90s to India for instance has no effect on the Russian Armed forces except for that production capacity is tied up while the order is met, and the money spent on the T-90 by India is used by that company to try to improve the vehicle and their other products as best they can.
    The point is that the Russian Armed forces has enormous problems with munitions and equipment in storage that need to be dealt with. Some munitions are getting old and unstable.

    Those Tu-22M3 wouldn't have been shot down if maybe they had some functional UAVs in theatre.

    Those? How many were shot down? The Tu-22M3 is seen in the west as a bomber. In actual fact there are several variants of the aircraft in service, including a maritime missile carrying attack aircraft, a bomber whose primary role is theatre strike against ADs, and a recon model. It was the Recon model that was used in Georgia, but the recon model hasn't had an upgrade since the 1980s so it clearly was the wrong aircraft to send in hindsight. In real time however a neighbouring country has launch an invasion against an area Russia is responsible for keeping the peace in and has attacked directly Russian peacekeeping troops. The first thing you do is check what satellites are in place and then you send in a recon aircraft to determine the enemies forces disposition and strengths. If the Russians had know the Georgians had SA-11s then obviously they would not likely have sent a recon model of the Backfire and would have sent in an Su-34 straight away.
    From what I can tell they sent the Su-34 in to jam the Buk and ground forces overran the SAM position. Seems like the new stuff works fine, but obviously UAVs would have been better. Hense the post conflict focus on UAV development.

    You've mistaken, Russian radars went berzerk. Keyword: Russian.

    Duh. The radars are directed by the AD network. You can't hack a radar. You hack the network directing the radars. If they could hack the radars then they could make their aircraft simply not visible rather than getting the radars to turn so as to not have the Israeli aircraft in the field of view as they passed.
    The Network was worked on by the French... just like the Iraqi AD network was largely Russian radars but the network was not Russian.

    A back door is something BUILT INTO THE SOFTWARE. The Russians are hardly going to give such information to the Israelis or US. The French however might.

    If Russian AD systems had a kill switch for export, you'd assume the ones passed down and later sold like those Buks that were sold to Georgia would also have a kill switch yet that Tu-22M3 still went down, along with a bunch of Su-25s.

    If the Russians knew there was a BUK system operating in Georgia do you think they would send an unarmed recon plane?
    The BUKs were sold to Georgia by the Ukraine... NOT Russia.

    Uh, check your numbers again, .001 m2 is F-35 frontal aspect, F-22 is .0001 m2. That's because the F-35's frontal RCS is estimated at -30 dbs and the F-22's at -40 dbs.

    Don't believe it. And even if you do we are talking downgraded export F-35s.

    An AESA =/= Hybrid ESA.

    WTF is a hybrid ESA? You are making that up.
    It is an active electronically scanned array. AESA.


    No QWIPs on Su-35s if you didn't remember the argument. Still not seeing it.

    We don't know what equipment the in service Su-35 will have. It is described as a testing bed for technologies of a 5th gen fighter... which would be the T-50.

    Because it's not designed for maneuverability. But AA-13 range is irrelevant because again, a Sukhoi or a MiG wouldn't see a F-35 coming.

    Why wouldn't a Sukhoi or Mig see an F-35 coming? Are they planning to operate completely independently of the Russian air defence network? The F-35 isn't designed for manoeuvrability either, and I would like to see the manoeuvre that dodges a mach 6 missile diving in from out of nowhere.
    S-400 and S-300 for that matter have lots of interesting radars linked to them including all sorts of passive and long wave radars... including AESAs BTW because making low frequency AESAs is actually not that hard because the TR modules are not that small.

    In which case JASSM would do the trick. They already out range the non-existent 40N6 missile that the S-400 uses.

    What is the point? Using stand off range to fire JASSMs just gives Pantsir-S1 lots of JASSMs to destroy like it was designed to do.

    SAM site remains active and ready to deal with any threat trying to attack whatever it is protecting.

    And I rather doubt they will bother to tell anyone when their 400km range missile is in service. Why would they? It can simply be a surprise. Twisted Evil

    Yeah, now you're talking about Aliens. I thought we were in Reality.

    Yeah... excellent point. Ignore everything I said and don't even think about it and just say there is no such thing as aliens.
    You are clearly not interested in a discussion... you just want to argue that the US is invincible and Russia can't stop them not matter what.
    Well if that helps you sleep at night fine... Russia would never use nuclear weapons because deep down they want the US and NATO to invade and take all their resources and land and rule them like they did the Native Americans.... you know... to death.

    Funny thing is that they didn't seem to want to let Hitler do that, so what has changed?

    lol, the Soviet Union was always behind us in Economic strength, they didn't win the Cold War if you didn't know.

    Yet when you count the nuke warheads that really didn't matter.

    And, we never conquered them, so why are you assuming NATO being assimilated?

    You invaded and interfered in the 1917-1921 revolution and then from 1945 you economically sanctioned them into a corner and kept poking them with a stick. NATO countries have invaded Russia lots of time, including Germany, France, Poland (yes in 1921... look it up), even Sweden.

    Why am I assuming NATO wants to assimilate them!!!!

    You are the one talking about F-35s penetrating their airspace at will and shooting down all the fighters they haven't even put into service yet without even being seen!

    I personally like America's Economic empire better.

    The same reason the Germans loved the Nazis... they didn't see the concentration camps or watch the genocide.
    They just benefited economically from it and ignored the bad stuff.
    Just remember if it all goes t!ts up just deny deny deny, or say you were just following orders.

    All in all, I thought you said Russia was smart. If they were, disarmament is the only option for the world.

    Yes, Pinky, you know the plan... the same plan we use every time to take over the world. Disarm everyone and we can take over the world with a butter knife...



    Maybe you're lost, here's my GPS-equipped iTouch. Or do they just not have our fancy technology out there?

    You were talking about reality before like it meant something?

    Have you not heard of GLONASS?
    I realise Navstar was too hard to spell and they went for GPS, but the problem there is like the problem with Spetsnaz. It is too generic.
    A map and compass is a global position system.
    The Soviet Tsiklon GPS system became operational before Navstar in 1972 and is still used by the Russian Space Forces.
    There are probably a dozen or so GPS systems that have been or are in operation.
    But of course only the American system is important enough to count. Rolling Eyes

    Then obviously someone has to pay attention to New Zealand before they turn into a Red Superpower.

    The amusing irony is that some of your replies are probably more effective in that regard than anything I have said or think.
    Sad thing is you don't seem to realise.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  nightcrawler on Mon Nov 22, 2010 6:15 am

    ....& why the hell Pakistan is painted black in map!!
    US still is trying to attack via drones in our Quetta regime & we have already out-rightly rejected it still whole Pakistan is painted black...great just great

    Sponsored content

    Re: General Questions Thread:

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 6:48 am


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:48 am