Kaktus29

well, i know ARENA will not be able to stop BRAHMOS ))but i said same or similar concept.. the ship "arena" would be bigger, stronger, with different explosives.. and would obviously act as last line of defense not something you count on exclusively.. about the armour shield for EW and other tracking radar to protect them in ARMs incoming fire so far i haven't seen a problem with this.. instead of making EW mobile and hiding them, they should rather be exposed and their location known, but protective with serious armour bunker type variant.. that closes the EW in time when ARMs rain in, and opens after the rain has passed to continue performing its mission.. to destroy and penetrate the heavy duty armour would need such a huge weapon that would be massive in weight and size would be easily picked up by anti-missile missile from the s-300,400 or patriot variant..

just thinking about the Russian ARENA active protection against incoming RPG and other kind of kinetic attacks on tanks, and was wondering how come this isn't implemented on a grander scale like.. ships, EW stations, Tracking S-300,400 radars, pretty much all this systems that are bound to be targeted by missiles of multiple sources .. having built a ring around the EW one could knock the ARMs much easier than using the S-300 or Tor systems, and cheaper as well.. about ships, this could act as last act of defense.. if the "goalkeeper" fails you get your last active defense by destroying the projectile meters from the impact.. other form of protection for EW systems i thought could be armoured plating thick enough to protect the EW from incoming ARMs.. ARMs are usually high explosive and can't penetrate any kind of armour ..so having this "active shield" pop up when radars notices the incoming ARMs can "jump" from the ground up and enclose the EW or other Tracking radar like a turtle with its back or hedgehock with its body or roman legions with their shields.. after the ARMs go boom boom, you are open for business ..

i guess it would be fun.. but how to simulate it.. what is the RCS of this craft? ..how "invisible" is it.. all this should be fairly accurate to have some sort of fun having it in, otherwise it could end up being way overpowered or underpowered.. also the range is an issue, this bomber is a long-range strategic bomber, what will this complex do in 500*500 miles map )) even B-52 looks funny and useless ..

wow .. @mastiff.. this is amazing.. yeah, good campaign of rewards and getting points for certain skill done good.. this guys from 777 studios should be in charge of DCS campaigns))

in the future campaign whether they are dynamic or not, the structure of how would you like to play it.. like to make a character of your own-like your own pilot avatar, or take one that already exists and stick with it until you die or war is finished and you survive the experience..? or would you rather have some sort of "pilot history" card where you can of course jump into different planes(in the future where DCS will offer more planes and one can imagine during the same campaign to jump into CAS mission and CAP at will or as an option) ..so after the war is over, you can see your "pilot history card" where it can be seen how good you are at landing, following way-points, being efficient at bombing, striking, responding to AWACS etc.. this system would allow you to be liberated from needed to have your pilot survive which could end the campaign quite quickly if you are the unfortunate noob or just damn unlucky and get yourself killed in the very first hours of engagements .. Or the campaign could have the structure of allowing you to play it as you see fit, you can "pick" a plane on the offer- CAP, Intercept, CAS, Tac. bombing etc.. or just play as the commander role, where from tactical F10 map you direct and help, assist units that need the most firepower to win, defend, survive.. this could give the option of multi-player-campaigns.. where people could play the campaign with as much people infested crafts and making it much more interesting to play, especially since the campaign would be designed "balanced" so with right skills any side can win, and with some bad luck even the -at the moment-winning side can loose .. I was thinking about campaign were you are "led by the hand" like BF series or CoDs ..where storyline is fixed and you start as a young pilot in the academy, flying a couple of missions back "home" either in US, Canada, Russia, ..where at the age of 19 you go through the motions of getting your plane basics under your belt, you get familiarized with your background,family, etc.. and after you do the training missions successfully (procifiency in bombing, intercept, GAI, AWACS trainings, formation flying, formation battling, BFM, etc..) you get a graduation or something, and then the screen goes black, and says.. 10 years later.. and you are in Sochi, where the story line tells you the situation, about war about to erupt etc.. so more background to the story to suck you up, to immerse you in,... same can be done for US pilots, French, etc.. all this is of course very time consuming and only hegemon companies like BF or COD can get this done with their budgets, so mostly i'm just elaborating this.. but how would you like your dream campaign done? .. would you like you-the pilot-to be central to the campaign, or just a number and you would orient yourself more to the actually managing the war, deciding which airport gets which missiles, how many tanks are sent where, what to strike, which recon to send where etc.. in this role you get the most satisfaction if you win the war, while in personal type of campaign of the pilot-player the satisfaction would be to help your teammates in your squadron to survive and be as proficient as possible.. about proficiency, it would be nice to have it AI measure it.. like, if you reach the enemy on the ground, how long will it take for you to bomb it, destroy it, and get out of there.. if its 10 minutes you are very proficient, if its 1 hour you most probably are a general son and got through the academy cuz of connections)) lol.. what do you think? what campaign version would you like.. something completely different? would love to hear your "best campaign" versions as well..

