TotenDead

Those pilots must have fought it in a clean configiration. 4-6 AIM-120s must increase its RCS quite a bit

So, not really stealth https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2022/08/17/f-16a-radar-scattering-simulation/

Will the F-35s FSS radome be transparent to other radars of the same band thus significantly increasing its RCS in its forward hemisphere?

По перспективному будущему. Частотно-селективный обтекатель Ф-35 прозрачен для других РЛС, работающих в аналогичном частотном диапазоне, что повышает для них ЭПР такой малозаметной цели где-то на 0.5 - 1м2. Будет ли зашита повышенная ЭПР в ППС для всех истребительных РЛС, для части, ну или же обтекатель будет считаться непроницаемым для всех типов радиоволн, поступающих извне?

Подскажите где в онлайн можно полетать на Д9? Видел только один населённый сервер (4YA), но там какой-то болван поставил доры на самый дальний аэродром откуда до противника лететь в три раза дальше, чем 109 и 190А8 (около 200км). В общем, не слишком играбельный. Может какие-то другие сервера включают по расписанию там или ещё как?

По-моему у них под наименование 27ПЭ забиты хармы

It will defenitely help to detect a stealth plane by revealing where exactly to look for it. Then, There's that FSS radome thing. It needs to be transparent so that radio waves of the radar could go through it. I suppose that once a stealth fighter starts scanning its RCS should increase on around 0.5m2 because that makes its radar dish visible for other X-band radars

Like you said, it's an individual thing. American (or British) tankers use war thunder for training, so... Well, good for them, I suppose. They use it for serious stuff, but that doesn't change the fact that WT is just a toy. Same goes to DCS It's their niche, that's it Misuse, eh? Well, I suppose all those people misuse it either then

I wrote that about SAMs, not aircraft When it comes to MiG-23, like I said, MiG-23MS was the main MiG-23 modification of the time to be in Syrian service. It had an airframe of 23M, but radar and weapons of MiG-21bis. The best a2a missiles it had were the R-3s and possibly some early R-13s

Iirc, most of syrian MiG-23s were of MS modification, not mf And the USSR had the 23MLA. Don't know about sams Syrians had, but if they were as downgraded as Iraq ones in 1991, those would be similar to what the USSR had in the 1960 capability wise (for example, their resistance to ecm was worse dozens of times)

And it's totally fine, one can simulate things in need for speed, call of duty, minecraft or here. I just keep in mind that And while simulating something must be interesting why should it necesserily be a choice between it and fun? Imagine flying a P-51D against a MiG-15bis. That's historically accurate. But is it actually fun?

We're playing a game here. In this game main redfor aircraft (Su-27 and MiG-29) are competitive against any aircraft from the 80s with weapons from the same era, but not against guests from the future. That's it

There's another way. Just look at war thunder: they sold the MiG-17 as a top dog, then they added next gen fighters and started selling the yak-38. After that they added even newer planes and made some cash on the newer MiG-21. These days they're selling the MiG-23ML How much would they earn if they started the other way around? Way less, I suppose ED could've started with the F-18A, then - 16A, after that - 15A. If so, this year they could've started to make the first C version of any of those planes. For full price tag, just like we got Fw-190A8 after 190D (btw, another questionable decision, but, well, yep...)

Next step would be a subscription model: you pay each month or your radar won't work XD

The Cassegrain antenna wouldn't even need those because it consists of a single powerful emitter and receiver, not thousands of those. What you wrote is used to counter specific limitations and problems encountered when working with AESAs. Each type of array has its own challenges, but other than that they are similar in their basis It's the other way around. AESA might need a displaced phase center antenna и space-time adaptive processing to improve its capabilities because it's an AESA, a radar that consists of hundreds and even thousands tr modules No wonder, the planes were created 30 years apart from each other. But basics are still the same

Sounds cool, but one should keep in mind that each of those sensors sees its target/targets with some degree of error. Data transfer between planes adds more errors. And then even more errors are added because the receiving fighter needs to compute the real parameters of the target in relation to itself. Not only what you wrote is just excessive, if you fuze such an amount of information about a single target INSTEAD of using your own sensors you'll turn the jet into an informational junk bucket. And if those are used together with sensors of the plane which will launch its weapons - there's simply no point in receiving info from other 5 of the buddy planes That doesn't mean that data transfer is useless in other scenarios, for example it's good for providing overall picture of the battlefield. But that's nothing beyond average Hard to argue with a religious belief when there's no info on other 5th gens and most of modern 4th gens

Well, Su-27 irst is also called EOTS and for a reason, i suppose. The fact that F-35 has extra sources of detection and tracking compared to the Su-27 is... Nothing special? I mean, it would be strange if technology stayed at the same level since the 80s, many post 2010 jets have similar capabilities

Processing algorithms have nothing to do with type of the array, you can make a Cassegrain radar on modern electronics with cutting-edge software and achieve similar results in that regard

Does it? It's like a Flanker in TPRL mode, huh

Welp, there're a few different NATOPS, they only say 6.5 or less and there's not a single mention of any war time G limit Wanted to add the later ones, but those would be post 1980, so... Any way, the plane never reached the projected 7.0 G limit. And, if I understand it correctly, was limited to 2G with flaps down

It was more physically demanding then the MiG-29, probably due to the back of the ejection seat angle. Anyway, that capability was there. Mainly due to the latter one probably, I believe 15C made its first flight when the MiG-23 was already allowed to pull 8.5Gs. Speaking of capabilities, the F-14 was still a 6.5G fighter in the 90s so it's probably not only about motivations but also airframe reserves I can't really argue on those topics, but I'd say that 9G maneuvers are more probable in a subsonic dogfight then while going supersonic. And that there must be some kind of limitations when one operates F-15/16 with certain fuel and weapon load outs. Though, of course extra capabilities are capabilities and will benefit in certain situations Well, the aircraft had a powerful engine and little drag due to 74,4 degrees wing sweep. Overspeed wouldn't momentarily damage the airframe though, the plane could reach M2.6 at high altitude for a short period of time even though it had M2.35 speed limit in the flight manual. But if one ignored overspeed for some time the canopy could start to melt. Are you talking about the one who died in 2010? To be honest, I couldn't find neither the accident nor the man... But I know that most of the crashes were due to departures and stalls, not to overspeeds or overpulls. If we're talking about the very early MiG-23Ms which shared MiG-23 '71 main structural component - the fuel tank №2, it was reinforced in 1974 which mostly fixed the problem. Mostly - because metal fatigue was still an issue (caused fuel leaks from time to time), but not to the point when the aircraft would dismember in flight

There're only 6 MiG-35s built And except of DAS it's equal to 29K so Yeah, if it can be made - why not, but 29k looks like a more interesting choice imo When it comes to the second statement, it was also said that those won't differ much from the old 77 because the aircraft won't be able to tell the missile to use all the fancy flight trajectories it's capable of

Hm, well, it's only a 3 year difference. Was the F-15A rushed into service? 15C looks like a fix in terms of G limit, as if it finally reached the desired capabilities in that regard Well, you are partially right here. Those limits apply to the MiG-23M, but they were kept on 23ML for a few first years of its service. Those were increased to 8.5G later Do you refer to anything specific? It had that extra 50% safety margin like any fighter plane if you're talking about its G limit. The other problem I can think of was a sudden departure followed by a flat spin which was fixed in 1978-1979 with introduction of a new dampening system

Well, I don't know if 7.3G could really be considered high since planes like the F-16 and the MiG-23 had ~8.5-9 G limits, but yeah, that's better than, for example, 6.5G of the F-14 I'm sure the F-15A was a formidable opponent for most of european fighters, but Lightning was really a fat pig, so the result isn't surprising

Yep. But the point was that SMT won't really give us anything new in terms of a2a combat and 29M/K would. The latter one would equalize the disparity of BVR engagements while still being something of the FF F-15/16C level. A better option gameplay wise in my opinion, equally matched to what we have right now in the game