tflash

Hé, it resembles the ultra-secret instant stealth button of the Belgian Air Force.

It is certainly true that the Super Hornet was meant as a reduced-risk intermediary fighter pending development of F-35. It turns out that it will become much more than "intermediary" due to the substantial delays in F-35 development and programme restructuring, which means several hundred planned F-35's wil come many years later, if they ever come. See: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/28/business/The-Price-of-Delay-for-the-Militarys-Biggest-Program.html I guess the US Navy is more than happy to have the Super Hornet, since in the mean time some 3 wars went by. You can call it an upgraded F/A-18C if you want, that isn't a bad plane either. I would agree though that Mig 1.44 has the looks!

Continued from : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1638103#post1638103 Marcos, Mig 1.44 is just another failed, unfunded has-been project, Mig-35 fails to attract customers. The somewhat underestimated Super Hornet has flown > 166.000 *combat hours*, there have been > 500 delivered on-time and on-budget in the small timeframe since 2000. This way the US Navy has an on average much younger fleet than USAF, let alone the RuAF. The real revolution has been the sortie rate the Super Hornet is capable of, effectively rendering the sorties generated by all other navies combined to sheer irrelevance.

Lets continue discussion in SH thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1638127&postcount=51

Awesome: X-47B on Truman http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2012/12/first-pics-x-47b-unmanned-aircraft-aboard-carrier-truman/

Wow, I just went for a burger and missed this 11-page thread? I also got the newsletter; super!

F-35A High AOA testing

To what I have read, Tranche 3 hasn't been defined yet, but EJ230 is not on the table. Beyond P1E, it will be Meteor and AESA, depending on the buying nation some specific A/G ordnance like possibly Storm Shadow and advanced GBU's. EJ230 isn't considered yet since EJ200 is one of the very best parts of the Typhoon, with excellent performance, maintainability and fuel burn. And Typhoon is already very manoevrable so there is no need for TVC at the moment.

Oman buys Typhoons: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6cef8ad8-4b52-11e2-88b5-00144feab49a.html#axzz2FcomvzGu

ADAM does away with rockets: http://www.businessinsider.com/lockheed-martin-adam-area-defense-anti-munitions-laser-defense-2012-12

I guess range is important in the South China sea. I'm not sure current assets on both sides allow for more tha some symbolic posture. There seems not to be a game-changing technology that would redistribute the cards. OK, with the J-15 and the carrier China has longer legs then before, but much of these advances are marginalized by the evolutions in long-range detection. in WWII, you could hide an entire carrier group at sea, I'm not sure that is still the case now. More than fast jets I guess aircraft like BAMS are assuring there is balance.

I find it strange that you all mention to great effectiveness of Patriot in game. I was going to post whether it actually works, since in all missions I make the AI aircraft have no issue at all disabling a Patriot or S-300 system. I made AI-only missions involving SU-25T where they disable consistently the Patriot radar with the first missile. When I fly it myself, I can safely engage the Patriot without ever being bothered. I guess something is wrong? The most deadly are the SHORAD systems. I would say, on the basis of the missions included, that Kh-58 and Kh-25MP are incredibly effective. Who needs stealth? FT kill S-300 Su-25T.miz FT kill Patriot Su-25T.miz

Did you notice the underbelly of the F-35 and B-2 is full of "round shapes" ? Radar reflection can partly be guessed from simplistic geoemetrical forms that you can identify with the naked eye, but much better is computer modelling and actually compute where the reflections go. I suppose they will review the whole engine housing on the PAK-FA prototype in due time.

I did it for you!

Maybe I can sneak in a related qestion: in LRS, the contacts are very clearly separated on the radar, when I switch to TWS, they knit more tightly together, which makes it difficult to select them. Is this a feature or a bug?

No, normally you can launch an Amraam from TWS without going to STT mode; it will sequentially go through all the targets you bugged.

Maybe small corrections for F-16: AGM-88 HARM only carried on station 3 & 7 and not on 4 & 6; Single AGM-65 also on 4 & 6 (now only on 3 & 7) A HTS pod!

Am I on the right forum? Wasn't this a forum on aviation and a thread about stealth or am I dreaming all this? :D

Pentagon orders more F-35's: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-30/lockheed-pentagon-reach-agreement-on-fifth-production-contract

I must say I'm impressed, the Liaoning only remotely reminds the original Varyag, and the J-15 is the upgraded, multirole Su-33 that we all would like to have in Lockon. I guess there is more to come.

Nice: I was flying FC3 with my headphones on, as I suddenly heard a strange buzzing sound while in a combat manoevre ... I immediately disengaged and started to check all dials to see what was malfunctioning ... as I gradually realized my wife just put on a hairdryer :D

With a first flight in 1997 and introduction to service in 2005, this no longer produced golden oldie cannot easily be compared to hypersonic testbeds. But it is still fair to say it did much better than older generation fighters and its accident rate compares to that of Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen. So in this regard, there is really nothing special to say about F-22, as many other posts in this thread have already stressed. Of course, F-22 is in the press crosshairs and attracts negative comments on a routinely basis: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/f-22-crashe/ The real thing worth mentioning however is that USAF routinely flies fifth generation aircraft, and I guess those who are desperately trying to copy this as well as those who are frantically digging deeper holes to hide got that message as well.

Well, I'm swapping A-10A and A-10C in the same missions and I must say the only real difference I notice is the A-10C having better sensors in the guise of Litening II. But then agian I always fly "safe", well within the envelope.