Forum: Technology

hb_pencil

Quote:

The failure of high technology high concept space exploration vehicles that serve very little domestic needs is hardly the sign of the stagnation of the west. If anything it shows the opposite. Actually you argued here that the " CCCP had conducted shuttle-like projects, but fortunately voice of engineers stopped this wrong idea. to advance space techs is very expensive thing even for cost-effective projects and we must be very careful to choose way." So when the NASA realized that constellation was not cost effective and cancelled the project, you claim that its a sign of national weakness?

Yep, my friend, there're hella my words Exclamation

but just look at that -- it's perfectly ludicrous: nasa will try to build something what they have to've had for many yrs Shocked

rocket is completely old-fashined, nothing of fresh waves Exclamation

real fresh & wise design is to use scramjet/ramjet as 2nd stage Very Happy

Quote:

Sure... you can read about them here:

Quote:

Newspapers acknowledged that the intervention in South Ossetia and

Georgia had been conducted swiftly and energetically, but complained

that the Russian forces had fought the war in the outdated style “of our

heroic fathers and grandfathers”. There had been no sign of the kind of

high-tech weaponry used by the United States in Iraq: satellite recon-

naissance, laser-controlled precision munitions, GPS (the Russian

equivalent is called GLONASS). The victory had been won through “hero-

ism, blood and 1960s weapons” rather than superior technology.

Napoleon said: they fight in wrong way Exclamation

but who cares? Very Happy

only result does matter Cool

Quote:

Are you seriously suggesting that the US combat arms have not faced high levels of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq? Just say yes or no.

Remember you're the one who loves to claim how useless American high tech equipment is.... I thought you'd be happy to point out how much of a failing they had vs a low tech enemy.

Taison arrived to combat hardly vs. children, huh? Very Happy

Quote:

I guess because Soviet ICBMs were never used they are also a failure?

perhaps, icbm's and aircraft are too different things? Rolling Eyes

-----------
don't get me wrong, i perfectly know good peoples live everywhere, but i've said not of "Average Joe" or "Average Ivan" -- they're good guys, no the least doubt Very Happy

but my point is to analyze/discuss different social/economical systems.

F-16.net Sponsor

Quote:

[quote="hb_pencil"][quote="sark0y"]
if to say of weapon quality, just recall WWII (CCCP vs. Nazi German)

You have courage as a Russian to come on this forum.
You must try and make allowances for many in the West - most have been brain-washed by Western Propaganda during the Cold War. Especially in the USA.
They have been told WW2 was won on D-Day. Never told the USSR had about 86% of Axis forces tied up at the time of the D-Day landings. They forget the USSR had the best practical tank of the war in tremendous numbers. They forget it was practical Russian Aircraft that finally got the better of the Axis Air Forces in 1943. They think Britain and the USA did that. Most do not know the USSR accounted for about 75-78% of Axis losses of troops and equipment in the War in Europe.

[quote="hb_pencil"][quote="rkap"][quote]quote="BDFBut

$'s do not always come up with the best solutions.
A lack of dollars often makes people strive harder.
Becoming too rich and too complacent has resulted in the downfall of all great Nations of the past.
People get lazy and waste there resources and become too self centred. If your theory was correct the Romans would still rule the World.

Quote:

"hb_pencil"][quote="sark0y"]hb_pencil
What programs have failed because of technological failure?

I am not sure what you are getting at - it certaily is not a war to test out high tech equipment in any real way.
I don't think any has failed but none of it has proved to be of much use either.[One US soldier said they would be lost without the Russian contract helicopters there for transport - transport only - shows how rugged they are and reliable and easy to maintain - they have got most of the contracts.]
It is a gorilla type war fought by ground troops in small units and a war for the hearts and minds of the people. Troops and Intelligence. "Kill Capture" operations seem to have become the main thrust now. While they may help at times "drones" don't seem to have been of much practical help. To easy to blow up innocents watching a screen in the USA. One sure way to lose the battle for the hearts and minds of the people. Precision air strikes are not much good also for the same reason.

rkap

i accuse $-clans for entire f..King $hit has gone in the World: for dozens upon dozens years, humankind had broken, to 20th Century (the Greatest Time of human Existence), through grief/blood/pain, two Great Scientific Traditions had been built (Russia's and West's), but these a$$holes have ruined almost everything because to moronize people, to make'em plebs is only effective way to rule humans in god-like style w\o necessity to be True God. since perestroika, Russia has decayed too: idiots & traitors make'ir own. if that way will be further, this civilization will be downed to stone age state as well.

http://www.airinternational.com/central ... e/1014.jpg

In new AIR international there is very informative article about Pak-fa MAKS2011.

More information about 101KS suite (Ruskie DAS).

New target pod will be located on engine intake. Maybe it will be build as part of intake as they already did with OLS-K on MiG-35:

http://images22.fotosik.pl/3/70610ec2d20608cf.jpg

Model of sensor on T-50-1:

http://www.mycity-military.com/thumbs2/ ... 632765.jpg

T-50-2 has sensor there and it is 101-KS-O (laser DIRCM)

Work on radar system will be in stages. First stage: main X-band aesa radar (1500 modules), second stage will be aesa L-band (wing antenna) and X-band aesa side radars (maybe third stage).

Third prototype which is pretty finished will get main radar and 360degree cameras. Flight of four prototype could happen in this year too, as Sukhoi's CEO said.

Thanks for the photo links milosh! The circular housing on both the targeting pod and the sensor behind the cockpit don't look very stealthy to my (admittedly untrained) eye. But it's still only a prototype time will tell.

About engine with English subtitle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVJny6UL ... r_embedded

[quote="rkap"]

Quote:

"hb_pencil"]

sark0y wrote:

hb_pencil
What programs have failed because of technological failure?

I am not sure what you are getting at - it certaily is not a war to test out high tech equipment in any real way.
I don't think any has failed but none of it has proved to be of much use either.[One US soldier said they would be lost without the Russian contract helicopters there for transport - transport only - shows how rugged they are and reliable and easy to maintain - they have got most of the contracts.]
It is a gorilla type war fought by ground troops in small units and a war for the hearts and minds of the people. Troops and Intelligence. "Kill Capture" operations seem to have become the main thrust now. While they may help at times "drones" don't seem to have been of much practical help. To easy to blow up innocents watching a screen in the USA. One sure way to lose the battle for the hearts and minds of the people. Precision air strikes are not much good also for the same reason.

Precision air strikes with people on the ground are a ton better than AAAAs at Creech blasting random vans and huts (or so it seems) a thousand miles away. "Hearts and minds" are actually of importance though, which is why I see the primary use of airpower in COIN campaigns as being direct CAS. Helps the Afghan farmers see that us crazy Americans aren't going to put a GBU-32 on someone's head in the middle of the night without a [i]really[i] good reason. There seems to be widespread hatred of the drones over in the ME, and even I don't fully trust them.

milosh wrote:

http://www.airinternational.com/central/images/covers/large/1014.jpg

In new AIR international there is very informative article about Pak-fa MAKS2011.

More information about 101KS suite (Ruskie DAS).

New target pod will be located on engine intake. Maybe it will be build as part of intake as they already did with OLS-K on MiG-35:

http://images22.fotosik.pl/3/70610ec2d20608cf.jpg

Model of sensor on T-50-1:

http://www.mycity-military.com/thumbs2/ ... 632765.jpg

T-50-2 has sensor there and it is 101-KS-O (laser DIRCM)

Work on radar system will be in stages. First stage: main X-band aesa radar (1500 modules), second stage will be aesa L-band (wing antenna) and X-band aesa side radars (maybe third stage).

Third prototype which is pretty finished will get main radar and 360degree cameras. Flight of four prototype could happen in this year too, as Sukhoi's CEO said.

Why the L band radars in the wings? According to some in this forum, its a lie that L band radar mounted in the wings can detect stelthy aircrafts. And...its believed to be a lie that the L-band radar will be mounted on some su-35`s

what to believe?

flankerfan

Quote:

Why the L band radars in the wings? According to some in this forum, its a lie that L band radar mounted in the wings can detect stelthy aircrafts. And...its believed to be a lie that the L-band radar will be mounted on some su-35`s

what to believe?

stealthies ain't Nothing but f*King joke: altitude, velocity of the aircraft; weather conditions; radar freq. vary ability to absorb radar hella-extremely. meanwhile, to develop stealthy surface needs to affect another parameters of machine. As result, we've gotten not battle machine, but capricious bs with arseache cost Very Happy

smart, stealthy toys are good only in hellywood-shitty movies. At real war, dumb & cheap, but powerful badass weapon rules everything Smile

sark0y wrote:

stealthies ain't Nothing but f*King joke: altitude, velocity of the aircraft; weather conditions; radar freq. vary ability to absorb radar hella-extremely. meanwhile, to develop stealthy surface needs to affect another parameters of machine. As result, we've gotten not battle machine, but capricious bs with arseache cost Very Happy

smart, stealthy toys are good only in hellywood-shitty movies. At real war, dumb & cheap, but powerful badass weapon rules everything Smile

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBeAjISB ... ture=feedu Twisted Evil

1st503rdsgt
how funny Very Happy

but your arguments 4 stealthy bs have been left in the deep darkness for me Wink

In short,

, bro

flankerfan wrote:

Why the L band radars in the wings? According to some in this forum, its a lie that L band radar mounted in the wings can detect stelthy aircrafts. And...its believed to be a lie that the L-band radar will be mounted on some su-35`s

what to believe?

Early variant of that technology was Epolet system:

http://www.mycity-military.com/imgs/111 ... olet_A.jpg

http://www.mycity-military.com/imgs/658 ... dutant.jpg

http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachme ... 1179678068

It purpose was to provide much wider angle of tracking for radar guided missiles.

Pak-fa would have cheek antennas which would do similar role as old Epolet. But still they are talking about wing antennas Wink

First flight of third prototype was today. Its purpose is to test avionics (sensors, man machine interface etc).

Forum: Technology

Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA