....Wut?

Sit tight! Hopefully some good reading will show up here

still waiting for the main protagonists!!
come hehar
and fight
pansies

Battle Royale!

The internet has officially hit a new low...

Huzzah ... my own thread. F-22A > all

LOLZOMFGZ F22>Russian Planes lolz I'ma pissin ma brainz out!

~Heartburn

Su-47? xD

Btw. I'm now preparing for the biggest flame of my life because there is a truly tough guy on Youtube whose opinions are spammed everyday, everewhere..........and they hurt me and they're just not true. And most of all, HE'S GOT NO COMPETITION. Can you believe it? Whole internet....nothing.

It won't be an easy task coz he's Japanese. But my channel is being loaded with tons of counter - videos and counter - informationrubbish and we'll be armed soon, which is when I'll strike like an aeroplane.

lets just all roll up a giant blunt and get along

no pissing contest

You're arguing with Japanese? Well there's your problem. Just ignore the butthurt little radioactiveite.

Internet is serious ****ing business.

Well, normally I don't. I consinder it to be a waste of time. But this is different, cause he does a lot of harm and he also appears to have no life, always replying back in a few seconds, 24/7.

Don't feed the trolls. Trolling only leads to moar trolling and lulz.

This troll is very influential. And I think I'll enjoy it.

/b/
Enjoy.

So since I have my own thread I thought I'd make a post with some significant content; recently went to Sexpo with a female friend of mine and ended up at different moments either bored or noticing that I am even somewhat desensitised to nude chicks IRL thanks to the amount I have now seen. My friend bought herself an outfit and some toys, we saw a peep show, a rather lame excuse for strip poker & a couple of stage shows. Anyone else been to one of these sorts of things before? If not an expo on the sex industry, perhaps another industry like a car or games expo?

Also recently bought myself a pair of new monitors ... 21" CRT's cos I love res ... res = more 3d art on screen at once. Going to be running windows @ 4096x1536 which is a very hard figure to beat with LCD's. And given I use LCD's at work it won't be permanently damaging my eyes, so I can work faster in what little spare time I have. I wonder if it is possible to get a tablet with compatible resolution? Anyone got nearly the same desktop res?

Oh and my work is going fantastically ... I'm being bounced from small task to small task at the moment and because I'm in earlier then the people I'm working with, I have nothing to do at the moment but write this. Additionally, quite a few of the tasks I'm working on are quite interesting and could lead to the next best thing I've done as a game developer after PoE. Of course, being paid for it is another bonus ... but I rate games based on merit first & financial return second (probably why I'm so poor).

Lastly; I'm glad the international trend to the right has ended. I won't go too far into politics today, just cos, but the USA has voted in a man who believes in Universal Health Care. South America might as well be the new "Union of Socialist States" and even James Bond is considering that (and the coincidental coup detat's) relevant material. My own government, since turning left has only disappointed me seriously once so far ... a feat unimaginable in my wildest expectations. Although, unfortunately they disappointed me on the subject of the Internet, making me quite jealous of the USA ... with their soon to be President being a firm believer in net neutrality.

[/rant]

Trend to the right? So you want us to go to the left? We should always remain a center-right nation. Among the supporters of Obama were radical leftists who don't think our country needs a strong military, want to waste a ton of money in welfare and "wealth redistribution", complain everytime the President says a prayer, whine about "In God we Trust" being on our money, and want things like gay marriage to be in the Constitution. Meanwhile the 2nd amendment is just for "bitter people who cling to God and guns" and their form of political correctness will be strictly enforced unless your talking badly about the white, straight, Christian majority.

I just hope that Obama will prove me wrong but I don't trust him. He pretends to be a moderate and says he wants to work from the center but his actions point to him to be extremely liberal.

I don't know about you guys, but I can't wait for my pay cut in January.

I mean it's not like I can barely feed myself as it is(hell yeah 1 meal a day for the next week).
\sarcasm

One (1) RPG-29 is said to have penetrated the lower front of hull of the Challenger 2. The armor on the turret and upper front hull of the Challenger 2 is quite stronger than that of the lower front hull. Part of this is due to the design of the Challenger 2. While much of the tank is new, the hull is largely based off of the Challenger 1. Like other Cold War designs the turret was naturally better armored, since the tank would often be a hull down position, and most hits tend to occur on the turret and upper part of the hull. Yet until the mid 90s or so only powerful ATGMs, or some modern (for the time) APFSDS and HEAT ammunition could have penetrated that lower hull armor. Plus before the Gulf War an ERA kit was developed which could defeat most of the single shaped charge CE weapons of the time. Yet modern tandem shape charge weapons can defeat this lighter ERA without too much trouble. As a result the British plan to replace that ERA with an add-on composite armor package which will be introduced along with other upgrades for the Challenger 2.

