nsf_zx

exelente!!!

CGI is not a radar... its a system: a system of radars of distinct characteristics, computers, comand centers... etc etc etc, and i dont know the bands in wich operate an modern (or older) cgi radar systems... but i think they can se more than a couple of km in resolution (they have an really strategic role and i think they have betther radars than the counter baterys have... or the guidance radars in the long range anty air bateries) even the airports can measure the distances between aicrafts of very diferent sices (i think diferenc resolution at diferent disctances and targuets... so the theme is more complex) I think you are thinking dogfigth as an bvr engagement... if you are pursing someone about 7km... and you got somemebody at your 3 chasing you.... you think your radar is going to show you this threat?? you can manage both thread at a time??? sure??? pulling 7g behind someone and loking the thread at your 3?... and if you can do this... how much longuer is that situation?1/4 of a second? the guy in your 3 are behind you with the wingnam of the guy you pursuit and your radar is showing this too???? and... wen you are pursuing the guy at 7km and 7g, in what radar mode you are using? i tell you... if you can see in your radar the guy at your 3... and the guy you got rigth behind... is command and control who is showing you (cgi, awacs, or the name you want to give them)

i am thinking where come the idea of "pilos in western aiforces fly alone" (almost like hippies in lollapetoza... searching for a beer or something else... hooo good times all my respects to those hippies) and dont recieve orders from cgi... this idea dont come from the usaf... they make documentaries showing they work, and its like i alwais thinck it is... so where the stupid idea comes?.... from top gun and hollowood movies like this? (at least top gun is an good enterteinment.... iron eagles are just crap, below z category movies), i know were the idea of "soviet pilot were robots stupids and soviet machines are made bla bla bla crap bla bla bla crap bla bla bla propaganda bla bla bla crap" this is just propaganda... but tho other idea its a nonsense spreaded all over internet... but where that come from????

here you got an u.s. documentary of the "air national guard" operations in alaska (and.. all is controlled by cgi... or iads, even awacs) ${1}

thanks Silver_Dragon!!! i pick an eye on this

wrong according to who??? in which part???? and your arguments are.... what... "i'm infallible and you are wrong because i say so"?

i see where you obtained the data of the soviet cgi... from the us navy... ok... no discussion... everyone can choose to which liar believe in and the data from radars.. im not an electronical engenier... and o dont know the math to do the calculations but i bet my salary (again) you cant make the maths neither and my coments abaut the a-4 in malvinas.... was just an analogy... i see you cant untherstand an analogy properly too.... is ok... NO PLANE IN THE WORLD IS CONCEIVED TO OPERATE ALONE!! ALL ARE CONCEIVED TO OPERATE IN AN STRUCTURE OF AN ESPECIFIC ARMY !!!NO THE MIG-29 NO THE F-15 NO THE F-16!!! NO ONE!!! NO THE 747 OR THE A-320!!! (yes im yelling you) i see yoy say ¨Did you know that Soviets doctrine was that if the GCI doesn't see a target, then fighters were not allowed to engage it? If the MiG-23 pilot saw an fighter somewhere...... bla bla bla bla bla bla........ purposes you just get the signal for coordinates as enemy can't cipher it, but they were not constantly silent either just with a coordinates¨ where you buy this???? some one tells you so?... you are an ex soviet pilot??? your grandpa was an former cgi oficer? in case of that you say "is true"... its in peace time??? in case the plane catch in his sensors (that you say cant do it without cgi... you are in this being at least incongruent) an intruder and the cgi dont see it... there the cgi go to sleep the nap... and the intruder pass?... or the cgi uses the plane as eyes??? in peace time an figther has to shot down any intruder withowt identify it? wat abaut the war time? the intruder has to pass because the cgi dont see it? do you see the stupidity in your words? i dont know wat the soviet doctrine was... but i know thet all the things the us say abaut the soviet union is crap... and the us people are educated in thsi crap... and this crap is also flooding internet... there is almos no reliable info abaut this things and again (AGAIN) what abaut u.s. doctrine and awacs? if the f-15 and f-16 has the power of the universe and the eye of god (which god??? tutatis??)... if the see all with is superduper radars (littttttle emit = big data receive) why in the name of satan the us expend so much money to buy a fleet (20 airplanes?) of e-3 (Unit cost. US$270 million wikiverga)? wat is the purpose of them if the f-16 cand do alone the job... (is a stupid cuestion... i know... i know what is the purpose... command and control... for who?... for the usaf... so f-22 f-15 and f-16 has datalinc with the commander of the battle... and for wath they need that?)

the difference in the soviet doctrine and the nato (u.s.) doctrine is in certain manner as you say "based defense, while west for the offense"... but remember... red army take berlin... and wait for the u.s. to arrive... in the militari doctrine of all cowntries habe "defence" and "attack"... "manouver" and " possition".... "shoting war" and "diplomacy"... you reduce all the things to a soup of misconceptions and propaganda (bad taste propaganda... noncence propaganda.. propaganda for dummyes) the only thing you say is not a total chaos and waste of time is... "DCS requires a overhaul of the EW to be implemented in core DCS." some useful concepts 1°cgi is an structure of command and control, so its function is the same as the awacs (in most of the cases the awacs replace the cgi) 2° an figther pilot is an soldier, and in ALL the cases his duty is TO FOLLOW ORDERS, in the air forces of the world the orders are gived in the "briefing" and by command and control 3° all warplanes has some degree of comunication with (cgi/awacs) command and control (... if avaliable... if it still alive, remember all dogs go to hell.. and if it is intended, some times the mission requires you still quiet... or your poverty deprives you of this system) so... there is no such thing like "U.S. maverick pilot showing the ass to his commander... and not such thing as soviet robots specting the order to eject in a flaming plane (i heard an stupid nato pilot saying that nonsense), both things are propaganda and nothing more) 4° each cowntry has its doctrine and all doctrine in everi corner of the world is revisited over and over again, sometimes the doctrine show its inefectivnes, sometimes they have to follow the spirit of the times and its changes 5° THERE ARE NO SILVER BULLETS!!!!! :megalol: 6° dont spend all nigth answering silly people (thats for me :D ) p.d. si a alguien le molesto todo lo que escribi... me chupa un huevo... es corta la bocha:music_whistling:

i think this is what you imagine is the operational profile of the mig-23... i dont know much about this... but... the mig-23 dont fly with cgi, the cgi shows in the instruments where intersept the intruder and the plane go this way and shot the enemy (seems like an P variant of the pvo) the other variants go to de front... to a terrain captured (not his oun home with dtv and playstation) to airfields of mud or grass at best, bombing near targets and defending the base from atacks (they call it frontal aviarion) and yes... the command in this theatre is the cgi ups!!! is the same theater for the f-16 "Think about flying to enemy land and you have just your radar and RWR telling there are a dozen or so EWR, and you are absolutely unaware of dozens of SAM sites, fighters etc all tracking you based to the EWR data, all waiting a some master plan to come together while you just fly deeper the defense to drop your bombs or something, and every second you are driving to your doom." come on man... and youre are traing to tell me the f-16 and f-15 can operate "withouth help" ajajjajaja so naiv... and finishing ".....This is why the F-16 or F-15 needs their radar to get a glimpse what is ahead of them, missing many targets but same time trying to find out the game plan that defenders has laid out to stop you....." so you really think the radar of the mig-23 is for tell the enemy "im here!!! shot me!!!" the f-16 pilot= master in chess ... mig-23 pilot= moron jajajajaja

what???????????:doh: the mig-23 have a radar of short range... with ENORMOUS emitions???? and they forgot to make the receiver? ... expend all the money in the emitter? the f-15 and the f-16 have an radar wich dont emit a thing and can see everything???? really you believe this? some data from wikipedia (EN) : AN/APG-66 can detect a fighter-size plane at a range of 34.5 Nautical miles (55.6 kilometers) / Introduction:17 August 1978 (f-16a) some data from wikipedia (RU) : RP-23D "Zafiro-23D" (1972) - MiG-23M / pulse Doppler radar (MiG-23M and MiG-23MF, MiG-21 class air target detection range - 55 km, acquisition range 35 km) very close, obviously the digital computer in the aiming sistem of the f-16 make some difference. very diferent thing is say with no fundaments the mig-23 dont see and spend so much radiation "to be spoted" and shot down other big mistake... "The MiG-29 and Su-27 were first fighters designed to operate standalone if needed" (uffffffff) :doh::doh::doh: the a-4 skyhawks Argentina use in Malvinas operate in the next manner... the leader of scuadron has in his plane nav sistems... others fron the scuadron dont... so if you lose the leader you gone to freezing water with NO posibility of SAR missions... if you have to make the british task force go to talk with the fishs.. you do wat you has to do, all plane can operate alone if it needed (Necessity have the face of a heretic says popular culture) i go further with this.... and i say "no plane in the world can operate alone" no recon? no mission planners? no awacs? no satellites? (now think wat happen if the u.s. fight against a country that dominates the radio spectrum, which forces it to fight without satellites ... bye gps ... bye stand off weapons) so, think in "warplanes alone" is a risky bet cgi "....they could see what enemy is about to do as they could read the enemy energy state and capabilities from the radar screen" so.... the command and control sees all... o yea jajajajja and can tell you by radio "what" is dooing "who"... in dogfigth the datalink its for morons? and wen you tell "energy state you talk abaut speed and altitud? in dogfigth things change so quick... no se... quizas soy tan mal jugador que me estoy perdiendo algo (p.d. cgi datalink lazzor is not voice chat in radio with command and control, and is an old sistem ........... i bet my entire salary of 6 moths that the awacs or cgi screen has not so much to do wit tackview)

