Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+45
Walther von Oldenburg
Isos
The-thing-next-door
Cheetah
Tsavo Lion
victor1985
GarryB
moskit
Admin
DerWolf
franco
KoTeMoRe
George1
0nillie0
nastle77
nemrod
TheArmenian
Regular
d_taddei2
RTN
kvs
GunshipDemocracy
jhelb
Book.
Werewolf
Trexonian
etaepsilonk
Mike E
magnumcromagnon
Morpheus Eberhardt
sheytanelkebir
Stealthflanker
flamming_python
IvanGrozny
Deep Throat
milky_candy_sugar
BTRfan
SOC
TR1
medo
Austin
Hoof
ahmedfire
IronsightSniper
nightcrawler
49 posters

    Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:05 pm

    Not in any way do I doubt Scramjets advantages. However, they still remain relatively untested, and aren't in service with anyone quite yet. Also, the minimum speed requirement of ~ Mach 5 isn't exactly a good thing. A Scramjet missile would need a very large and powerful solid-rocket first stage. 

    GarryB, do you know why SAMs never implement "Aero-spikes" as found on the Trident series of ICBMs? They are said to improve aerodynamics by up-to/over 50%, which would result in a considerably greater range.
    avatar
    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 707
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  etaepsilonk Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:18 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    Scramjets characteristics are still relatively unknown, so Ramjets would be the safer bet. Ramjets also allow for the missile to throttle down to around Mach 1, which could improve range dramatically.

    Is that so?

    From what I know, it's the other way around, efficiency increases with ram pressure, which is proportionate to speed. Correct me if I'm wrong  Wink


    "GarryB, do you know why SAMs never implement "Aero-spikes" as found on the Trident series of ICBMs? They are said to improve aerodynamics by up-to/over 50%, which would result in a considerably greater range."

    Dunno exactly, but maybe high alfa angles have something to do with it?

    ------------------



    To Garryb:
    "Creating a scramjet S-400 likely wouldn't make it smaller or lighter, so I doubt they will bother, but for very long range very high speed missiles scramjet propulsion will probably be the mode of choice."

    I'd like to add that current scramjets able to emulate the performance of 48N6's/40N6's rocket engines are not yet available, even prototypes.
    The best performing S-J, X-51 "waverider", goes only to about mach 6, while even middle tier s-400 missile has a burnout speed of about 8 mach, quite a significant difference. And I'm not even talking about 40N6 with ~12 mach Smile
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:26 pm

    Yes and no, while Scramjets have been tested, they've never been put to use.

    Scramjets do use a lot of use, with the benefit being speed. I would guess Ramjets are less efficient around Mach 5 (Scramjet speed), but more so at lower speeds (for obvious reasons) (I need a second opinion on this, correct me if I'm wrong).

    Could be, I'm not sure. From what I've read, Spikes wouldn't be a problem at high angles of attack because of their small size and surface area.

    Scramjets aren't "there yet", but when they are, you can expect big things.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29920
    Points : 30446
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB Tue Jul 15, 2014 4:40 am

    Also, the minimum speed requirement of ~ Mach 5 isn't exactly a good thing. A Scramjet missile would need a very large and powerful solid-rocket first stage.

    There are no hard limits of speed for scramjets... the SA-5 test just started testing at mach 5 because that is the normal flight speed of the SA-5 so that is when it started operating.

    The engines in the SR-71 are a good example of what can be expected.

    they work as standard turbojets for takeoff and landing, but as they accelerate to high speed bypass air that is sucked in the intake but goes around the outside rather than through the engine is increased. This air going around the engine is called bypass air, just like on a turbofan, engine, but in this case when the SR-71 is flying at mach 3.5 almost no air is flowing through its turbojet engines which produce almost no thrust. The bypass air has fuel added and operates like a ramjet and produces the thrust to propel the aircraft.

    Having a variable cycle engine is likely the future.

    In fact an onboard store of fuel and oxygen and the ability to close the intakes could be used for a space plane.

    Use normal jet propulsion to take off from a runway with air sucked in the intakes and fuel used with the air coming in the intakes. Climb and accelerate to supersonic speed and close off the turbojet engine with bypass air acting like a scramjet with air still coming in the intakes and accelerate to mach 26... turn to a flight path to take you out of the atmosphere and close off the intakes and start feeding the O2 and burn it with the fuel and you pretty much have a rocket plane. So turbojet, scramjet, rocket propulsion.

    GarryB, do you know why SAMs never implement "Aero-spikes" as found on the Trident series of ICBMs? They are said to improve aerodynamics by up-to/over 50%, which would result in a considerably greater range.

    Not the best solution... an aerospike is used on missiles with rounded noses of poor aerodynamic design for supersonic flight. Trident has a round nose because of the design constraints to pack as much missile in as small a tube as possible so rather than an efficient long pointy nose is has a stumpy rounded nose which would be aweful for supersonic flight.

    Another application is IR guided SAMs and AAMs because the IR optical sensor is most efficient with a rounded nose which greatly increases nose induced drag.

    The example would be Igla with its aerospike to improve performance without compromising the shape of the nose optical port.

    In comparison the Mistral has a pointed nose which effects its IR sensitivity and performance.

    Very simply the Russians went for a good optical sensor performance and good flight performance,while the French compromised IR sensor performance for aerodynamic performance.

    From what I know, it's the other way around, efficiency increases with ram pressure, which is proportionate to speed. Correct me if I'm wrong

    It is a bit like a car... in top gear you move most efficiently using the least fuel... the worst performance is low speed accelerating, the best performance is top speed cruising with a low throttle setting to maintain speed by countering drag.

    I'd like to add that current scramjets able to emulate the performance of 48N6's/40N6's rocket engines are not yet available, even prototypes.
    The best performing S-J, X-51 "waverider", goes only to about mach 6, while even middle tier s-400 missile has a burnout speed of about 8 mach, quite a significant difference. And I'm not even talking about 40N6 with ~12 mach

    Very true, but the key is that scramjets are in their infancy and have enormous potential.... in a range of applications.

    I would guess Ramjets are less efficient around Mach 5 (Scramjet speed), but more so at lower speeds (for obvious reasons) (I need a second opinion on this, correct me if I'm wrong).

    Ramjets choke on supersonic air, just like turbojets do. The fastest flying turbojet engine is the engine in the MiG-31 where all the thrust is derived from the turbojet engine. The problem is that as you approach Mach 3 the incoming air needs to be slowed down so when it goes through the engine in the hot section where fuel is added it is subsonic so the fuel burns properly. To achieve this the intake narrows and reduces the airflow into the engine, which slows it down to subsonic speed. Of course the limitation of speed of the engine is how fast it can push this air and the burnt fuel out the back... the speed it pushes it out determines how much thrust is produced... if the air through the hot section becomes supersonic it will flameout and stall and the air blown out the rear will greatly lose heat and energy and thrust will go down.

    It is the same for a ramjet... if the air going into the hot section becomes supersonic it will flame out and stall and thrust will be lost.

    Most ramjets are efficient in the mach 3-4 range but not much more... they still need a certain volume of air flowing through them to generate thrust to maintain flight.

    With a scramjet the airflow is still controlled but can be allowed to go through much faster including supersonic or faster through the hot section meaning a lot more thrust and much higher speed.

    the limitations on scramjets is heat... the insides can melt and the external surfaces of the aircraft can melt due to the high temperatures generated in high speed flight.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  magnumcromagnon Tue Jul 15, 2014 6:05 am

    GarryB wrote:The limitations on scramjets is heat... the insides can melt and the external surfaces of the aircraft can melt due to the high temperatures generated in high speed flight.

    What's the likeliness that Space Shuttle-style heat tiles make their way on to scramjet vehicles?
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Tue Jul 15, 2014 6:31 am

    Thank you for all that info! 

    I simply mean that Scramjets have to be accelerated in order to function. This isn't that big of a problem for missiles, but is for larger/heaver planes etc. 

    The SR-71 really was a revolution, that engine technology was way ahead of its time. (Thank you Kelly!!!)

    I completely agree, we will be seeing much more in the variable cycle area. (Just to let you know, I know the basics of Turbojets and jet engines in general. I used to know a TON on Scramjets, but it all came out of me.)

    Ok, thank you for answering that for me. I guess it is more of a stop-gap solution than anything else. If I remember right, India is said to have a better solution in which the rocket somehow ionizes (?) the air in front of it, supposedly increase aero properties by ~45% .

    That sounds reasonable, especially when Scramjets are "popular".

    Heck, I feel Ramjets are still undervalued! (Yes I know, Scramjets are basically the same thing.)

    That's is one advantage of Scramjets, they probably don't create as much drag. (By not slowing down the incoming air, causes air around the engine to "reroute".

    Heat will always be an issue, but there are many ways of (for the most part) overcoming it. Look at MIRVs, they travel at Mach 10! (Albeit with heat shields.)

    (I found the Indian aero technology, here it is; http://www.domainb.com/aero/mil_avi/miss_muni/20080910_Indian_technology.html )
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Tue Jul 15, 2014 6:33 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The limitations on scramjets is heat... the insides can melt and the external surfaces of the aircraft can melt due to the high temperatures generated in high speed flight.

    What's the likeliness that Space Shuttle-style heat tiles make their way on to scramjet vehicles?

    Very plausible, if not, engineers will find a better solution.
    avatar
    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 707
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  etaepsilonk Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:57 am

    GarryB wrote:Not the best solution... an aerospike is used on missiles with rounded noses of poor aerodynamic design for supersonic flight. Trident has a round nose because of the design constraints to pack as much missile in as small a tube as possible so rather than an efficient long pointy nose is has a stumpy rounded nose which would be aweful for supersonic flight.

    Another application is IR guided SAMs and AAMs because the IR optical sensor is most efficient with a rounded nose which greatly increases nose induced drag.

    The example would be Igla with its aerospike to improve performance without compromising the shape of the nose optical port.

    In comparison the Mistral has a pointed nose which effects its IR sensitivity and performance.

    Very simply the Russians went for a good optical sensor performance and good flight performance,while the French compromised IR sensor performance for aerodynamic performance.

    Yeah, seems true enough Smile


    ----------------------------
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The limitations on scramjets is heat... the insides can melt and the external surfaces of the aircraft can melt due to the high temperatures generated in high speed flight.

    What's the likeliness that Space Shuttle-style heat tiles make their way on to scramjet vehicles?

    Eh, I think space shuttle's (and other space carriers', actually) tiles are built for quite a different purpose. That is, to be used not in flight, but in descent.
    And that descent is rough- flying at near 90 degrees AoA while slowing down from mach 20 to mach 2-3. I don't think the near future scramjet vehicles need that kind of strength yet.
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Wed Jul 16, 2014 6:35 am

    Does anyone have any thoughts on that Indian aerodynamic feature? 

    "Agni III, which is India's longest-range missile with a capability of striking targets 3,500 km away, may now have an extended range of around 5,000 km thanks to a unique solution discovered by Indian scientists at the prestigious Indian Institute of Science (IISc) here. The technology will increase the range of not just missiles but also other satellite launch vehicles.
    The technology also has the exciting possibility of reducing the risk of occurrence of a Columbia space shuttle-type of tragic accident.
    The enhanced range of an Indian re-entry vehicle or missile will now be due to a special-purpose coating of chromium metal applied to the blunt nose cone of missiles and launch vehicles, for which international patents have been sought for by the team of IISc scientists.

    ''Objects such as missiles fly at hypersonic velocities which are more than five times the speed of sound and encounter atmospheric drag because of friction. The chromium coating works by adding temporary heat and pushing the stagnating gas away to create an easier path,'' G Jagadeesh, an assistant professor at the IISc here said.
    The findings of the IISc team, which also includes Vinayak Kulkarni of IIT (Guwahati) and GM Hegde, E Arunan and KPJ Reddy, have been reported in the latest issue of the Physics of Fluids journal published by the American Institute of Physics.
    Laboratory experiments have shown that atmospheric drag because of the coating fell by 47% and Jagadeesh said a ''conservative estimate'' was that this would result in range going up by at least 40%.
    ''The measurements show about 47% reduction in the drag coefficient for a 60° apex angle blunt cone in a Mach 8 flow of 3.4  MJ/kg specific enthalpy,'' reads an extract from the article in the journal.
    Scientists say the breakthrough also has potential to avert disasters of the type that struck space shuttle Columbia in 2003, which resulted in the death of seven astronauts, including Indian-born astronaut Kalpana Chawla. The shuttle burned out as it was re-entering the earth's atmosphere as there were problems it's thermal protection system.
    The special-purpose coating developed at the IISc could likely replace the tiles and panels which currently protect orbiters against extreme heat during re-entry into the atmosphere.
    ''The coating evaporates once the object has re-entered the atmosphere. This novel method is path-breaking because additional energy is not required to reduce drag; objects which travel into space need to carry a much lower fuel load,'' Jagadeesh said."

    - From domain-b, I posted the complete address earlier.

    Anyway, I think it seems like a great idea. These "coatings" could be applied to all Russian SAMs, and really help them "reach out" to farther distances.  russia
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29920
    Points : 30446
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:45 pm

    What's the likeliness that Space Shuttle-style heat tiles make their way on to scramjet vehicles?

    Ablative tiles could be useful for one use systems like rockets, but for reusable craft like the shuttle they are a pain in the backside... after every flight they need to be very carefully examined for wear or cracks with old tiles replaced.

    A better solution would be to pump slush hydrogen fuel through the aircraft skin... it is very cold and would take the heat out of any surface... very much the same as if you throw a plastic bottle on the fire it will quickly melt and catch fire itself. Now take a similar bottle and fill it with water and throw it on the fire... the heat from the fire is absorbed by the water so the plastic does not get hot enough to melt because the water draws the heat away from the plastic.

    I simply mean that Scramjets have to be accelerated in order to function. This isn't that big of a problem for missiles, but is for larger/heaver planes etc.

    Certainly with a scramjet... with a heat limit rather than a speed limit the faster you can accelerate it the better... a rocket engine will accelerate it faster than it can accelerate on its own.

    Even a pulse detonation engine can operate from stationary, but becomes rather more efficient as the aircraft moves faster. It is just like gears and internal combustion engines... very low gears and cold engines reduce efficiency and performance.

    Heck, I feel Ramjets are still undervalued! (Yes I know, Scramjets are basically the same thing.)

    A scramjet is a type of ramjet... think of it in terms of turbojets... an old end of WWII turbojet engine is still a turbojet engine. Comparing it to a modern turbojet engine and you could almost say they are different engines but the basic functionality is different. Without a variable ramp air intake a turbojet from a late WWII plane would stall at supersonic speed.. the same with a ramjet and a scramjet.

    Obviously ramjets are incredibly simple, scramjets are slightly more complex, but until the ramjet is operating at very high speed the combustion will be subsonic anyway so a scramjet and a ramjet will be identical. It is only when the ramjet loses thrust and the scramjet continues to burn fuel supersonically and generates rather more thrust than any ramjet can generate that the differences become obvious.

    That's is one advantage of Scramjets, they probably don't create as much drag. (By not slowing down the incoming air, causes air around the engine to "reroute".

    The Scramjet at any speed can have the air intake wide open which means higher airflow, higher exhaust speed and rather more thrust.

    Heat will always be an issue, but there are many ways of (for the most part) overcoming it. Look at MIRVs, they travel at Mach 10! (Albeit with heat shields.)

    The period of time they travel at mach 10 is fairly short as they fall through the atmosphere... if we assume the atmosphere is only significant in terms of drag up to about 50km then we are talking about less than 20 seconds of reentry.

    And that descent is rough- flying at near 90 degrees AoA while slowing down from mach 20 to mach 2-3. I don't think the near future scramjet vehicles need that kind of strength yet.

    Good point... the space shuttle uses its wings and lower surface area as a sort of aerobrake, so it does rapidly heat up. Importantly the angle of entry into the atmosphere is critical... too steep and it gets too hot and you burn up. Not steep enough and you skip like a stone on flat water back up into space.