i think china should also be added, since otherwise it ends up looking like Russia vs. US, Canada, Australia, Germany, France, UK, Finland, Sweden, Turkey, Georgia etc etc.. already as it is, the RED team is now Russia and Ukraine and the BLUE is like the rest of the world)) lol.. So adding China should be necessary to make it more, well, at least realistic to imagine campaigns..

it would seem the harrier pilot wanted to rather crash land it and avoid the ejection.. after the flames erupted near the cockpit he had enough of "fun" and punched out.. good ejectio seat though, .. got him out safe at 0m altitude ..

@pyro.. yes, good stuff, credit points and such.. in this regard its good to get some strategist to help DCS.. Paradox games comes to mind, they are very good at evaluating the "value" system of different military complexes.. like plane vs. tank vs. infantry.. once you have this pyramid scaled correctly you can play with this numbers and use them as you see fit. There are so many things you can do afterwards. .. as you said, an interdiction comes out of nowhere, you order your tanks to scramble, pop smoke, and head for the closest woods-where it should be simulated you can't "lase" your weapon to hit the tank or "see" it easily.. you can "guess" bomb it if you want though.. and scrambling fighters or re-directing CAPs patrolling the sky to the troubled place.. the need for a wonderful game that makes you want to play it over and over is "paper-rock-scissors" type of logic that makes you think, guess what the other side has, like in a shooter type multiplayer, if you have on one side 5 assault guys and the other team has 1 sniper, 2 assault rifle guys, 3 mortar team guys, most likely the 5 assault guys are in trouble.. having this ability in DCS would draw other player in, just for playing reasons, forget simulations of particular craft.. actually talking all this, it makes me want to play a strategic DCS only.. imagine, 2D only, where you have the planes simulated in a different way, but still realistically and then having it all play out infront of you, sending recon flight, getting info where the enemy is, sending and deciding which payload, which bombers, etc..to send, plotting waypoints.. and then if by a miracle we could have "SWITCH" that makes you go from 2D into 3D like Total War series games, where you have 2D strategic map and 3D world where you fight that would be the pinnacle of everything that is out there right now.. man, if i had 5 million dollars to spare i would donate it to DCS to hire like 100 guys and really getting all the resources needed to make this and even more come true..

not really, there was never a plan of actually owning and having a carrier by 2020.. the mistral will not contribute nothing in design of modern ships and carriers.. many in russia fume at this idiotic purchase and are quite right.. mistral is a system needed for nation that has colonies and needs it-like france today in mali, africa.. what will russia do with a giant ass helicopter carrier that needs a whole battle group of ships to protect her?.. its totally retarded purchase..maybe some russians thought if we make french contractors big money we will get them to give us what we really want-.. its a stupid idea, one way or another.. about the small carriers i know, i don't count them since they don't stand a chance against a real carrier.. what will a small carrier that affords 20 planes be able to do against a 60-90 planes carrier?.. it will loose the air battle, and then it will be sunk.. will not even mention the amphibious heli-carriers.. they can operate ONLY if you already have some semblance of naval superiority ..otherwise they are one big ass drone target practice for the enemy.. about russian economy.. am, diversification has no meaning, unless you think oil and gas will plummet in the future.. which is hard to imagine.. it is nice to not reliant on oil as revenue as fluctuation can disrupt some plans but russia always builds a sovereign fund that it uses during those fluctuations to correct them and ride out the storm-which they did in 2008-2009 beautifully.. about how much can they afford has nothing to do with oil.. their economy is the size that is, and you can afford according to the GDP not wether your economy is diversified or not.. you somehow are implying if they diversify the economy the GDP will increase 20 fold)) lol.. edit: So far they can afford a 70 billion USD budget for the army which is what it is, its better than the 90's but still needs to be doubled at least in the next 10 years to be okei.. will it happen, of course yes, why not, Russian economy is growing about 3.5 % per year which is much more than i can say about EU or US 0.2 %.. with China becoming Russia's biggest trading partner in the future this can easily accelerate to 5-7% where it is optimal for Russian growth.. the budget for Defense will i think in 5-7 years come into the 140 billion range,making all the vital needs of the navy provided for.. of course Russian navy will not be in shape to wage war on american shores but that is not the intended goal for Russia...only to secure her shore's and enable her subs to operate freely in the vicinity (2000km from its shores) of Northern, Eastern Russia.. for this the goal seems realistic.. to diversify you need market..to have markets you need good economic partners that desire your economic strength, now tell me, will germany desire that? will they desire to accept russian dishwashing companies entering their market? and taking the german share of german companies? as you can see, trade is all politics.. south korea was ALLOWED to enter US and EU markets for this was the strategic goal, i'm not saying south korean's are thick or something, but if EU and US would blockade the deals and impose tariffs there is no way south korea would develop economically.. economy is intertwined with geo-politics.. russia can only diversify as much as the west allows it..which under the still active "containment" policy is very hard to do so.. Russia as it is is almost forbidden to sell oil and gas to europe, and we in europe listen to daily complaint from uncle Sam how unhappy he is that russia fills her coffers by selling gas and oil to europe even if the price is cheaper for europeans than if they buy canadian tar sand oil or usa energy..

i guess the "guided rocket" notion is about making a rocket with small adjustments into a missile.. while a missile on the other hand is a much more complex design etc.. the S-25L is a pretty good classic example how to turn a rocket into a guided -rocket.. i guess i would call it guided rocket too, because its not maneuverable enough to be called a missile..you have to pretty much fire it at the target as if firing an un-guided weapon but because of those minor or large adjustment it rockets right into the target ensuring excellent Pk..

just for robo lovers out there who want to share their robo science clips.. here is some i find amazing.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9qzLi2tQKY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8iSrFXissY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM_weW9iv5c hope you have more new-up to date or otherwise interesting robot stuff clips to share..

@maior.. in case you have total air dominance you don't need to employ tanks, you can finish the enemy tank formation by drones and choppers.. but in a case of hot war where air is contested severely i don't see the use of relying on drone's to assist in what i described.. i rather have the tank have a small drone that can be re-used afterwards in order to conduct the BVR tank battles.. about russian drone development, i think you make too much of it, they didn't pour lot of money into it, are a newcomer but that doesn't mean they can't make drones, the new RATNIK battle gear for soldiers already provides a hand drone that can fly 100 km away and provide with recon.. designing a tank drone isn't something that russians couldn't do.. they already made many pioneering moves with automatic reloading and active protection system and tank fired missiles .. i'm sure they make an amazing machine .. Smerch MLRS system already has a drone and had it for a long time, its basically fired in the probable enemy position, then it starts flying, and directing fire to enemy position and helping the SMERCH in precision arty bombardment.. this tank T-90MS will probably not be bought by Russian army since they are making the armata,but this doesn't diminish the amazing novelty and new capabilities by this tank.. maybe this will be a new hit on the weapons market, ..maybe india, brazil..venezuela etc.. I heard India got from the russians the license to build the T-90C .. they tried to build their own tank design but figured out the T-90C is just cheaper and better to build under a license than to struggle at the moment at making modern MBT on your own..

@vanir... agree with you.. from what i get the Russian navy is to get modernized, the biggest problem is not so much money as other issues like expanding the shipbuilding docks to enable construction of 300+m capital ships-mostly carriers.. right now they have refused the design of the carrier that was presented to them and officials said they don't like it because the carrier design looked like either an improved kuznecov or american CVN-70 or smth.. they want more advanced design in the range of 60-70 thousand tons of displacement .. 4 carrier groups are to be formed, and of course the goal of this carrier groups are different than american carrier groups.. USN is about power projection and doing that somewhere in asia, latin america, africa.. Russia is about making sure they can ensure safer sub operation in arctic, border of atlantic and arctic and pacific/arctic... this will be very important especially in the next 2,3 decades when ice recedes and oil cravings from uncle Sam intensifies .. so, right now they are designing the carrier on paper only, until they will be satisfied with the paper concept only then will the building commence.. how long before the thing is made is different problem.. if relations with ukraine warm up they could rather use the nikolay shipbuilding complex that would ensure 365 days per year warm waters access and easier building conditions but in any case substantial investment is needed to make sure the infrastructure supports building such big ships.. after they do this, i don't see how they couldn't launch a carrier in 4-6 years .. but even in this scenario it would mean by 2030 RN could have about 2 carriers at best, and at worst none-but close to completion .. i do wonder what are chinese doing also.. especially since their shipbuilding abilities are accelerating like crazy, their DDG price will drop below 120 million per unit after they build 30 of them and the time between each one built is reduced substantially, so by 2020 china could be launching ships especially destroyers per unit in 3 months or less.. with such a tempo by 2030 they could field the biggest navy the world has ever seen.. it all depends how will the economic picture look like of course.. if US dollar gets dumped US could face USSR catastrophe and we could be witnessing all kind of US carriers being cut for scrap in the next 10 years, or it could be otherwise, China goes belly up economically and dreams of having a modern navy goes to the bottom-i doubt this scenario though.. any long-term projection is difficult of course, but some lines can be drawn today.. RN is to increase the number of surface ships considerably by 2030, China as well, US pretty much leave the fleet at same numbers as it is(modernizes the fleet of course to keep up-to date with tech), UK maybe reducing a bit, JAP increasing a bit but not too much, Australia i think definitely increase, especially in acquiring helo-carriers, India by 2030(if economic growth is okei) i guess also increasing their navy substantially and carrier force should number 3 carriers-the russian one they will be getting soon, plus 2 home-made.. so 3 carrier groups.. all in all by 2030 if nothing major happens US will have (if we can count India, China and Russia as opposite to US) 11-13 carrier groups facing Russia-2-4 carriers+China (who knows but at least 4 carriers considering their expanding shipbuilding industry), and maybe Brazil 3 carriers, India 3-4 carriers, ..so all in all about 10-15 carriers.. a totally different world than now.. if we count other nations like italy, france, uk, thailand, .. US vs. the world and 2030 could be the year the world will finally muster more carriers than US ..i'm not saying this means the world could sink the US carriers in battle, just putting the numbers out.. so far, US has a supremacy not rivalled by anybody, with 10 carriers(talking about carriers with fighter,bomber wings and with more than 12-24 fighters onboard) vs. the world with 10(counted in non-operational Chinese one, non-effective Thailand, Brazil,Italy)so its more like 10 vs. 4..

it could have been a bug.. most likely a bug.. it happens..

just to think seating their in the cockpit and realizing the nightmare of flying this defunct plane with only engine control.. and then swooshing left and right to such an extent the damn thing looked like mig-29 with thrust vector control or something.. and still line up to the landing strip and landing without damaging the plane.. wow.. nerves of steel indeed.. love the calmness of other Russians in the airfield, its like nothing can get to them, yeah we have a plane in SOS mode, its all right, Ivan is gonna land it all right.. there's a meteorite sir flying across the sky.. okei, no worries, .. so it makes a little boom boom, who cares.. it does put it into perspectives when we complain about landing frogfoot in DCS in strong winds)) lol.. that video about the prop crashing into the lake is also quite something.. i had a feeling he tried too much to hold it in the air thus bleeding to much speed so he ended up descending too fast, almost stalling instead of gliding.. but in any case its bad and was a lucky pilot to get out of it alive.. about the DH plane, horrific.. the controls must have "stuck" of something.. terrible way to go, ..especially knowing you can't change anything, can't eject..just waiting there for it to end.. sad..

amazing tank indeed.. i wonder how will the Armata tank come along.. Russian may just cut another man in the crew and make the turret totally digital and automatic with driver and commander the only crew heavily protected below the turret with a 150mm gun .. personally i would like to see a small drone tube in the back ready for launch when about to engage "BVR" tanks)) so the drone can direct the missile attack that this tanks already posses.. with that Russian tanks could devise a system of attacking enemy tanks at 10 km or more..

i guess the arctic circle could be amazing as well, with Canada,US,Denmark,Russia, Norway all involved in the fight for the oil after the ice melts - post 2020 e.g. scenario.. but this would be more of a naval + aerial operation not so much ground forces and tanks..

mr. burns you are thinking correctly.. i was thinking even more so in this general idea of "hiring" teams and squads.. what we need is the general view-command screen that we already have.. but the guy who would rule this giant machinery on one side and another guy on the other side.. then he "employs" the stand by squadrons or teams or individual virtual pilots as he sees fit.. based on her/his success he gets "reputation.. more reputation more i don't know chances he gets "voted" for another "gig" as a commander .. and if he totally sucks like (he would send 10 F-15 to provide cover for 2 Ka-50 attacking enemy on the ground while the other "guy" would send or employ 10 S-300 instead of any air superiority fighter and thus making the other guy loose .. what we need is, pre-setup gameplay.. where the commander decides how to employ his "points" .. S-300 or Patriot would have certain cost, F-15 has it also, Su-25 etc etc.. and then you decide how to use those points and what kind of army will you have, .. more air superiority, or SEAD, or A2G, or Ground units or what kind of mix of those units etc.. after this is done, people waiting in stand by, jump in to fill up the role, .. either as A2G, or A2A, or SEAD, or leading a tank group etc.. with this also the game becomes much longer, it would be measured in 4-9 hours.. and make it more possible to play and continue even as some players quit .. when they quit the AI takes over the plane.. so, the question is, do we have enough people to employ a commander seat 24/7 ..if so, committed servers could make an amazing air campaign that could last uninterrupted for hours or even days.. but something tells me the whole thing would crash in 3 hours.. ) lol..

.. planes that almost didn't make it back to the airfield and you have a link for all of us to see it.. i start with this Russian pilot flying a defunct Tu-154 that was "stored" since 2005 and was taken for a repair to other place.. with the take off, the pilot noticed the flight controls stopped working and he had to use the engines to get back and amazingly land it.. when you observe this Tu going all over the place i must think, wow, the pilot sure had to have lots of nerves to stay calm and not panic, which would be quite easy thinking "shit, i'm in a civilian plane, and i can't eject!" .. and after all that land it without a scratch.. jesus wtf is my response..

love the trains.. would definitely pay for DCS: Trains..

@alex hunter.. such a true statement )) love it.. Best is the enemy of good) i agree.. Best is like an illusion, while good is the most rational, pragmatic and efficient approach that you can make at that moment.. searching for "best" in any field is pretty devastating.. like searching for the best wife, or best husband, girlfriend, or best job, all this searching only leaves a man devastated for he is searching an illusion, shadows on the wall.. a true man, is one that is practical, an engineer at his heart, doing what is good, what makes sense..and not wasting time in the pursuit of the "invincible" .. there are many such stories from the ages of time, and all cultures, yet Russia epitomizes this the most in their military construction..

@maior.. you think there will be 6th generation fighter that will be manned? thats some serious optimism that i don't share.. drones are already here, and they are here to stay.. AI is improving at rapid pace.. so, 2050-2090 i don't see human pilots out there flying.. no way.. about your 30 yrs time of developing PAK-FA i disagree, there was hardly any developing done in the 90-and 00's.. so, yes, the most time and money spent on this project is 5 years ago.. and yes, the project has been super efficient as we can see with our own eyes.. how will PAK-FA come years later after F-35 is beyond me, F-35 has serious drawbacks that are impossible to re-design today.. it might become heavier, fatter as time goes by and ending totally less capable machine as it was designed for... PAK already achieves the elements needed, electrionics and the rest will come, Russia is in no hurry to wage war, so if the final electronic suite will be ready in 2020 no problem.. the plane will still be able to fly without fear of igniting in mid air and exploding because of structural engineering problems.. And for all this to be designed in the last 5 years is nothing short of a brilliance on the part of russian engineers.. @ZIM .. you say, you get what you pay for..am, not true.. NASA spend millions of dollars to design a PEN that will work in space, vacuum, etc.. russians engineers used a 5 cent pencil and the problem was resolved in 1 minute.. so, 1 million dollar pen equals 5 cents worth of pencil.. i'm thinking somebody doesn't know math and economics here..

i guess in the tradition of russian superiority fighter they want to stuff as much fuel as possible to have as biggest range they can.. i wonder how much that will be, .. i've seen numbers from 3800km to 5500 km.. i guess this plane will be the last human operated in Russia and US and elsewhere.. the planes are just getting more and more capable of enduring long flights, there is only so much a pilot can do to stay focused on the mission if he has to fly 5 hours, or 6, or even 8.. at some point he does need to use the WC or eat a snack, .. so, we are witnessing the last generation of human operated planes, and what a way to go, elegance all around.. loving the Pak-FA so far.. about that 1 year delay, i wouldn't worry, if they deliver it in 2019 it will still be ahead of anything in terms of efficiency and building it, since serious work started only 5 years ago we can rightfully say Russians are making this plane as efficiently as any manager can imagine.. thats the beauty of limited defence budget.. you are forced to make the "right choices" or you ram the project into the ground.. US just doesn't have limitations to war budget so they can and will complicate everything to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollar for the simplest engineering tasks..why?because they can.. and universe is such, if vacuum exist it will be filled with something.. here its like, if money exist it will be spend of something..

i knew about the ESM triangulation in navy, but its strange, why not use same thing for airplanes on ground AD forces?.. can a nation just have many of this ESM passive receivers around the nation, and then as an enemy flies with its radar on you will get quite a precise position of the plane, might even target him?.. i guess thats why all navies spy on each other, to get their "library" full of signatures so they can know who is who when S*it hits the fan .. it makes it also dangerous for training to use your radar since you are giving the enemy your signature to store it and use it later in a war.. maybe navies use different radar-training mode- or something,so the "real deal" is hidden until hostilities commence? .. anyway, would enjoy a a decent sub simulation in DCS, even if the whole naval ops is not there.. but the sea should be improved, the weather as well.. right now the black sea looks like the black lake.. with no wind!))

@Ripcord.. so very true.. the crypto tech is the one most important in war, even more today with so many system inter-connected and reliant to each other.. same happened with germans using their u-boat while the brits broke their code and knew where they were and just avoided their subs for major part of the war while germans being frustrated as to why no convoys coming where our subs are.. and all they received was destroyers coming to kill them.. i guess new tech for info and conveying messages is laser one, .. shooting a laser into a "drone" flying high up there, then this thing relays it back to whom-ever was the message intended.. it would make sending messages and communication more... concentrated and much harder to "break" since unless you are in direct line of the laser there is no chance of even trying to break the code ..