the f-14 is clearly better in bvr and.... (the rest is propaganda... or a wish or an assumption or... whatever other thing than real) according to NASA te mig-23 is more agile than the f-14 (sourse: NASA technical memorandum 86352 - some fighter aircraft trends) maniobrabilidad__NASA technical memorandum 86352 - some fighter aircraft trends.pdf

measure the "representibity" of the version in respect of the family is almos imposible (in the world of "my opinion" all is valid, but this let us with nothing... and i respect your opinion and this opinion diverge almost nothing than of mine) they thought the mld as a form to seal the gap between the 4th gen and the trird gen (soviets had a lot, in the 80s, planes of third gen, nato too but i think wen they come first to the 4th gen era... they got more planes built) so its not a simple variant... its a fix of a problem... a solution desperate to a big problem... an very good solution they replase all old variants and send them to the frontline of the cold war (wating for the mig-29... even the agressors scuadron training the pilots of the mig-29 were flown by experienced pilots in mld variants) thy send them to afganistan to do CAP in the frontier with Pakistan, they send them to Cam Ram Bay Vietnam to patroll and confront the tomcats.. and more important they send them to DDR so the representibity from the 84 to the end of the carrere in the URSS (yes in castellano jajajja) and russia were almos all mld (ml... mla... how long their carrer were be til transform them in mld?)

are you sure?

hi guys i see much people discussing the systems of the plane and features in this aspect..and all of this is ok... its important.. veri important... but i think more important is the acurate fligth model... first: i am a fan of the mig-23 (in my opinion one of the most refined and powerfull third gen aircraft... and one of the most beautifull) and a fan of the mig-29, and in both cases dcs let us "half plane" im really thankful to razbam they are working in the mig-23mla (almost the best mig-23) and as PROWLER 111 say "The version that will be available is the MLA, why? because it's the version we have access to, the real plane" and thaths very good (im really anxious wating the anouncement of the pre-sale of that lady). having say that... the real deal is the MLD, not only because it have the spo-15 and not the spo-10 and got chaff and flares, but most important is the diferences in aerodinamics is so abismal that is another plane (some features... litle wings in the pitot tube like in the mig-29 and two extra fangs in the wing boxes that generates vortex alowing you greater angles of attack, betther handling at lower speeds, other change is the wing... wider... in other position... an aliwing angles of 33° or 36° (depending the source) not in 45°.. the posbility of use the r-73... and other things) that let us a bird that cant deal with a tomcat in close combat (the mld can... and they do in a couple of times... Cam Ram bay... Libya) and in better position to figth an f-16 (as they do in siria fron the 83 and beyond,... in the afgan war).... as i say.. half plane some people say "its a actualization"... no... isnt, they build between 60 an 70 from in MAPO (1982 to 1984)... and actualize ALL the ML... MLA... and P variants, and most of foreign users made the same Dont misunderstand, im not complaing abaut Razbam... im complaing abaut ED, i bougth the flaming cliff 3 a couple of years ago, and the mig-29 to this day havent a complete navigation system... have not the lazoor system (some people say mig-29 dont have datalink with awacs, its true but have datalink with the ground control) the gardenia jammer dont work... and missiles... bether dont speack abaut the missiles . the su-27 and su-33 are in a bether shape... but are not in "much" bether shape i think ED dont mather wath happen to the red wings