    For high speed flight there are areas of the airframe that will be subjected to continuous friction heat... a Mach 2.86 the canopy of the MiG-31 can get to 70 degree Celsius... other external parts like the wing root get much hotter and cannot be made of Aluminium or it will melt.

    ''The coating evaporates once the object has re-entered the atmosphere. This novel method is path-breaking because additional energy is not required to reduce drag; objects which travel into space need to carry a much lower fuel load,'' Jagadeesh said."

    If the coating evapourates on reentry then how can it operate as a substitute for heat tiles?

    I am skeptical and would want rather more information directly from the people developing the technology.
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty scramjet vs ramjets

    Post  Mike E Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:08 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    What's the likeliness that Space Shuttle-style heat tiles make their way on to scramjet vehicles?

    Ablative tiles could be useful for one use systems like rockets, but for reusable craft like the shuttle they are a pain in the backside... after every flight they need to be very carefully examined for wear or cracks with old tiles replaced.

    A better solution would be to pump slush hydrogen fuel through the aircraft skin... it is very cold and would take the heat out of any surface... very much the same as if you throw a plastic bottle on the fire it will quickly melt and catch fire itself. Now take a similar bottle and fill it with water and throw it on the fire... the heat from the fire is absorbed by the water so the plastic does not get hot enough to melt because the water draws the heat away from the plastic.

    I simply mean that Scramjets have to be accelerated in order to function. This isn't that big of a problem for missiles, but is for larger/heaver planes etc.

    Certainly with a scramjet... with a heat limit rather than a speed limit the faster you can accelerate it the better... a rocket engine will accelerate it faster than it can accelerate on its own.

    Even a pulse detonation engine can operate from stationary, but becomes rather more efficient as the aircraft moves faster. It is just like gears and internal combustion engines... very low gears and cold engines reduce efficiency and performance.

    Heck, I feel Ramjets are still undervalued! (Yes I know, Scramjets are basically the same thing.)

    A scramjet is a type of ramjet... think of it in terms of turbojets... an old end of WWII turbojet engine is still a turbojet engine. Comparing it to a modern turbojet engine and you could almost say they are different engines but the basic functionality is different. Without a variable ramp air intake a turbojet from a late WWII plane would stall at supersonic speed.. the same with a ramjet and a scramjet.

    Obviously ramjets are incredibly simple, scramjets are slightly more complex, but until the ramjet is operating at very high speed the combustion will be subsonic anyway so a scramjet and a ramjet will be identical. It is only when the ramjet loses thrust and the scramjet continues to burn fuel supersonically and generates rather more thrust than any ramjet can generate that the differences become obvious.

    That's is one advantage of Scramjets, they probably don't create as much drag. (By not slowing down the incoming air, causes air around the engine to "reroute".

    The Scramjet at any speed can have the air intake wide open which means higher airflow, higher exhaust speed and rather more thrust.

    Heat will always be an issue, but there are many ways of (for the most part) overcoming it. Look at MIRVs, they travel at Mach 10! (Albeit with heat shields.)

    The period of time they travel at mach 10 is fairly short as they fall through the atmosphere... if we assume the atmosphere is only significant in terms of drag up to about 50km then we are talking about less than 20 seconds of reentry.

    And that descent is rough- flying at near 90 degrees AoA while slowing down from mach 20 to mach 2-3. I don't think the near future scramjet vehicles need that kind of strength yet.

    Good point... the space shuttle uses its wings and lower surface area as a sort of aerobrake, so it does rapidly heat up. Importantly the angle of entry into the atmosphere is critical... too steep and it gets too hot and you burn up. Not steep enough and you skip like a stone on flat water back up into space.

    For high speed flight there are areas of the airframe that will be subjected to continuous friction heat... a Mach 2.86 the canopy of the MiG-31 can get to 70 degree Celsius... other external parts like the wing root get much hotter and cannot be made of Aluminium or it will melt.

    ''The coating evaporates once the object has re-entered the atmosphere. This novel method is path-breaking because additional energy is not required to reduce drag; objects which travel into space need to carry a much lower fuel load,'' Jagadeesh said."

    If the coating evapourates on reentry then how can it operate as a substitute for heat tiles?

    I am skeptical and would want rather more information directly from the people developing the technology.

    I agree on your second point, about using rockets to get the Scramjet "up to speed". Hopefully variable cycle engines will solve this problem soon enough. 

    Yeah, what I meant to say is that Ramjets have never been fully utilized like Turbofans (for example). (I knew the differences already, but maybe other people will learn.)

    That is true, but MIRVs also have to travel though the thick atmosphere, unlike missiles which might have a booster to get it "up high".
    .
    I don't see it replacing heat tiles, as they would have to reapply after every flight. However, I do see its potential when it comes to reducing drag, which is almost invaluable. (Agni III, which is India's longest-range missile with a capability of striking targets 3,500 km away, may now have an extended range of around 5,000 km thanks to a unique solution discovered by Indian scientists at the prestigious Indian Institute of Science (IISc) here.) Those 1500 km are a huge deal.
    avatar
    Trexonian

    Posts : 12
    Points : 18
    Join date : 2014-11-30
    Age : 32
    Location : Somewhere in Canada

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Does Russia have stolen valor?

    Post  Trexonian Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:27 am

    As you may know, the U.S. has many incidents of where people...mostly civilians, people who have never served in the armed forces, are wearing uniforms, with medals. Most of the time they are claiming they are Ex-Navy Seals, rangers, or marines just so they can get respect, of which is something they don't deserve. Now recently this is starting to pop up in Canada as well. Recently U.S. veterans are becoming more aggressive with these "Stolen Valor" chaps, by filming them and calling them out in public. Where later they will be identified, put on the News and/or on Facebook. I imagine there are some cases where they are beat the crap out of them too, but that doesn't happen likely since everyone loves to sue people over there.

    My question is, do Russians, have incidents where people are walking around, claiming they are Ex-VDV or Spetsnaz, while wearing fake uniforms? If they do, what do they do about it?
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Werewolf Sun Dec 07, 2014 3:24 pm

    Such phonies exist in every country but good thing is in very rare cases they actually walk around in fake uniforms, most of the part such phoneys just take pictures and brag with them with their fake facebook,vk or whatever profiles.

    The 21st century is the age of phony people online, being superhereos, top models and geniuses like only Marvel comics can create but in real life all are as boring as they can only be.
    flamming_python
    flamming_python

    Posts : 4661
    Points : 4745
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  flamming_python Sun Dec 07, 2014 6:22 pm

    I'm sure it happens, although I can't say I've heard anything about the exposition of 'stolen valour' fraudsters in these parts.

    Although it doesn't qualify as stolen valor as such, I witnessed quite an amusing episode myself when me, an army buddy and one of our other buddy's cousins were part of a big camping group, and at around 10 o'clock in the evening or so we took an inflatable dinghy out for a spin on the lake; bottle of whisky in hand of course.
    Our idea was basically to row ourselves up to the all the camping fires we spotted in the distance - and crash the party.
    We had quite a time doing it, but eventually we crashed the party of a few ex-VDV guys celebrating something or other. They started being a-holes when we asked if we could dry ourselves by the fire for a bit, but whatever. More seriously though, they started aggroing our buddy's cousin, who was wearing a telnyashka (part of the Naval and VDV uniform) - when he admitted that he hadn't served anywhere upon confrontation (he was barely 19).
    Well we quickly got in the way and the situation didn't escelate further; although one of them told us that if the kid was wearing a VDV telnyashka than he would have punched him out.

    As it was though - he was wearing a naval one in fact. Note that both me and the other guy served in the Navy, and the telnyashkas were also part of our uniform - but neither of us gave a damn that the kid was wearing one too, live and let live, and all that.
    But for certain people it seems - they don't take kindly to anyone wearing something that they're not supposed to be.
    Stealthflanker
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 935
    Points : 1015
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 33
    Location : Indonesia

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty OPSEC "How far are they"

    Post  Stealthflanker Sat Jan 24, 2015 7:47 am

    Well as the title.. We know that for "security" Reason some images, tech specs and others may not be in public. The problem however is "How far"

    Last time i visited arms show for anniversary of Indonesia Military, brought in new and better tool..and do repeat measurements i did last year for Leopard-2. Well i gotta admit i was wrong in my first measurement. The loader side of Leopard was really around 780-800 mm weld to weld (Me and my poor ruler missed over 20 cm last time)

    Problem however it appears when i posted it online.. i got some ppl in Indonesian military forum mad Laughing Claiming about broken OPSEC...It's dangerous etc... Well i wonder if i really break anything. Our Polish brothers Militarysta repeated the same thing.. But i wonder if they ever got yelled etc..

    I wonder if i really need to clarify matters to those ppl or i can just giggle on it.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29920
    Points : 30446
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  GarryB Sat Jan 24, 2015 9:38 am

    If they let people crawl all over it with a tape measure then it is not secret.

    If there is a guy standing next to it with a rifle who steps between you and the vehicle every time you move towards it then don't measure and certainly dont post your results.
    Book.
    Book.

    Posts : 696
    Points : 755
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty ATGM low cost anti ship?

    Post  Book. Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:14 am

    ISIS v Egypt navy

    look like wire anti tank

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 6nNUTq2
    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 DLe3tWx
    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 R5Q2Nur

    Book.
    Book.

    Posts : 696
    Points : 755
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Book. Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:59 am

    No sure if thermo head

    twitter say the kornet



    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Mike E Sat Jul 18, 2015 4:03 am

    Book. wrote:No sure if thermo head

    twitter say the kornet
    A Kornet doesn't produce such a big explosion...it seems more like a small AShM or something.
    Book.
    Book.

    Posts : 696
    Points : 755
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Book. Sat Jul 18, 2015 5:49 am

    ISIS missile ATTACK on Egyptian navy deadly hit


    Look like small anti ship

    Mike u right ! clown
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Werewolf Sat Jul 18, 2015 10:25 am

    That is not an ATGM, this is explosion is vast and at least 100kg Warhead of explosives.
    Walther von Oldenburg
    Walther von Oldenburg

    Posts : 1241
    Points : 1330
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 30
    Location : Oldenburg

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg Sat Jul 18, 2015 10:58 am

    THis was just a small coast guard vessel - a 100kg warhead would rip it to pieces - but we only see some fire and then a burning ship. ATGM could cause this.
    jhelb
    jhelb

    Posts : 959
    Points : 1066
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  jhelb Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:37 pm

    Book. wrote:ISIS v Egypt navy

    look like wire anti tank

    Raytheon had developed a naval version of the Javelin ATGM. Probably it is one of those, that the US recently air dropped to ISIS.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Werewolf Sun Jul 19, 2015 3:17 pm

    Walther von Oldenburg wrote:THis was just a small coast guard vessel - a 100kg warhead would rip it to pieces - but we only see some fire and then a burning ship. ATGM could cause this.

    The explosion of even heavy Helibrone ATGM's are roughly the same size as the tanks they hit. This ship is not only several times bigger than the biggest tank but also the explosion is 3-5 times bigger then the ship. The payload of the missile is in ten fold figure of usual ATGM's with their 8-12kg warheads.

    In comperision ATGM with the highest warhead payload infantry could have is a Kornet which also is Laser Beam Rider meaning it has a very distingive trajectory whirling around within the Laser Beam.

    Also the most exported Kornet's are all HEAT warheads with directed shaped charge, meaning the explosion should be smaller than HE-Frag or Thermobaric warheads.

    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5289
    Points : 5490
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Werewolf Sun Jul 19, 2015 3:19 pm

    jhelb wrote:
    Book. wrote:ISIS v Egypt navy

    look like wire anti tank

    Raytheon had developed a naval version of the Javelin ATGM. Probably it is one of those, that the US recently air dropped to ISIS.

    Raytheon and Lockheed Martin also propagate that their Javelin and Hellfire are AShM's which they are not with lousy 8-10kg warheads with barely 8km range which would not make much more difference then using the normal HE-Frag warheads of Hellfire. Those are not AShM's.

    Sponsored content

    Μilitary Questions & Answers - Page 3 Empty Re: Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:47 am