Compared to your basic Challenger 2 the Abrams has a stronger front hull, but the turret is believed to not be quite as strong. The enhanced Chobham on the M1A2 is believed to be rather comparable to the newer Dorchester armor.



Indeed modern "heavy" ERA provides some protection against APFSDS ammuntion, however it tends to result mainly in a reduction of that APFSDS performance, rarely is the "dart" totally defeated by the ERA. The highest claims I have seen state Relikt can result in up to a 50% reduction in penetration for an APFSDS round. Of course that may vary greatly with the ammunition used. M829A2 and M829A3 for example were designed specifically to defeat ERA.

In regards to defeating tandem warheads, I have seen some claims of the ERA reducing the penetrative capability again but nothing supporting the ERA being able to defeat such weapons completely.



I certain if the USAF has repaired the problem, or if they ever stated how many F-15s need to be repaired. Either way it appears that most of the F-15 fleet is flying and doing fine. Either way the whole problem for more F-22A Raptors like the USAF wants and insists they need. Yet some in the military like Gates and a collection of politicians don't want any more.



Where did you get such absurd statistics? The F/A-18E/F has a typical range (internal fuel only) of over 2,100 km, with a ferry range of some 3,050 km. The only American or Russian aircraft with a significant advantage in range would be the F-15 (with CFTs), Su-27 family, F-22A, and F-35C. Boeing's proposed Block III upgrade further increases range however. Meanwhile the typical range of the Mig-35 is said to be somewhere around 2,000 km. I have read online the Mig-29SMT upgrade offers an unrefueled range of 3,500 km with five tons of ordanance but that is clearly a mistake. Whatever the source of those claims, they probably meant up to five tons of weapons OR a maximum ferry range of 3,500 km.

Range is not everything however, and such information is rarely accurate because things like combat loads and the speed and altitude flown at all affect range.

no one on the corner have swagga like usss swagga like us swagga swagga like us.

this thread is quite... fascinating?

now that you see that... you need to join in and make senseless comments

only because you insist lynxy...

Did you ever realize that porc chops without herbs are nasty? Same could be said about lamb chops, but to a lesser extent. I don't know about pony chops, since I've never tasted those.

I will respond to the rest of Freebie's massive post later.

I honestly don't think we will get anywhere but sometimes banging your head against a wall can be fun.

You're wrong ... Kangaroo chops are the best. Better then all! Not that I've tried Pony chops ... but I got you confused with Recon_Team so I had to disagree. Its a matter of principle!

Imo it's imoral to turn those cute fluffy kangaroos into chops!
And you obviously haven't tasted ostrich chops, which beat all other chops

did I mention I just went to the bathroom? And layed an egg?

Does this look cute and fluffy to you?

yes it does, but I've seen more handsome kangaroos.

about the egg (I named it Eric): still floating

Whats your source? My source is the RAAF website. They say 1,000km for interdiction, 740km for combat. That is a PATHETIC range and you can't just handle the fact that the USA has produced pretty much the greatest lame duck fighter aircraft in the last 30 years.



So you're saying that the only Russian or American aircraft that have a better combat radius then 740km are air superiority aircraft and hypothetical future aircraft?



The 'typical range' of the Mig-35 = with a full combat load and external tanks is 2,000km

The 'combat range' eg. the longest distance an F/A-18E can fly and fight and hope to return with JUST 2 AIM-9's is less then half that ... and its hauling 5 external tanks.

The 2 seater mig goes even further ... and then you can add buddy refuelling to boot.

Why do you even bother???? I mean you're arguing the impossible!



Actually that is correct. Thats 5 tons of ordinance + 3 fuel tanks + inflight refuelling.

That turns into a 6,000km ferry range too ... handy if you have to quickly relocate to the other side of the world.

The furthest an F/A-18 can fly and return is 1,000km with any ordinance ... and if it goes that far, its cutting a fine line in terms of running out of fuel if it has to execute a tight turn.

Look at the FECKING CLAWS ON IT!!?!

Yeah, but what perplexes me more is how many albino kangaroos show up in google image search if you look up red kangaroo's. Someone must be breeding them like they breed trout.

