RoflSeal

His youtube comment level physics. I stopped taking him seriously when he said the F-16 was more efficient then the F-35A because the F-35C needed a larger wing; and F-16 would only need a beefier landing gear to operate from carriers. A ridiculous comment considering the F-16 lands at a much higher AoA then the Hornet (13 degree vs 7 degrees, you probably wouldn't see the deck in an F-16) and still a higher approach speed (150-160knts vs 130-140knts [weight dependent obv). F-16 lands too steep and too fast for carriers, if you need reinforced gears, wings and bulkheads, that just further increases landing speed.

Can you read? He wrote it 5 posts above. Though I would be interested in a screenshot of relevant page, since I can't find it in what I think is relevant document https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eyh14uxc89acs4j/AADFrtiutzoX6Qnu0-WkCCDka/MiG-21bis%20Manual.pdf?dl=0

I don't think during Bekaa Valley, F-15A radar was able to do NCTR.

There is a test right below where all CPUs are clocked to 4Ghz

You can download DCS 1.5 from the site http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/

Remember that if you break lock with the AMRAAM, it will still head towards the last known trajectory and go maddog (lock the first thing in sight)

Harrier has no radar, so it won't appear on RWR

Block 4 upgrades for the F-35 (happening in 2020+) specify integration of AIM-9X Block II which indicates that AIM-9s will probably be carried internally (as Block II is Lock On after Launch)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR5.TRC2.A0.H0.XI7+3770k.TRS0&_nkw=I7+3770k&_sacat=0

Well that's not right since the Blackbird cruised with Reheat on. Supercruise is Lockheed Martin defnition that is constantly changed so only F-22 can "supercruise"

F/A-18 sustained turn is almost that of the F-4 Phantom

That's something up to the gods to decide.

Which is quite funny since the F-105 got more gun kills.

And it's historically accurate to shoot at F-4E with other western aircraft, (due to Iran using F-4E)

And there has been no change in the stowage of the main ammunition since the Leo 2A0. 27 rounds unprotected in the hull, left of the driver, 15 rounds, with blast doors in the turret. What has changed is protection, cannon, fire control system.

Leopard 2 only has blowout panels on the ammunition stowed in the turret, hull ammunition is completely vulnerable if it is penetrated in that region, considering the blowouts of the Saudi and Iraqi M1s, 120mm ammunition is still vulnerable, of course in those cases it looks spectacular as the blowout panels of the M1 Abrams are working as intended. Leopard 2A5 and later granted does protect that area due to the NERA wedges covering it from above.

I don't see what tank fanboyism has to do with S-8 rocket effectiveness. Tying it in with the S-8, Leopard (and M1 Abrams) drivers compartment are very vulnerable to top attack as those areas are only 40mm (50mm on the Abrams), sloped at very high angles, so they are effective from the level attack, Leopard 2 is particularly vulnerable since next to the driver sit 30 or so rounds of 120mm, whilst in the Abrams, the driver has armoured fuel cells to his left and right which are part of the armor.

Not an anti tank mine, 500lb JDAM. Cojone Eh, after the decision to abandon her, was desided to throw thermite grenades into the ammuntion and crew compartment, another Abrams from the column shot a HEAT round into her turret bustle. Further efforts to destroy Cojone Eh involved 2xHellfire, 1x Maverick and 1x JDAM TUSK II armour package still leaves the roof and engine vulnerable T-90A only has ERA panels on the front 1/3 of the side of the tank, this is designed to protect the crew compartment from 30 degree attack T-14 Armata also clovers only 2/3 of the side with ERA/NERA armor, engine + roof is still vulnerable Active protections systems are likely to get overwhelmed by the onslaught of 64 projectiles coming towards. Tanks are protected from rocket attacks by aircraft by other systems, mainly Manpads, it would suicide to do a low-level rocket attack, as was shown in Ukranian War, where UAF promptly grounded their fleets

Well they will penetrate the Abrams/T-90 if the hit the side/rear/top armor. Only place with composite armor is the front (and side turret of the Abrams), and side ERA (T-90)/armoured skirt (Abrams) placement is designed to protect the crew compartment from the front +- 30 degrees. Side and rear armor on MBTs is thin (40-80mm of steel)

ED already have developed a UAV simulator for their military contracts [ame] [/ame] Question is more whether ED is allowed to release a consumer version.

Well if it penetrates and hits any ammunition, unprotected fuel tanks and engine its gonna go on fire. An example would the M1A1 "Cojone Eh", which has hit by what is thought to be a 73mm SPG-9 in the rear fuel tanks and was set on fire. The Halon fire extinguisher was set off, but failed to stop the fire. Further attempts of the crew to stop the fire failed and they were forced to abandon the tank. Most of the damage to Cojone eh came however from coalition efforts to destroy it, including other Abrams, Mavericks, Hellfires and Thermite grenades DCS damage model is however too simple to model this, but if I modelled that in DCS, I would argue that the Abrams would of been killed in the first shot as from then on it was not combat capable.

I doubt there will be much difference if both aircraft are cruising at military power at low altitude. And MiG speed limit is 1300 km/h IAS, F-5E limit is 750 KIAS which is 1390kmh. Will be difficult to pull snap shot with shitty ASP gunsight, it's pretty much luck shot, say unlike in F-86 Sabre which has a very good A-A gunsight (and I assume F-5E will behave similar). Honestly, best way to fight the MiG will be to engage emergency afterburner and just pull loops, the F-5 will probably stall, afterall with Emergency AFB, MiG-21 gets a T/W ratio greater then 1.

Mig 21 radar is stabilized -8/+25 degree vertical and 70 degree roll

And a more usefull RWR, a better gunsight that won't stop working when you pull more then 3G, and much better visibility. EDIT: Just remembered this thread http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=144200

F-4E is the definitive variant because it was used by so many countries.