|
HouseofSuren posted:If it starts using its weapons (opening bay) stealth is no longer a factor in the equation. Stealth ends once you open the bays, everyone knows this, including them. The Klingons famously know this.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 04:55 |
|
mlmp08 posted:How many of those 40 frames are airworthy? A lot of aircraft in the world are sitting around as parts donors that will never fly again. You know you're in a glass house right. How many Abrams do you think are functional. Do you think we have thousands of F-16's ready to go? How many planes do we still have where the entire FAB is already deconstructed. There's less B2's in the official inventory than is stated publicly, and that's a fact. Every time that baby crashes in Guam is another one down out of a few never replaced.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:13 |
|
HouseofSuren posted:You know you're in a glass house right. How many Abrams do you think are functional. That's my point. I am aware that hundreds of tanks are sitting dry in the desert, and their primary purpose is to donate parts to the tanks that still operate. I am not under some illusion that you can count every broken American plane or truck or parts bin storage item in the Arizona desert as a temporarily uncrewed vehicle. Some will never move again, others would only move again if you spent significant time and money on them. Ardennes is acting as if there are still 40 or near-40 A-50s out there (not counting combat losses). Most public accounts are that Russia has single-digit functional A-50s prior to losing two recently.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:17 |
|
Most are the Russians are already bringing them out, so probably at least some are. (Also, it is a il-76 with a radar array, the Russians can clearly produce il-76s.) Otherwise it is poor reporting; they had about 8 A-50Us, the upgraded variant. So not all of those A-50s from the 1980s are still around or usable, but not all of them aren't either, and can be fitted with new arrays. It isn't that hard to understand. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 07:22 on Mar 8, 2024 |
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:18 |
|
It's the equivalent of a BACN node, and we have few of those as well, in fact we just lost one a few years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Airborne_Communications_Node
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:20 |
|
HouseofSuren posted:If it starts using its weapons (opening bay) stealth is no longer a factor in the equation. Stealth ends once you open the bays, everyone knows this, including them. why has no one tackled this problem inventing* conformal external hardpoint bombs and missiles made of radar absorbent material that cost 520 million dollars each? *getting a giant cost plus contract for the idea they drew on a napkin
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:20 |
|
Ardennes posted:Most are the Russians are already bringing them out, so probably at least some are. (Also, it is a il-76 with a radar array, the Russians can clearly produce il-76s.) Most? So 21+? E: Oh, I see you edited your post to 8. Not sure if before or after the two recent losses, but no major difference.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:21 |
|
mlmp08 posted:Most? So 21+? The U stays for the upgraded variant, I have said this multiple times. As for how many total A-50s the Russians have that are usable, who knows, but it is probably some. In addition, the Russians with some time, probably could start building more completely new planes alongside the A-100 (eventually).
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:23 |
|
Ardennes posted:The U stays for the upgraded variant. Yeah, I understand that. So sounds like you're saying they had 8 A-50Us, lost two recently, and some unknown number of older ones might exist, but it doesn't really matter much.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:24 |
|
Owlbear Camus posted:why has no one tackled this problem inventing* conformal external hardpoint bombs and missiles made of radar absorbent material that cost 520 million dollars each? They kinda tried, and the guy who helped create the B2 sold blueprints on this type of missile to China. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noshir_Gowadia
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:25 |
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah, I understand that. So sounds like you're saying they had 8 A-50Us, lost two recently, and some unknown number of older ones might exist, but it doesn't really matter much. It doesn't matter when the Russians are taking them out of storage, upgrading them, and bringing them back into service to replace losses?
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:25 |
|
Ardennes posted:It doesn't matter when the Russians are taking them out of storage, upgrading them, and bringing them back into service to replace losses? I'd count those chickens when they hatch. It doesn't terribly matter to guess how many legacy A-50s you think might or might not be airworthy or be useful as parts donors. These kinds of things tend to be very slow programs. I'm sure Russia will eventually deploy an operationally accepted A-100 and it seems likely that they'll try to replace losses from recent combat over time.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:32 |
|
That's orientalism basically, is what you're deferring to. Like when people say China can't cross the Taiwan straight but Ghenghis got to japan with a lesser army 3 different times from China and Korea after marching across the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Japan
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:33 |
|
mlmp08 posted:I'd count those chickens when they hatch. It doesn't terribly matter to guess how many legacy A-50s you think might or might not be airworthy or be useful as parts donors. These kinds of things tend to be very slow programs. I'm sure Russia will eventually deploy an operationally accepted A-100 and it seems likely that they'll try to replace losses from recent combat over time. Supposedly, they added one (A-50U) in September 2023, and another more recently. Probably not all the older A-50s are usable, but probably enough to satisfy their losses.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:50 |
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah, the new anti-radiation missiles can still track the target when it turns its radar off and can strike moving targets. The probability of hit will never reach 1, but it goes a long way to be able to still precisely hit a target when it turns the radar off, especially on a very fast, and very long range missile. One of the challenges of testing AARGM-ER is that most US test ranges aren't big enough to handle its full range of flight. https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2022/navy/2022aargm-er.pdf?ver=IxurX-EnMo2WFX6Ea_N0Lw%3D%3D If anti radiation missiles are so good why didn't they fire them at Chernobyl? Makes you think.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 07:58 |
|
HouseofSuren posted:That plane has no stealth if the bombs are equipped outside the bays. Everything has to be inside, and as soon as the weapons bay opens every radar will know that object is an F-35 and not some random bird, even if it closes the bays back. Yep. Not enough people played the f-19 stealth fighter Sim game on MS-DOS. Open weapons bay? Great now your signature is huge and you're hosed. Video games is the only way to teach physics now I guess.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 08:03 |
|
DancingShade posted:If anti radiation missiles are so good why didn't they fire them at Chernobyl? Makes you think. fhey actually needed radiation missiles, for the radiation
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 08:13 |
|
DancingShade posted:Yep. Not enough people played the f-19 stealth fighter Sim game on MS-DOS. this isn't actually how it worked in the game. You had in the center console, with the plane's stealth signature being a bar that comes from the bottom-up, and various radar systems pinging you from the top-down opening your weapons bays, leaving your landing gear deployed, climbing to a high altitude, etc, would increase the size of your stealth bar from the bottom, making it easier for pings coming from the top of display to intersect with it, representing detection but you could, for example, fly really really low to minimize your signature, so that even with the weapons bays open, radars still won't detect you. this was especially useful for camera runs alternatively, you could learn the radar return interval so that you time your open-weapons-bay > launch ordnance > close-weapons-bay cycle in-between sweeps when carrying ordnance that had to have a minimum altitude before release, you pretty much had to toss-bomb: fly low on the ingress, climb just before the release point, open the bay doors, release, and then dive, and hope you did it quickly enough to avoid detection but opening the bay did not immediately reveal yourself
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 08:15 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:this isn't actually how it worked in the game. You had in the center console, with the plane's stealth signature being a bar that comes from the bottom-up, and various radar systems pinging you from the top-down Been a long time since I played F-19. I'll take everything you said at face value as someone who has probably played it a lot more recently than me, who I think was on a 286 or something at the time.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 09:02 |
|
mlmp08 posted:The Klingons famously know this. CRY HAVOC AND LET SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 11:34 |
|
When ponies show signs of agitation, it indicates that they are nervous about their master's increasingly visible shortage of carrots and sugar cubes.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 12:20 |
|
THIS is why America doesn’t have healthcare???
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 13:03 |
|
Kazzah posted:THIS is why America doesn’t have healthcare??? They spent all their money training mlmp in sophistry.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 13:38 |
|
mlmp08 posted:Reference the bold, I'd argue the US ground forces are not banking on the latter at all. The army and marines, starting in 2015-ish, started up all kinds of programs to augment their own organic long-range fires and artillery capability precisely because of a lack of faith that the USAF could be their on call all the time. As soon as the army saw the kinds of numbers and sortie rates expected of the F-35s combined with seeing modernizaed anti-air weapons from major competitors, they decided they required their own ability to launch high capability munitions (like precision strike missile) in support of their own troops, plus a lot of GMLRS to take the place of missions that would be too dangerous to try with A-10s or F-16s. Not trying to be snarky here at all but a genuine question, where are all these Actual Supplements/Replacements For Air Power or whatever that the army and marines are fielding? Like, actually in production and in service, and in what numbers? Because like, as this thread has clearly demonstrated, saying you are going to Do A Thing does not remotely translate into Getting That Thing Done when it comes to the American MIC.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 13:48 |
|
GoLambo posted:Not trying to be snarky here at all but a genuine question, where are all these Actual Supplements/Replacements For Air Power or whatever that the army and marines are fielding? Like, actually in production and in service, and in what numbers? Because like, as this thread has clearly demonstrated, saying you are going to Do A Thing does not remotely translate into Getting That Thing Done when it comes to the American MIC. They were all retired and scrapped... because they were replaced by... AirPower 🔄
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 13:51 |
|
GoLambo posted:Not trying to be snarky here at all but a genuine question, where are all these Actual Supplements/Replacements For Air Power or whatever that the army and marines are fielding? Like, actually in production and in service, and in what numbers? Because like, as this thread has clearly demonstrated, saying you are going to Do A Thing does not remotely translate into Getting That Thing Done when it comes to the American MIC. Why would you need anything else but the F-35?
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 13:57 |
|
The John Holmes tank
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 14:10 |
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:They spent all their money training mlmp in sophistry. And marketing courses for Lockmart
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 14:24 |
|
KomradeX posted:And marketing courses for West Point FTFY
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 14:32 |
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:They spent all their money training mlmp in sophistry. mlmp trained themselves in sophistry, to show that they could train others in sophistry if they wanted to.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 15:46 |
|
GoLambo posted:Not trying to be snarky here at all but a genuine question, where are all these Actual Supplements/Replacements For Air Power or whatever that the army and marines are fielding? On the fires side, the army has returned to divisional fires, increases the size of many of the rocket artillery battallions by ~50% (so similar number battalions, but significantly more launchers and people per battery and bn supporting divisions), increased GMLRS production numbers, upgrading existing MLRS and HIMARS, and is fielding the precision strike missile program, which gives army units organic capability to fire out to 500+ kilometers. Separately, GMLRS-ER extends GMLRS from about a 70km+ range to 150km+ A lot of it isn’t super obvious because it’s not a new type of vehicle or whole new formation type and has been ongoing for several years as divarty was fielded new fire units. The army’s cannon replacement plan is less clear. Lots of development on the ammo front (both capability and capacity), but not clear what their plan is for the future of tube artillery. Frosted Flakes is excited about very large unguided tube artillery of the Cold War, but I don’t think the US is eager to go back to big 203+ mm guns for a variety of reasons. On the more boring training end, there is no assumption of air superiority. So the focus has been partially on air defense modernization but also just getting back to training basics of doctrinal passive air and missile defense measures. The doctrine never went away, but it wasn’t emphasized for deployments to areas with little or no air threat. Other stuff is more minor. Attack helicopters are being fielded rounds with much longer range of the hellfire now. In total, it’s a lot of small org, equipment, and training change to overall allow the land component more ability to provide fires for itself and greater expectation of having to survive without air superiority. Marines’ focus is more on being able to disperse and fire long range weaponry (anti-ship missiles, cruise missiles, rocket/missile artillery), and it’s focused on trying to stay relevant in the face if China’s significant and inpressive capabilities and modernization. Maybe none of it is a good idea, but it’s all a decidedly different approach from assuming jets will be there all the. It’s just not flashy the way unmanned aircraft or jets are.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 15:49 |
|
rip UK military’s 10-year spending plan isn’t affordable, committee finds www.defensenews.com - Fri, 08 Mar 2024 posted:LONDON — A powerful U.K. parliamentary committee has reported what it says is the “largest affordability gap” since 2012 between the Defence Ministry’s budget and equipment requirements.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 16:40 |
|
BREAKING: Pentagon report finds no evidence of alien visits, hidden spacecraft
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 17:11 |
|
Perfect, send that to games-workshop and tell them to make a plastic model of that, it's time to retire the poo poo from 2003.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 18:24 |
|
mlmp08 posted:The army’s cannon replacement plan is less clear.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:05 |
|
Ted Wassanasong posted:ship belt buckles are a thing, and are specifically allowed in uniform, that’s a power ranger color pattern, but probably just slapped on the normal style. Computer.... enhance ... Enhance ... Enhance
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:08 |
|
Lostconfused posted:Perfect, send that to games-workshop and tell them to make a plastic model of that, it's time to retire the poo poo from 2003.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:09 |
|
Lostconfused posted:Perfect, send that to games-workshop and tell them to make a plastic model of that, it's time to retire the poo poo from 2003.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:09 |
|
like I said Lostconfused posted:
Lostconfused posted:The difference of seven years between sprues and yes it does look much better without the ridiculous shield on the front.
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:17 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 04:55 |
|
Lostconfused posted:like I said But think of the TBI for the poor guardsmen!
|
# ? Mar 8, 2024 19:25 |