I looked at the RAAF's site and their information is not totally accurate, but why should they release the exact details? The USN's website says different as do a wide collection of sources. Specifications for Russian aircraft vary just as much if not more.

I don't know how on earth you think the Hornet and Super Hornet are "lame ducks." The experience of the USN and other nations operating the Hornet including Canada, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia, and Switzerland proves it is fine aircraft. The original F/A-18 was a fine replacement in the attack role for the A-7 while proving a capable air-to-air opponent which would supplement the F-14 Tomcat. The F/A-18E/F improves on that, giving the USN an excellent all around aircraft. Sure it is not perfect but it was not the Navy's original plan.



I am not saying it is only Russian and American aircraft. A number interceptors and fighter-bombers have such ranges too, not to mention larger aircraft. Yet I am talking about modern aircraft with an air-to-air role currently in service, which belong either to the Russians or Americans.



Where do you get your numbers. The USN's official site states a range of 2,346 kilometers clean (no external fuel tanks) plus two AIM-9 Sidewinders. A typical air-to-air load may reduce this but not to a huge extent. Nothing backs your other claims either.

Inflight refueling makes all the difference there however. Take it away and see what you get. How is any two seater Mig-29 going to go any further? Like it or not there is only so much room to jam fuel into the Mig-29S and the Mig-35 is probably the limit of what they can do unless the add larger, redesigned wings or something. Why on earth would the Mig-29SMT have such a longer range than what is generally stated for the latest Mig-35 and earlier the Mig-29M/M2 prototypes? Hell even Su-35 is stated to have less of a ferry range



MIG-29S
37,000 lb loaded weight
22,460 lb of thrust dry power
36,570 lb of thrust afterburner

FA-18C/D
37,150 lb loaded weight
22,000 lb of thrust dry power
35,400 lb of thrust afterburner

Mig-35/D
unknown loaded weight
23,800 lbs of thrust-dry power
39,600 lbs of thrust-afterburner

FA-18E/F
47,000 loaded weight
28,000 lbs of thrust-dry weight
44,000 lbs of thrust-afterburner

The Mig-29 is certainly faster (which varies with altitude), but closer to Mach 0.5 than Mach 0.8. Either way the F/A-18 was not designed for high speeds and nobody would deny this. When it comes to agility the FA-18 has always been an excellent performer at low speeds and in mock dogfights the F/A-18A was able to beat the Mig-29 in this regard. The Mig-29 had more maneuverability at high speeds however. Interestingly when the F-16 was compared to the Mig-29 the reverse was true. The F-16 was superior in terms of maneuverability at high speeds but inferior at low speeds.

The F/A-18E/F is slightly underpowered in comparison to the F-15 and F-22, but this is mainly due to the origins of the F414 engines designs. Upgrades are planned for the F414 engine however. According to the GE website.

"GE has continued testing growth versions of the F414, including an Enhanced Durability Engine (EDE) that includes an advanced core that can provide either a 15% increase in thrust or extended component life at current thrust levels. This configuration uses a six-stage, 3D aero high-pressure compressor and an advanced high-pressure turbine. The new compressor increases airflow and efficiency while the advanced turbine has higher temperature capability and improved efficiency."



Says you those Fulcrums are better. Also radar details like that regarding modern designs are not just lying around anywhere. The OLS certainly has uses but it is not a massive advantage in air-to-air combat like you think. The F-35C will share a similar capability, with a similar range to the Super Hornet and stealth features.



Don't blame me for the politics and what else comes in the packages we sell you. I value Australia as an ally as does most of the military and certainly some of Washington. Yet that does not always transalate properly. A few years point we sold Malaysia some F/A-18Ds with no complaints from them as far as the price goes.



Similar thrust class? Where did you get that? The F-22A's TVC is only inferior in the sense that it only provides 2D thrust vectoring, but it much stealthier than most conventional or 3D thrust vectoring nozzles. Yes the Mig-29OVT would be a generation ahead in that one regard since the F-22A has no IRST type system. I believe originally, one was planned to be added at a later date but budget cuts have certainly cancelled this. The F-35 family has a very advanced such system however. BTW the Raptor has quite large control surfaces and those of the Hornet and Super Hornet are not as lacking as you think.



