D-Scythe

And again, this isn't necessarily undesirable.

A radar with an AESA antennae can generate multiple beams, AFAIK.

If you're stuck with PESA, then yes, that's about the best it gets. With AESA though, you can always mount a bunch of extra arrays...anywhere in the aircraft. Thus allowing tracking of 2 targets simultaneously 240 degrees apart. Only a few T/R modules would be directed at a target at any one time, so even if there was one target, the output power would be minimal anyway. This is actually an advantage. More narrow than a 240 degree search sector, but arguably being able to send dozens of radar beams instantaneously to any point in a 120 degree search sector is nothing to scoff at.

240 degrees isn't a huge deal - it just means that the ESA is mounted on a mechanically steerable plate. The radar will still be unable to cover a target at its 8 o'clock and 4 o'clock simultaneously, as AFAIK is still limited to a 120 degree sector just like other comparable fighter radars.

Are you sure that the varying warning times on the RWR is a direct result of the AI engaging a jamming target differently? Or your RWR reacting differently? As far as I can tell, the range at missile launch is the same for both types of targets on the SAM's part. I think it's the same story across the game - an AI in a Su-27 is gonna engage you the same, regardless if you're jamming or not. It's just that if you are jamming, you don't get a RWR warning. To me, it doesn't seem like SAMs are any different. Jamming only screws up the targeting of other players in MP, and forces radar missiles into pure pursuit, in Lock On, from my experience.

Against the AI in general, ECM doesn't do anything.

And once again, DU is no more toxic than any other heavy metal.

"Ring ring" yourself. I'm not gonna mud-wrestle with you.

Yeah, cause war is all about "fairness" :megalol:

Each and every cell in your body has its own complete set of DNA, that's identical to every other set of DNA in other cells of your body - barring mutations in other individual cells and some specialized white blood cells called lymphocytes. Oh, and obviously sperm/eggs. Anyway, despite the fact that cells have the same DNA, there are clearly different types of cells in your body - red blood cells, muscle fibres, neurons, etc. - the differences in these specialized cells arises from the fact that although each cell has its own set of DNA, cells express that DNA differently. Brain cells won't use their DNA in the same way as pancreatic cells and start secreting insulin, for example. The nervous system principally transmits information by integrating electrochemical inputs, either from different sensory cells (like from the retina) and/or other neurons, then passing that information on to another neuron or an effector cell (like a muscle to reflexively respond to a stimulus from the eye). The complexity arises from how neurons behave and how they integrate information under the stimulation of these inputs. Well, in a nut-shell anyway. In any case, no, DNA is never transmitted extracellularly in mammalian cells. Bacteria can pick up random DNA in the extracellular environment, but even so, in terms of its own genome (its complete set of DNA) everything is intracellular. Radiation works by mutating the DNA, at a rate faster than the cell's DNA machinery can repair the damage. This can lead to the faulty expression of DNA - the same expression that is critical to the function and identity of the cell. Remember, DNA is under constant expression in a cell - what differentiates one cell type from another is the manner of which the DNA is expressed. Mutations screws this system over completely, and genes (segments of DNA) that are normally suppressed become active, and vice versa. In the case of cancerous mutations, the mutations alter the genes that normally govern the growth rate of the cell (among other things) - hence, the cell loses the ability to control it's growth and starts replicating, making many new cells. Hence, a tumour. That's the Spark Notes' version anyway. But back to the original point, mutations are mistakes in DNA generated by radiation. Cellular mutations are just manifestations of DNA mutations.

UV radiation from the sun strikes the DNA molecules, forming dimers between thymidine bases. Thus, science does know how sunlight causes skin cancer. However, knowledge of the disease mechanism doesn't necessarily equate to a cure - take the HIV virus for example. Science knows how HIV attacks CD4 T-cells (specialized white cells that act as the "AWACS" of the immune system), but as of yet there is no cure. You've got to be kidding right? Genes are sequences of DNA. That's just a basic fact that even Wiki will explicitly confirm. You're problem is that you're looking at DNA simply *just* as a genetic blueprint of a cell. It isn't. All cellular processes require DNA, not just the ones involving cell replication. Cells manufacture proteins to carry out all its cellular activity - guess what codes for and plays a key role in the expression of these proteins? DNA.

BTW, the definition of "Mutation" after a quick Google search: - are the changes of a gene from one allelic form to another (ie, the nucleotide sequence changes). - Changes in the molecules of heredity in reproductive cells. - Change in the character of a gene. Passed from one cell division to another. - a change in the usual DNA sequence of a particular gene that prevents the gene from working normally. Not all changes in genes are mutations. Some changes are beneficial, neutral, or normal variants (such as the changes that lead to different eye colors). - A chemical change in the genes of a cell causing it to show a new characteristic. Some produce evolutional changes, while others produce disease. Wow, would you look at that. All of these definitions agree with my "theory" that mutations only deal with DNA. I would look through my textbooks, but they're rather long.

... Thanks for chiming in, your explanation about DU and it's radioactive effects were spot on. Best I've seen in fact.

You know what? I'm not gonna even bother - not only are you wrong (mostly), you're also oblivious. You clearly think you're some kind of know-it-all, I might as well smash my head against the wall till it bleeds. BTW, I'm a pre-med student, and hopefully soon-to-be actual med school student. But whatever, you're Applied Physics degree clearly is worth 5 other degrees, including Health Sciences.

Don't quit your day job. Think about it - your body has billions of cells. One single cell with a mutated genome isn't gonna do squat unless it successfully can replicate and carry its DNA to the next generation of cells. Thus, your "cell mutation" argument is just wrong - cells are temporary, but their DNA is permanent. DNA mutations happen all the time - at a very low rate, but it's evolutionary advantageous to allow some degree of mutation in an organism so that the new genotypes can be experimented with through natural selection. In any case, mutations in DNA can cause altered function in the cell, or physical deformities - both of which you mentioned - or something else. Clearly, the mutation can manifest itself in different ways, but the bottom line is that everything stems from mutations in the DNA sequence, NOT a mutation in the cell. Radiation just speeds up the mutation rate.

Almost everything is radioactive. The question isn't whether it's radioactive or not, it's how radioactive. And from what I've seen, GG's right - DU exerts most of its damaging effects through heavy metal poisoning, not radioactivity. Everything you listed IS a DNA disorder. A mutation in DNA causes everything you mentioned. Which should be the least of your problems, since you'll die from heavy metal poisoning far before you die from radiation with depleted uranium.

Bad reputation for a mid-air? I wonder what plane *does* have a good reputation for mid-airs then. Hmm.

"There hasn't been, nor ever will be, any MiG-29s shot down by Western aircraft."

Haha, I'll be there.

Training can do many things...but actually, physically expanding the envelope of a jet fighter is a new one to me. Since when did BFM lessons teach the pilot to stick his hand out of the cockpit to alter the airflow dynamics of the plane in mid-flight? :unsure:

Fighters in production, not plastic airshow singletons.

There aren't...at least in the U.S. It's just Patriot and Stinger, currently. Don't know the status of the surface-launched AMRAAM variant, except that it's not operational.

Well, for the basic discussion of SAMs vs. SEAD, it's simply a matter of physics/kinematics. It doesn't matter how much money you pay sometimes - if something is classified, then that's the end of that. Personally, here's MY take on the whole SAM vs. SEAD debate, that I posted on the Tanknet forums. GGtharos will give you more details and stuff, but the basic gist of it (as I see it) is as follows... So you see, there really isn't a "source" that will tell you that an F-16CJ starts off in a much more kinematically advantageous position than a SAM battery. It's just sorta assumed. I mean, I could quote from my Physics textbook, but it's rather big and heavy.

... ...you're making the counter-claim. Everyone agrees that Wikipedia is not a "valid" source - cept you. Um...no you haven't. You have provided NO sources that say LOMAC and Wiki are reasonably accurate. The only sources you used *were* LOMAC and Wiki. Clearly, a source can't be a source of itself. That's just silly. GG, Rhen, I feel bad. This isn't even a fair fight - we might as well be clubbing a baby seal :gun_sniper:

While I don't think SAMs are simply an inconvenience for air power, I also don't think searching Wikipedia is "doing your homework." The truth is, if SAMs really worked the way their brochures say they would, nobody would bother having an Air Force. The actual reality of the SAM vs. fighter game probably lies somewhere in between the two perspectives presented here. I'd say GG is closer to the truth though. Obviously, EVERYONE knows that *I'M* ALWAYS right. CLEARLY. My opinion is worth 10 of yours :harhar: Yeah, that's right GGtharos (takes off shirt, revealing well chiselled bod) What are you gonna do? What are you gonna do?