Trident

It's just non-reflective paint, which accounts for a lot of the perceived superior build quality on Western jets, BTW ;)

There's no official word on what type of radar this is, but IMHO there's a good chance that it's the Zhuk-MAE AESA. Several clues point in this direction: - Phazotron made an announcement in autumn 2006 that they were planning to fly a full scale AESA prototype on a MiG-airframe before the end of the year. - The hexagonal distribution of transmitter elements seen here looks nothing like any published passive Zhuk variant to date (all of them either have a 'non-equidistant' distribution or look totally different altogether). - The above does match the Zhuk-A AESA mock-up seen at MAKS2005 however. What's more, the differences between the array shown in the photos and the Zhuk-A demonstrator agree well with the changes described in various articles (non-slanted antenna, reduced diameter, fewer elements). - The Zhuk-MAE is part of the MiG-35 configuration that is being submitted to India's MRCA competition. Whether the radar is flat or not depends on the type of radiating elements used AFAIK, so this does not automatically mean that it's not an AESA.

LOL, only in Russia: SSBN's sponsored by a namesake steel-foundry (TK-20 Severstal) :D

I'm all for implementing the R-77 dual-engagement capability in LOMAC. What's the point of having the MiG-29S and the R-77 in the sim if not?

Is that significantly more than 10 when subs like the Seawolf do more than 20? Not to mention the fact that we're always looking at nothing more than ballpark figures and downright speculation when talking about submarine speeds - or do you have some privileged sources that I don't ;) I'm certainly going to improve my chances exponentially. Your example was an absolute worst case scenario for the Shkval at maximum range and no lead / inertial correction whatsoever. Given a target that is commonly about 100m long itself and that might well be all it takes. It's by no means a guaranteed hit, but then neither is the conventional torpedo, no matter how much you act like it. Better yet, if the Shkval is so utterly pointless, why was it ever developed, tested and eventually even deployed? Logic dictates that it can't be all that bad, you can spend all day poking theoretical holes into any weapon and its employment concept if you only want to :rolleyes: In said point blank range engagement yes, I personally would certainly fill my underwear if I got shot at with Shkvals. If the other guy is stupid enough to try to stalk me with Shkvals from 30km away with no heavy-weight torpedos at his disposal then I won't break a sweat. You keep assuming conditions that are biased against the Shkval - and if that does actually happen count on a USET-80 or a similar conventional torpedo being used in the real world. In a way we're agreeing, but next thing you'll dismiss Shkvals as a waste of time again. Which clearly they are not, if they are a useful short-range weapon, especially since short range engagements are going to be the norm in the ever more important littoral theatre (aren't they actually back to seriously investigating light-weight torpedos for the Virginia class again, in order to trade range for more weapons aboard?). Anyway, I'm out of this thread :D

There are currently about as many submarines with a silent patrol speed *significantly* beyond 10kts in the whole world as there are fingers on one of my hands. Considering how long the Shkval has been in service I call the relevance of recent developments like Seawolf and Virginia to this discussion into question. Trying to second-guess the reasons for introducing Shkval two decades ago just because there are *now* submarines on the horizon that have a pretty good chance of evading one seems pretty far fetched. Exactly - when the other guy knows where you are well enough to shoot at you then there's no longer any point in hiding. Get his position and speed vector with your active sonar and give him a well-aimed Shkval to think about, but I suppose if D-Scythe seriously believes the shooter will not lead his target before firing a Shkval then we have no argument ;) It's that sort of quick-draw contest where this weapon excells, be it as a last-ditch defence or to kill a contact that suddenly emerged at point blank range from background noise or fluctuations in salinity that are so common in littoral environments. Again: Shkval-rebuttals, such as the article D-Scythe posted, which are based on the assumption that the threat submarine is armed with Shkvals and Shkvals only completely miss the point of this weapon. A submarine armed exclusively with Shkvals makes about as much sense as a F-15 loaded only with AIM-9s - but that doesn't mean the Sidewinder is useless as part of a balanced A/A-loadout.

'Only about 230mph'? Considering the fact that its quarry is likely to be moving at about 1/20th that speed it is pretty damn fast indeed. Its maximum range is about 10km, several times less than a modern heavy-weight torpedo. It's *explicitly* made for point blank range engagements, so I fail to see that as a defect. Again, you seem to be operating on the assumption that Shkval is designed to replace conventional heavy-weight torpedoes. It is not - it is designed to supplement weapons such as the USET-80. It's all about using the right tool for the job. Say what you want, but particularly in a littoral environment with progressively more stealthy SSKs I can imagine plenty of scenarios where a sub commander would appreciate having some Shkvals in his torpedo room ;)

Giving a Shkval-type weapon the ability to maneuver is comparatively simple - TVC is a brilliant option here, widely used on other solid-rocket motors such as SAMs and ICBMs. What IS hard is developing a working guidance system: active or passive sonar transducers won't work because of the supercavitation bubble (same for wake-homing sensors, probably) and the incredible volume of noise from the rocket while the exaust plume of the latter makes wire guidance a practical impossibility. It is possible however to make a maneuverable Shkval go for a preset interception point computed from sonar tracking of the target and uploaded to an inertial navigation system in the Shkval prior to launch. This isn't as good as a real homing system but it improves PK somewhat and has the *huge* advantage of not requiring the launcher sub to aim the weapon before firing. That is, IMHO, what "Shkval 2" is all about and it does constitute a big improvent over the original, if true. Given the short range, Shkval should have a reasonble PK due to its speed. Any evasive maneuvering by the target would have to be *very* prompt in order to escape and trying to jam a non-existant guidance system is inherently futile ;)

Now that I'm back at my LOMAC computer I finally got around to installing the newest version of the F-15 model. It's a work of art walmis! Have some Rep, my friend :)

Any idea how 'new' it will be? New as in fundamentally new code (like AFM vs. SFM), or is it limited to a new interface and some additional features? Just curious :)

I was working on the Sevastopol ABM radar a few weeks back, but couldn't finish it in time before my internship started. Now that I have a few days of time I could try to finish it - if my CAD-software licence hadn't expired 2 weeks ago :(

Don't rush it. Ideally you should wait for ED to release their new model of the original Su-25 anyway ;) http://www.lockon-models.com/-==Screens==-/Su-25-2.jpg

So true! http://forum.airforce.ru/download.php?id=3288 Here's a walk-around of the aircraft, how about it brewber19 ;) http://www.photoka.info/su25_4/index.htm

Thanks... that IS a nice photo!

Hm, could someone perhaps upload the photo somewhere else, please? Seems I can't connect to that server :(

I wouldn't mind a Mirage2000C (as an add-on) either, I like that jet alot! But first things first ;) I'd sure prefer it to a Falcon (the USAF variety, not the Mirage's civilian sister ;) ) though.

Boy, you can say that again!!!

Superb! Thank you :)

You're a hero StrikeMax!

Very nice. I wouldn't have expected a polygonal (as opposed to a particle effect) afterburner to look this good. Great work :)

You're on the right track walmis, keep going! It's getting better and better :)

Simply put, it's a classic. It has been built in greater numbers than any other supersonic jet-fighter (perhaps even more than the F-4 and F-16 put together!), so it was extremely popular in real life aswell. As for putting it in LOMAC, I don't see any pressing need but it certainly can't hurt. The thing with third party modelling is that you get what the few individuals with modelling skills in the community like best - not necessarily what makes the most sense. If so, the first models to be created would have been the F-14, F-15E and MiG-31.

The Su-27SM is pretty much a single-seat Su-30MKK. This might be misleading though, because the stuff in the SM is domestic Russian standard equipment, which is highly likely to be superior to its export derivatives (downgraded software...). It is also lighter and should make a better fighter (but inferior strike platform) overall. There is also a small additional display in the cockpit that I'd love to know more about. It is looking increasingly likely that the Su-27SM is but a first stage in an upgrade programme that will culminate in the Su-27BM, which is an all-Russian Su-30MKI avionics suite shoe-horned into a Su-27SM. It is also known as the Su-35 (not to be confused with the Su-27M! Sukhoi strikes again, lol) for new-built export airframes. The BM is going to be scary, it should be more than a ton lighter than a MKI (or the original Su-35) and they're still planning to put (generously) uprated engines in it!

That sure is a remarkably pretty model walmis, thank you for taking the time to make it! One small request though, could you perhaps make the leading edge root extensions and the cannon muzzle a bit more rounded? The rest of your model looks so gorgeous that these low-detail areas stick out a bit.

Sweet, I never knew! Thanks for the heads-up :)