First the Mig-31 entered service sometime around 1982. Again it's PESA radar was more comparable to other designs of the 1980s than today's AESA and PESA designs. It may have had some advantages, but not much compared to designs like the APG-63. Only a handful of newer phased array radars saw service on 12 Su-35s, the Mig-29M prototypes, and some Mig-31M interceptors. Certainly not enough to make a difference in the very poor state of the Russian Air Force of the time.

The F-22A would have entered service quite earlier if not for post Cold War budget cuts. If a true F-14 replacement was not developed, upgraded F-14s would have certainly had phased array radars too. F-15Es would have likely been upgraded at an early date as well.

Right now in the USN and USAF most F/A-18Es and F/A-18Fs have an AESA radar (early models lacking this will be upgraded), as well as F-22As, and a decent number of upgraded F-15C Eagles. (These upgraded F-15Cs also have helmet mounted sights, and some other new avionics, some have suggested they also be upgraded with the more powerful F100-PW-229 engine.) The F-35A will include an AESA radar, and plans exist to upgrade the F-15E fleet with an AESA radar along with some other improvements.



I suppose all of those Red Flag exercises, the years of experience, and nothing else matters. For most of those 30 decades the poorly trained, Russian Air Force had awful morale, too many aircraft in poor condition, and was getting very little new equipment. Only recently has that changed. Also what Russian jet that you speak of can supercruise and at what speed? The only relatively modern Russian design that I know of with this capability would be the Tu-144 supersonic airliner.



Hardly. Some generals strongly support the F-22A but most of those recognize the need for the F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C as well. Some high level officials like Defense Secretary Gates are not very fond of the F-22 at all and would rather see more F-35s and other aircraft.

All fellow USians have a good Thanksgiving, Canadians enjoy yours whenever you have it. Better celebrate before the holiday is removed as being "politically incorrect."

The Mig-31 can travel for 30 minutes at Mach 2.4 with a full combat load without external tanks
The F-22 can travel for 20 minutes at Mach 1.7 without external stores or external tanks

Which aircraft can supercruise? According to Lockheed Martin super-cruising is travelling over Mach 1.3 without afterburners and with a relevant combat load. The Mig-31 can also do that ... but it can travel at over Mach 2 for longer then the F-22 can travel at Mach 1.7. Thats BETTER super-cruise ... even if it uses afterburners to achieve this.

Also, the Su-35BM can super-cruise, as can the Mig-35, albeit, these are only claims, not verified.

I don't believe the USAF has released complete data on the F-22's range capabilities, Freebie. It's likely wherever you got your data it is either misleading or just pure speculation.

It was the USAF air force annual. Sure, thats possibly speculation but my bet is its based on at least some facts especially given the thrust, fuel effeciency, drag and weight are all on the public record and anyone with any skill in mathematics can determine the range of an aircraft from that.

Do ya'll actually the any of the technical manuals for these aircraft, or are ya'll just taking this information off of websites? Cause stating something as a fact because it's on a website just seems kind of dumb.

~Heartburn

I use a mix of sources. From official manufacturers websites to air force publications to memory from when I was at uni and had access to publications like Janes.

Those publications are all fine and dandy, but unless you have the Technical Manuals, you really don't have trusted information.

Yeah, you're right. But at the same time, I don't have the time these days to do the calculations required to determine the actual performance. That takes a lot of time for an amateur like me.

All I mean is if the Australian Government wont release details on how deep the Colins Class Submarine can dive, I down any air force worth their salt are going to make it easy to calculate the operational range of their aircraft.

Using the Collins class submarine as an example of how much better equipment is then is publicly stated is about the most stupid thing you've ever said on these forums.

Not only were the initial requirements for our submarine published but a COMPLETE report into how well the contractors achieved these requirements was commissioned by the government and finished by 2 outsiders of substantial influence. The report was released publicly when it was completed and even provided detailed suggestions of each area where individual parts were causing issues and could be fixed or EXPLOITED.

The significance of this is even more startling if you consider that every nation in our region pretty much with any clout releases a defence white paper which outlines its capabilities and objectives in security.

ANYONE who thinks the government keeps secret and powerful military projects from us that are large enough to have any effect on strategic warfare is just a glorified conspiracy nut. Too many contractors, beauracrats, politicians, soldiers, spies, international organisations, businesses and all their family members get their hands on this sort of information EVERY day to bother keeping it quiet.

I mean sure, if you want to develop a one use, light weapons system like a backpack nuke you might be able to keep it within a small enough circle. But a 3,000 tonne submarine or a few thousand combat aircraft? Give me a break! This is called the information age for a reason!