|
Depends on the service and version - early Navy A-7s had traditional Colt cannon.
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2012 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
Times where that has worked: - B-17 Times where it hasn't: - A-5 - F-105 - Initial conception of the TFX - Pretty much any time Lockheed tried to build a fighter Also your analogy doesn't even work because the Brits told the US to get hosed and built Lancasters after finding the B-17 an inaccurate and vunderable bomber. Forums Terrorist fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Jan 16, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
grover posted:F-35s with combat lasers will be capable of boost-phase missile interception. The 747/chemical-laser -based ABM was cancelled largely because a compact solid-state laser was anticipated to reach maturity virtually the same time and will be far superior in virtually every respect. I don't think the F-35 is fast enough or has the range for proper missile defense. Not to mention one advantage of the 747 is that it would have a real loiter time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
Well I guess that takes the F-35 from "utterly worthless waste of money" to "A modern day Voodoo".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
I see your Comanche and raise you a Ka-50 Hokum:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHyVNdZfILE  (Goddamn it is hard to find good pictures of the Ka-50 firing)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
kill me now posted:Superbugs are about as LO as the navy currently has in its active inventory. Why do people even care about LO anyway, why not focus on something that can actually fight effectively and then build super Phoenixes or something, like what the Russians are doing?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
edit: nvm
Forums Terrorist fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Jan 23, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
Psion posted:You know, this has been bothering me for a while, and really started bothering me when I was flying one in Ace Combat a lot (shut up Serious answer: Countermeasures dispenser.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2012 03:14
|
|
|
Psion posted:canards are apparently complete poo poo for low RCS, Not strictly true; the Eurofighter's FLCS automatically adjusts trim so the canards can be kept in a position that minimises their signature.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 04:36
|
|
|
Psion posted:I'm not a Radar Master, but wouldn't this fail miserably if you had two+ sources trying to paint the Eurofighter? Well yeah, but obviously as you said the canards give it an advantage in manoeuvrability.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
I don't know what you're smoking, getting into bed with the US was the worst thing British hawks ever did. What yes, let us rely completely on an ally who is across an easily blockade ocean  On that note...  
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
You're thinking the wrong end of the supply chain.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
grover posted:The notch maneuver is a real thing, and a classic historical move to fall under the velocity gate pilots set for pulse-doppler radars. It's not that RADAR can't track the massive underbelly of an F-15, it's moreso that it gets automatically squelched along with ground clutter and a poo poo-ton of other extraneous slow-moving/stationary returns. I'd like to think modern US radars are smart enough that this no longer works, but I've heard it mentioned quite frequently regarding Soviet-era fighters and SAMs. It's certainly gotten better, and US radars do have better computers that can discriminate between clutter and targets much easier and more quickly, but notching is still useful since it can allow a pilot to escape a US fighter using track-while-scan. This forces your US pilot to either go to single target track and devote all radar resources (radar energy, computational time) to following that one bandit and to sacrifice situational awareness, or to disregard him and go after easier prey. Note that this is with traditional passive phased array radars like the AN/APG-70 in the F-15. Your fancy shmancy AESA radars work completely differently and we'll have to wait until a plane with such a set (such as the F-22 or Eurofighter) starts seeing regular combat against something that isn't a Mig-23 piloted by a terrified rookie.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 16:14
|
|
|
Most active AAMs only engage their seekers within about 10km to the target. Notching is meant to beat the guiding/illuminating radar; if the enemy loses lock then that AMRAAM/Adder he just fired is the world's most expensive dumbfire missile. Also it's worth noting that it's purely an air to air tactic, as even taking clouds and birds into consideration the sky makes a great backdrop for ground-based targeting radars.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 16:43
|
|
|
movax posted:
well now i know that books a fictional story oh ho
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 16:53
|
|
|
I'd figure that most UAVs'd be too cheap to kill with Patriots, those'd be more the kind of thing you'd Stinger or hit with a Vulcan.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 19:04
|
|
|
Cool, so I guess you'd have no issue spending a million to pop a 50k four-stroke engine with wings and 100 kg of ANFO strapped to it. I don't know about you, but if I were the enemy in that situation I'd punch those numbers into a calculator and watch it make a happy face.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
In fairness I'm just mad the US didn't stick with the Standard Missile concept and develop a scalable set of short, medium and long range air defense systems that could share components to keep costs down. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
Hey, I think I read that one. Was it the one with the nuke stolen from the downed B-29?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2012 10:18
|
|
|
I'd fund that program, if nothing more than to see how Lockheed would gently caress it up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2012 15:41
|
|
|
grover posted:Reported for shilling.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2012 23:18
|
|
|
Well if you wanted to save money you could start by nationalising key defence industries. :fascistsay:
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2012 09:09
|
|
|
The British arms industry has been involved with the Mid-East since the fall of the Ottomans.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2012 18:50
|
|
|
I regard the MV-22 in a much better light than the F-35; it's a deathtrap, sure, but at least it's a useful deathtrap.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
VERTiG0 posted:I used to like the F-35, then I took an Arrow to the knee. Sorry, overdone I know, but I couldn't resist. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
And now we get to the heart of TFR: military toys (literally). (I wasn't allowed anything "violent" as a kid and mostly played with lego)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2012 15:14
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So in a WW 3 scenario, did modern western tank designs (the M1, the Leopard 2, the Challenger) take into account mass-reproducibility, so production could be cranked up if needed? To a certain extent, yes, but that was because the West had a flat out more advanced industry, so they could operate at a higher level of sophistication and still churn out Challengers by the dozen, while the Soviet philosophy was to have thousands of cheap as gently caress, maximum-bang-for-buck tanks such as the T-55, T-62 and T-72 supported by dedicated tank guards divisions with the much more capable, advanced and expensive T-64s and T-80s. Both of the latter were arguably the most advanced tanks in the world when they came out, it's just then you get early adopter syndrome - they were expensive as hell as a consequence. Meanwhile, because the West, especially from the mid-70's onward, had made huge advances in computer technology and materials science it was possible to make tanks that were somewhere between the two tiers of tank design for a cost that wasn't absurd (except Japan,  ). It is my firm belief that in part because of all this the M1 Abrams is the finest weapons system the US has ever deployed, and I'm saying that as a huge goddamned Russophile.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
The Silent Eagle is a loving brilliant concept and gently caress the US for not going with it 
Forums Terrorist fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Mar 30, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I read in one of those Dunno about the Soviets, but the CBU-97 basically works like that. It identifies targets by IR signature and laser outline.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 05:23
|
|
RED ARMY 1980 books about some kind of artillery shell that would reach a certain height, deploy a parachute, and then turn into some kind of one shot mini recoiless rifle and would fire a penetrator downwards into an enemy tank. How it would aim itself or ID targets was unclear.
|
mlmp08 posted:The rounds are self-detonating and supposedly drop small enough bits of shrapnel to not cause a whole lot of damage. Then again, it's still thousands of the drat things. Holy Christ, that's worse. DU is nasty, nasty stuff when broken into thousands of small pieces.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
Also it's pyrophoric but yeah, DU's toxic and mutagenic as hell. Ask any mother in Fallujah!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:That said, I have no idea if the line for producing M1s still exists. It's possible that the US could just use up its entire force of tanks over decades of low intensity conflict. The lines are closed, but there is money put aside to reopen them sometime around 2015 for maintenance and upgrades IIRC. Same with the Challenger II. Nebakenezzer posted:(That's another thing I utterly don't get about the F-35 - in Europe most of the buyers already have new planes in the form of the eurofighter.) This essentially goes back to the formation of NATO - one of the conditions of membership (and of receiving Marshall Plan aid, incidentally) was that the participating country purchase US arms. As the Cold War went on and Europe rebuilt itself there was a struggle between the US, which was perfectly happy being the arsenal of Eventually, with the Cold War ending, this question became somewhat irrelevant but there are some muppets who think that it's still 1950 and that American industry is still on top of the world. It also doesn't help, of course, that a major difference between European and American equipment procurement is that in America, if, say, a fighter has issues with its radar being delayed, the whole program gets delayed, whereas in Europe we'll just put it into service sans radar, and put it in later.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 21:26
|
|
|
grover posted:I also love that spreading work equally through all the european partners ended up with really stupid poo poo like one wing being built in one factory in one nation, and the nother wing built by a completely different company in a completely different factory in a completely different company. And it goes on and on. And they wonder why there are issues with commonality and spare parts. The Eurofighter has issues, but that's essentially the same approach used by every pan-European project ever. For gently caress's sake, the US does the same thing, but with states. The real problem with the Eurofighter is that it's a pure air superiority fighter in an age of multi-role aircraft; it meets the design goals, but the problem is the design goals were poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
grover posted:Hey, at least it's 1/3 of what UK is paying for the Typhoon, so it's a relative bargain... On the other hand the Germans aren't complaining about the Typhoon not doing what it wasn't built to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2012 02:23
|
|
|
goon project convert old Mig-21s into manned SAMs
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
Yeah, pykrete's only useful in naval applications since it floats and you can afford to fit the refrigeration systems to keep it from melting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
Counterpoint: you guys bought those SFWs instead of, say, healthcare.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 04:51
|
|
|
omgLerkHat! posted:So in other words we should have military parades of physicists, technicians, aeronautical engineers, and nuclear scientists. A vast parade of I was going to get into a stupid sematic derail but then this came up. This is awesome please do this tia. Also Raw_Beef you should probably sober up before posting next time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
AlexanderCA posted:Well.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujpllo5ZDiI This is loving Ireland, one of the least imperialist countries on earth. The United States not doing the marching thing is a rarity because hey, precision guided munitions are loving expensive and dudes with Steyrs are cheap.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I do think that you should toss any real idea of "good guys" and "bad guys" in international foreign policy, though. There are very, VERY few instances in history where that judgement doesn't rest purely on your individual background and point of view, and almost all of those involve something completely out there, like genocide. To expand on this, international politics is much like tic-tac-toe in that the only winning move, morally speaking, is not to play. The only nations one could consider "good" are those that have never done anything ever due to being too small/weak/poor.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 21:15
|
|