59th_LeFty

Hi DArt! I'm installing LOTATC to our server right now and having a bit trouble. I'm using the guide you've made here: http://lotatc.dartsite.org/wiki/LotatcSetupGuide And it doesn't want to work anyway... In the download section, there are three files. Of course install first, but I think I'm not using corectly the .gz file. What should I have to do with it? Thanks for the help!

OK, resurrection for one of my favourite thread :D There you go:

True:thumbup:

Insane people :) What I find a bit interesting is that the helo dropped from just above ground, around a meter or so - and the gears collapsed under it. According to elemental physics Lesson 1, it should not be quicker than ~10m/s - how much can the Apache stand? (I remember of a 5 or 6 m/s crash-land survivability but I'm not sure about it)

I think I got an idea which MAY be the one you're looking for :) If a signal-to-noise ratio is too low (which means harder target tracking) the effectiveness of the missile's LOS can be truly degraded - which let's say would be 15°, it became 10 or less due to electronic conditions. This is enough to keep target taracking, but in combination with target LOS change, it can really cause lose of sigth on a target. On the other hand, if we're talking about SNR, it means existence of active jamming, which is easily defeated by modern ARHMs like amraam. So the discussion must keep stick to SAR missiles. EDIT - correction: SNR is mentioned with actve jamming in the source? :) 'Cause the source of noise don't have to come from JAM, it can be other clutter :smartass:

And about 1000 people's idea in this forum:)

RIP Seems like a dark period, and it is truly fotr the past weeks. But remember last year :( In April, there were at least twice more incidents. http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/PROJECT/YEAR_Pages/2008.htm This year compared: (on bottom) http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/0000/Bang_up_to_date.htm

Think that1s the right thread :) Gripen-lovers should like this (especially at 0:50)

Toooooo right.... About the 'picture' given by the scope, it must be some busy airspace somewhere in the US, and according to that, they must be quite large aircraft. The point is wether it does help the radar to acquire precice info on it, or not. The other interesting thing is that the last two targets were vectored after those 'many' seconds, which in, even the farthest targets were acquired accurately. I think that technology is above the knowledge of many of us :D

Your point is that even that technology might not interest anyone if real capabilites would be shown? :D

LOL :D

Haha, found a topic :) Russia to Deploy S-400 to Belarus http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/russias-s-400-secures-belarus-airspace/ http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/2009/04/15/Russia-to-equip-Belarus-with-S-400-air-defense-missiles/UPI-35321239828175/

I think the answer for the main question is that an A2A ARM is quite pointless if it only has passive homing. Using the techniqe on other, but mainly (semi/) active radar homing missile should be wise. The question then, is the technical design. Actually, it is hard to believe for me, that a Home On Jam missile is not capable of passive homing all the way on the target. The problem could posibly is assigning the seeker to the adequate source.

Hey, isn't that the 3D model of the Kuz' from LockOn? :D

I know these are all hypothetical, but... Other things which PLAAF would need for such scenario: - Enough fuel, AND fuel resupply - that 48 Flankers require 50ton fuel for one takeoff (where from? Iran? routes would be blocked instantly) - Maintenance of equipments - virtually everything what includes even a bolt or a wheel; no mention the difficult systems like aircrafts - Support of ammunition (that 300+ AAM must be in place) Do they really have it all?

Hey, MoGas, where did you find those MiG-29 shots, they're five years old and I've never seen them :)

LOL :) Let me take the opportunity of going OFFTOPIC in a topic became totally pointless, and ask the question abou air defenses. The least, I'm not making a new topic instead.. Is it possible for MODDERS to limit IR missiles (let it be SAM or A2A) effectiveness in clouds? Especially in overcast. It's quite annoying if an IR SAM hits you above cloud...

How much attention did the aicrcraft manufacturers pay to RCS when constructing planes such as F-15, F-16, F-18? I think it's out the question that they were favouring other things instead of it. I mean, the 'same' plane, (re)constructed by keeping other things in view (stealth in this case) doesn't have that perfectly designed structural integrity more, therefore, reducing their other superior capabilities. What I'm saying: this F-15 might (or surely) not as fast, as agile, or has the range and amount of weapons as it is designed for. So if I stick with this, comparing F-15SE with even an F-15E is like comparing PAK-FA to F-15.... Other world, other needs.

http://uscockpits.com/Jet%20Fighters/F-16A%20Fighting%20Falcon%20Block%2015_2.JPG A bit similar (F-16B Block 20 rear) but not tha same... Good question.

Intersting news. So this decision is official? Our MOD news website don't show anything about that (yet).

Boberro! Don't forget, only the Sukhois are blue. MiG is grey. Anyway, I see more contrast to the instruments, with blue canopy. But maybe the reason is that in those old times, very less blue paint was used :D

I don't get what is the problem. These MiGs are not wrecked by today, nor yesterday. And what's the differece? The MiGs remained in duty, are having FAR enough flight-hours to sustain the limited amount of flight-time of the russian pilots... (hmmm... familiar situation) By the way its not likley that any country take a chance of any attack on grounded planes....

No debris coming out from the fireball, not even after a few sevconds. It must be fake.

Agree! :thumbup: