|
The Locator posted:Some good IT security decision making going on there! But we can save valuable taxpayer money!*  * Warning. No money may actually be saved**. ** The men responsible subsequently getting non-executive directorships in the company awarded the contract is entirely coincedental.
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 11:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
Burno posted:had to bring up this post from a few pages back cause this video is really cool overview on ECM I got wood. Mark that thing NSFW! Is there a declassified report that shows the effectiveness of North Vietnamese radar systems during the war?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:So I'm going to Udvar Hazy for the first time Saturday. How many hours should I plan for so I can see everything good? Should I wear loose clothing to conceal my arousal? As much time as you can get in the day. If you can pull off an all day from open to close, try and do it. You will not be bored and worst case it'll give you more time to look at detail and take poo poo tons of pics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
Genuine question: why does the USAF not do sick camo paint schemes? (Not counting aggressors) Is it just a cost vs. usefulness thing?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
Murgos posted:I got wood. Mark that thing NSFW! My guess is no, because those same systems are still in use globally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Stridsvagn 103 is a prime example of weird Swedish materiel. And it kicked rear end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
My bad for being stupid enough to get sucked into a stupid argument with stupid people.Platystemon posted:Stridsvagn 103 is a prime example of weird Swedish materiel. CommieGIR posted:And it kicked rear end. It's a bit like I-153, or the XB-70, which got rendered surplus even before it was finished by better missile technology, or the Saunders-Roe Princess. I'm trying to think of other aircraft that suffered the same fate. Something like the B-36 doesn't count because it was a successful design, even if it was clearly the last effort of an older technological era. Nor does something like the F-82 Twin Mustang, which was intended to be an interim solution from the beginning of its service.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
I want a world in which CR.32s, Avia B-542, I-15s, He 51s, P.11s, D.371s and D.500s mix it up, like WWII kicks off in 1936 or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I want a world in which CR.32s, Avia B-542, I-15s, He 51s, P.11s, D.371s and D.500s mix it up, like WWII kicks off in 1936 or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:Genuine question: why does the USAF not do sick camo paint schemes? (Not counting aggressors) Is it just a cost vs. usefulness thing? They do, the grey is low visibility at distance. Anything that could hit a military jet at distances where camo would be actually visually resolved (and camo against what? They are flying over all sorts of terrain etc) won't be put off or confused in the slightest by it. Visible range matters so little for fighter engagement that might as well paint it whatever is the hardest to spot at distance and call it a day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
F-18s should obviously be painted to look like another F-18 with buddy stores, so as to best blend in with their natural backdrop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
galaxys should be painted like the inside of a hangar
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:So I'm going to Udvar Hazy for the first time Saturday. How many hours should I plan for so I can see everything good? Should I wear loose clothing to conceal my arousal? I got there at opening and closed the place down. If you take your time and look at everything, it's easy to spend 7 hours there. They've got some really  poo poo
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:Genuine question: why does the USAF not do sick camo paint schemes? (Not counting aggressors) Is it just a cost vs. usefulness thing? The USA's current tactics are all based around flying big heavy airplanes way up high against enemies with no air force. Pale gray blends into the haze when you're trying to spot the F-15 dropping bombs on you from 25,000 feet. If hiding down in the weeds was still something that they needed to do, or if there were any threats coming from above instead of below, you'd probably see camouflage coming back. Look-down-shoot-down radar has made a lot of it obsolete, but a camo paintjob would still be beneficial in a low-altitude dogfight -- if there was anyone still doing that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Zorak of Michigan posted:F-18s should obviously be painted to look like another F-18 with buddy stores, so as to best blend in with their natural backdrop. I thought F-18s were mostly inhabiting Fleet Readiness Center overhaul hangars, at this point? Maybe paint forklifts and engine hoists on them?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Okay, that all makes sense. Still wish we had cool paintjobs though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:Okay, that all makes sense. Here ya go:  (Oregon ANG, so they've a bit more leeway) Also look up "F-16 Heritage" on Google Image Search.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The USA's current tactics are all based around flying big heavy airplanes way up high against enemies with no air force. Pale gray blends into the haze when you're trying to spot the F-15 dropping Fighter:  Bomber: 
Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Sep 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2017 22:39
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
charliemonster42 posted:I got there at opening and closed the place down. If you take your time and look at everything, it's easy to spend 7 hours there. They've got some really Thanks for the tips everyone. Going with the wife and some of her family so I doubt an open-close visit is an option but I will make sure I get 4 hours out of it
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:Thanks for the tips everyone. Going with the wife and some of her family so I doubt an open-close visit is an option but I will make sure I get 4 hours out of it My girlfriend hung on like a champ. She geeked the gently caress out about the space shuttle and space section in general, since she is also a colossal nerd like me. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:Thanks for the tips everyone. Going with the wife and some of her family so I doubt an open-close visit is an option but I will make sure I get 4 hours out of it There is the IMAX theater as well as the observation tower - those are both places to kill a goodly amount of time, and the theater you can sit down in. Combine the tower with a plane tracking app like Flightradar24 and it can be a nice way to kill 30 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yes and the Navy publishes it here: http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcwd/ewssa/downloads/NAWCWD%20TP%208347.pdf Just scanning through and I want to pull out a couple choice nuggets because the topic of AESA comes up fairly frequently: LOW PROBABILITY OF INTERCEPT posted:Since the AESA can change its frequency with every pulse, and generally does so using a pseudo-random sequence, integrating over time does not help pull the signal out of the background noise. Nor does the AESA have any sort of fixed pulse repetition frequency, which can also be varied and thus hide any periodic brightening across the entire spectrum. Traditional RWRs suffered significantly decreased effectiveness against AESA radars. HIGH JAMMING RESISTANCE posted:Since an AESA could change its operating frequency with every pulse, and spread the frequencies across a wide band even in a single pulse, jammers are much less effective. Although it is possible to send out broadband white noise against all the possible frequencies, this means the amount of energy being sent at any one frequency is much lower, reducing its effectiveness. In fact, AESAs can then be switched to a receive-only mode, and use these powerful jamming signals instead to track its source, something that required a separate receiver in older platforms. OTHER ADVANTAGES posted:Since each element in an AESA is a powerful radio receiver, active arrays have many roles besides traditional radar. One use is to dedicate several of the elements to reception of common radar signals, eliminating the need or a separate radar warning receiver. The same basic concept can be used to provide traditional radio support, and with some elements also broadcasting, form a very high bandwidth data link.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
   
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Godspeed, you random Chinese guys making homemade aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
They all look like flying fú qis, but this one in particular looks like "successfully flown" means "any landing you're successfully stretchered away from".
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:This has reminded me of something I've always wondered about : is there a good (unclassified) article or publication somewhere that explains exactly what EW aircraft are doing? Like, on a level that's more technical than wikipedia's "they jam the radars What you want is Lärobok i telekrigföring för luftvärnet: radar och radartaktik (Electronic Warfare Textbook for the Air Defense: Radar and Radar Tactics), a 440 page textbook published in 2004, going over all the basics on exactly how radars and jamming them actually works (in layman's terms - it is written to be understandable to someone with a high school education, i.e. officer cadets), as well as tactical fundamentals for the use of radar and radar countermeasures. Unfortunately, it is in Swedish, and since it's long as gently caress I can't really translate much for you. It does cite a bunch of English references/sources, but when I googled them they tend to be books that are $100 or so on Amazon...
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 16:58
|
|
" -- what sort of techniques do the electronics use, what's the technical basis for it, what are the EW officers doing moment-to-moment, how far away can they do it from, what does it actually do to the enemy radar, how do you counteract it, all that stuff.
|
StandardVC10 posted:Godspeed, you random Chinese guys making homemade aircraft. It's an amazing field where the homemade blimp made by a farmer looks the safest
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:It's an amazing field where the homemade blimp made by a farmer looks the safest It's also the only one that made it out of ground effect. Not that I can blame the other two for not flying above "will probably just break a leg" altitude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:It's an amazing field where the homemade blimp made by a farmer looks the safest
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:What you want is Lärobok i telekrigföring för luftvärnet: radar och radartaktik (Electronic Warfare Textbook for the Air Defense: Radar and Radar Tactics), a 440 page textbook published in 2004, going over all the basics on exactly how radars and jamming them actually works (in layman's terms - it is written to be understandable to someone with a high school education, i.e. officer cadets), as well as tactical fundamentals for the use of radar and radar countermeasures. Unfortunately, it is in Swedish, and since it's long as gently caress I can't really translate much for you. It does cite a bunch of English references/sources, but when I googled them they tend to be books that are $100 or so on Amazon... Interesting stuff. I'm going to try reading that, but it will be hard without laughing my butt off from all the weird words. "Vilseledning", "åtgärder" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
The B-1s original desert camo was pretty dope. The anti-flash white with the SAC emblem was also a good look.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:But we can save valuable taxpayer money!* We've come back around to Britishprocurement.txt again I see.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
LOVING that Swedish book, also loving the craftily translated terminology:Nice piece of fish posted:"Vilseledning", "åtgärder" Åtgärder is a normal phrase but vilseledning is fantastic. Perhaps it's in normal use as well, but as translation for spoof or decoy it does the job much better than the Norwegians who'll just say it in English with a local pronunciation. Maybe the Swedes do as well and are only linguistically strict in literature. "Kolla grabben, ryssjävlar! Skicka dikåis, spoofa dom för fan!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
So are Swedish and Norwegian basically dialects of the same language like British English and Scottish English? Or more like Spanish and Portuguese where they're kind of mutually understandable but holy gently caress do not sound alike at all?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:So are Swedish and Norwegian basically dialects of the same language like British English and Scottish English? Or more like Spanish and Portuguese where they're kind of mutually understandable but holy gently caress do not sound alike at all? All of the Scandinavian languages share common ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
D C posted:All of the Scandinavian languages share common ground.    ...... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:So are Swedish and Norwegian basically dialects of the same language like British English and Scottish English? Or more like Spanish and Portuguese where they're kind of mutually understandable but holy gently caress do not sound alike at all? Ask the scandithread and you'll get about fourty different opinions. It's more like the difference between south african english and heavily accented scottish, if it isn't officially completely seperate and not really mutually intelligible language, it's close enough to that to not really matter. Norwegians understand spoken swedish and written swedish and danish, swedes don't understand anything and nobody understands spoken danish. That's basically it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Norwegians understand spoken swedish and written swedish and danish, swedes don't understand anything and nobody understands spoken danish. That's basically it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-mOy8VUEBk
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:This thread needs more Hustle: That's a weird looking Foxbat, whose is it? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:27 |
|
|
From the TV show Narcos. What airplane is pretending to be in the USAF?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2017 23:37
|
|