that research at the bottom of a wine bottle?Originally Posted by R6_kid
arr need more money lets sell ****** and make a law banning #####
?
yes Sir!
that research at the bottom of a wine bottle?
arr need more money lets sell ****** and make a law banning #####
?
Cyborg Biker
It is still difficult to do... thats one of the other reasons IFF is used. (beingg an ex navy RP or Radar fella)
Flying under the radar is still possible today till you get on the horizon about 13 Nautical miles, from there you can easily lauch a missle... its called the curviture of the earth amd line of sight....
By the time you pick up a fast moving object at that range (either a missile or aircraft... you only have a matter of seconds to re-act
Decide from other intel if its a missile or aircraft, friend or foe, if missle use chaff, and or electronic jamming which modern missiles will just lock onto and travel done the jamming signal anyhow... (but you have to know what type of missile it is... fly by wire, heat, blah blah blah or close in anti air to try and shoot it out which is like hitting a atom in the greater universe, the new (well old) Phalax which is to designed to put up a wall of lead... something like 3000 rounds a minute. Turn the ship into the missile making a smaller target. and less heat for the missile to detect... blah blah blah
If an air craft, it opens up another kettle, bigger slower moving target than a missile and means anti air defences have a better chance of doing there job. However fighters to are out gunned there advantage is to be low, fast in and out... They do prefer to shot from over the horizon... out of direct sight from the ship... But
as soon as the lock on to the ship for a firing solution... the Electronic Warfare guys should have them and the ship should know they are there and prepare...
This is of course all in theory if every one does there job correctly and well many other factors also come in to play...
Wearing Hi-Viz Black.
In combat? = No.
Transport = yes.
Bombing? A long range farce conducted at great expence for nil results. When this approach failed, they armed the Vulcan with SHRIKE missiles and attempted to attack with those. Somone on the ground, wearing an Argentinian uniform, simply switched the radar off, so that idea didn't work. These were the missiles which were the cause of international concern when the Vulcan diverted to South America (Brasil?).
True, but who were flying the Sea Harriers? Royal Navy Pilots - NOT RAF. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleet_Air_Arm There is a difference. Not that the general public appreciate this.
As stated, there were several RAF pilots who arrived on the Atlantic Conveyor, after most (but not all) of the air combat. Their primary role was air-to-mud.
AIM 9L.
They arrived just in time!
The endurance of the Mirage was insufficient and relied on drop-tanks to take the fight over East Falkland and beyond. Once they had jettisoned all of the tanks, they were not seen in the conflict until the invasion commenced.
One Mirage was shot down by their own forces as it attempted to land at Stanley!
And the "Type 64" was invented. A 22 + 42 "combo" that could cope with both threats.
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Hardcore Biker
I dont understand how our dumbass PM doesnt think we can afford to keep some very effect A-4k Skyhawks in the air ( basically kept our military relationship with aussie going ) , but we can afford some very expensive to buy / maintain NH90 helicopters ( Hueys could do the job just fine ) and some big fat ship...
Moped rider
Different pay scales for different services. 3 people posted to wellington from each service at equivalent ranks and they will all be getting paid differently. Im at the right pay level for my seniority. Everybody else that graduated from my senior trade training is on the same pay. That training has taken 3 years for my current trade including on job training.
Kiwi back at home!
Worked fine until the dabber turned the ship in front of the guy with the weapons.........silly dabbers.
Ground Wave and surface ducting can create radar ranges far exceeding the horizon actually, but of course that depends on the environmental at the time. This beats line of sight and curvature problems.
The used to play a game on the bridge
"I spy with my little eye some thing beginning with......... E!"
Only 4 seconds from detection to impact nothing you could do!
The best anti missile trick I have heard of is blinking. Two targets, normally planes fly towards the threat and pulse their radars so the missile flys between them..... requires balls of steel I would say!
Cyborg Biker
yes and no... its not that accurate... and you get a lot of surface noise (similar to sea clutter (when you get a radar return from wave tops in highish seas) and been know to get false contacts as the beam passes through a variety of atmosphere contidions etc
Commanly called Super-refraction. "Super-refractive conditions can extend radar coverage up to 50% above normal operational coverage" but it does depend on radar strength, frequency, moisture and a variety of other contions. You could get super-refraction contions on the port side, sub refraction ahead, trapping to the starboard and normal contions to the rear... (in theory) I doubt that would ever happen tho.
errr read here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar (for those that are interested)
Wearing Hi-Viz Black.
Should have left the job to the WAFU's!
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Deus ex ukulele
Are we back on topic yet?
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
Still Ridin'
We'll get there when we get there!
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Cyborg Biker
Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Still Ridin'
***SCREEEEEEEEEEEEECH***
Get out and WALK!
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Cyborg Biker
For whom the bell tolls
Because not having the A-4K's is saving nearly a billion dollars over 10 years... the UH-1H, while not being obsolete is now getting hard to source parts for... bell no longer supplies parts or engines for them so the only option is second hand... and one NH-90 does the job of two UH-1H's, can be better armed, has better avionics, better range, etc etc (it was a good idea to get them).
The big fat ship was also a good idea.
The smart thing to do which should have been done in 2001 was scrap the skyhawks, keep the Aermacchis and only buy 14 F-16's (rather than 28) which would be 4 two seaters for conversion training, and ten single seaters (or two seaters) for operational use. Also getting half the amount of LAVIII's as they bought as we didnt need anywhere near as many as they bought, and there was the option of upgrading the M113's to A3 spec such as the US Army uses then we could still transort them in the Hercules.
KiwiBitcher
where opinion holds more weight than fact.
It's better to not pass and know that you could have than to pass and find out that you can't. Wait for the straight.
Moped rider
Got any idea how mych the skyhawks and macchis are costing us to stay in storage?
How many Nh-90's are we getting, its 6 or 8, I cant remember which, but it doesnt seem a lot...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks