seikdel Posted January 3, 2013 Posted January 3, 2013 http://www.ausairpower.net/index.html Not sure if people have talked about this site before. It's an Australian think tank with a website that has a ton of articles about air power, particularly Russian aircraft. Any thoughts? I've found some fascinating reading on here about the different Su aircraft, as well as the technology that Russia seems to be developing. Makes for good reading during boring histology lectures =) On a similar note of education, anyone have any really solid resources on the physics of radar, especially relating to military aircraft? I want to learn more!
Weta43 Posted January 3, 2013 Posted January 3, 2013 It's come up once or twice. Oh you're a funny man :) Seikdel - the appreciation of that site, and teh tendency to believe or discredit the information there falls exactly as any discussion of the relative capabilities of Russian and American equipment... Cheers.
seikdel Posted January 8, 2013 Author Posted January 8, 2013 I'm reading this as, "Yes, we've had passionate flame wars about this before." Am I close?
Jona33 Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 I'm reading this as, "Yes, we've had passionate flame wars about this before." Am I close? Flame wars would mean we disagree. Always remember. I don't have a clue what I'm doing
GGTharos Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Not so passionate ... let's put it this way. Kopp has no access to classified info, and he likes to ignore real information and under-value western kit while over-valuing eastern kit. His slant is specifically for Australia to bring back upgraded F-111's, get no F-35's, and get F-22's instead. The stuff he writes can be interesting and informative, so long as you keep in mind how his 'east v west' slant goes ... some of the numbers he presents for missile ranges are ridiculous (in terms of comparing missiles. The missiles might actually reach those ranges under certain circumstances, like at 60000' launched from a mach 2 aircraft, which he then compares to missiles launched at 30000' from 0.9 mach ... but he won't tell you this). Similarly he extolls russian data link and passive systems ... while not squeaking a peep, or undervaluing the corresponding western systems. So while you're reading his stuff, just remember this: Western systems have had several more times the expenses pumped into them than eastern systems in general, and in this industry you get what you pay for. I'm reading this as, "Yes, we've had passionate flame wars about this before." Am I close? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
aaron886 Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Karlo Kopp is a bit of a twat. It's come up once or twice. Can't rep. :D
Jona33 Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Karlo Kopp is a bit of a twat. That sorted that out :D Always remember. I don't have a clue what I'm doing
sylkhan Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Kopp has no access to classified info Only some of them, like most of the people and you he likes to ignore real information Lol, what is real information? YOUR information..... and under-value western kit while over-valuing eastern kit. Not at all, he is logic and coherent, and for most of the time very accurate. It's the most accurate site about east vs west hardware. Similarly he extolls russian data link and passive systems . How can you say that? You don't have any idea about real capabilities of these systems. Like you said, it's all classified :) and we can't debate about it. You have your informations, and i have mine, but all i can says is that most of the informations of the site are very accurate.
GGTharos Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 (edited) A lot of his stuff may be either accurate or reasonable. Some things are definitely and possibly deliberately wrong. Last time I spoke with a RAAF pilot, he mentioned squadrons pinning the guy's face on dartboards. But that's just hearsay :) You have your informations, and i have mine, but all i can says is that most of the informations of the site are very accurate. Edited January 8, 2013 by GGTharos [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Eddie Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Although I haven't wasted too much time reading his site, every article I have read contains, at best, conclusions based on incomplete or misinterprected data, and at wost contain flat out misinformation. His Typhoon article alone ranks up there as one of the least accurate, most misinformed passages of text I've read on the entire Internet. And it's clearly based on publicly available data from the mid nineties. Needless to say he is not exactly given any credence in military aviation circles. The kind of claims he makes and conclusions he reaches simply can't be valid without access to the classified and/or otherwise protected data.
Pilotasso Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 My antivirus blocks the page "Dangerous site with possible malicious content" :D .
topol-m Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 (edited) My antivirus blocks the page "Dangerous site with possible malicious content" :D :laugh: + rep edit: "must spread" annoying forum rep system... Edited January 8, 2013 by topol-m [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
wilky510 Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Not at all, he is logic and coherent, and for most of the time very accurate. It's the most accurate site about east vs west hardware. Yeah right, thanks for the good laugh there.
theChris Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 Why does this site say the r27 has like twice the range of an aim120? when i shoot r27s they never make it before an aim,furthur more they state the range as something like 70.2NM! It does say in brackets "long burn" so is this a different missile to the games r27er? http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html
GGTharos Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 Because the long-burn version can be employed at about 70nm when launched at a mach 2, 60000' head-on, non-maneuvering target from a mach 2, 60000' fighter. In other words, he's telling you part of the truth. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
theChris Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 hey so in game im assuming you are using feet(60000) so thats like 20km high altitude. I could go mach 2 in a jet? iv struggled to get passed mach 1.3 at 10km high. Or must i dive down to reach the encyclopedia max speeds? mach 2.5
aaron886 Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 hey so in game im assuming you are using feet(60000) so thats like 20km high altitude. I could go mach 2 in a jet? iv struggled to get passed mach 1.3 at 10km high. Or must i dive down to reach the encyclopedia max speeds? mach 2.5 Clean jet, light fuel state, most efficient altitude possible.
GGTharos Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 You have to fly the right profile ... sometimes diving down is appropriate as it can get you speed and you can climb back up at higher mach. Between M1-1.3 you tend to have a lower TWR ... once you get over that bump things get easier, and you can climb back up ... carefully. And like Aaron pointed out, aircraft configuration matters. hey so in game im assuming you are using feet(60000) so thats like 20km high altitude. I could go mach 2 in a jet? iv struggled to get passed mach 1.3 at 10km high. Or must i dive down to reach the encyclopedia max speeds? mach 2.5 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
theChris Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 (edited) Hey i just tested it out in a few planes and i noticed the r77 was alot fatser then the r27er it got a target even though it fired 1-2 seconds after the r27er, strange seeing as on that site it had 25Nm range maybe i should go put this track on bugs. EDIT: wait nvm false alarm it seems when you shoot an r77 after shooting an r27er the r27 does its own thing lol i quess this also could be a bug but idk what do you guys think? Edited January 9, 2013 by theChris
Cali Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 theChris, are you saying the ER lost lock after shooting the 77? i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED
theChris Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 when i think about it now the second r27 stayed on target with r77s shooting before and after it so it must have been bad angle or something idk what hapened to the first one wish i saved that track now. The second test i did i ended up having missiles colliding cause i shot them quickly together haha
seikdel Posted January 9, 2013 Author Posted January 9, 2013 Anyone have any good reading material on radar?
GGTharos Posted January 9, 2013 Posted January 9, 2013 Try looking for the radar bible. It isn't cheap though. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Recommended Posts