Virtuelni dogfight

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Mean , lepo sam rekao , ali ovog puta nisi , za razliku od neshaoct-a , shvatio ispravno . Rekao sam da svako lansiranje sa daljine vece od raspona 25-30km nema sanse za pogodak . Racunao sam da je najveca optimalna daljina za lansiranje u tom rasponu , od 25-30km . Ispalo je da je na gornjoj granici .
Sve preko toga verovatnoca pogotka bi bila sve manja .

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Al ovde svi vuku na svoju vodenicu. Ono sto je neshaoct postovao, stvarno ispade tako, po nekad (sebab bez ljutnje ali jeste). Stoji da je avion celina i to niko ne moze da obori ali je i istina da je prvo bilo reci (barem je tako napisano i ako mozda nije tako mislio) da je radar na Mirazu bolji (pa samim tim ispade da je i pocelo bas oko performansi samih radara, nezavisno od aviona koji ga nosi i njegovog radarskog ordaza, kao i od aviona koji je cilj i njegovog rcs-a). Medjutim neshaost i ti se po malo pravis blesav (sto svi nekad radimo), a znam da razumes sta je hteo da kaze ali si opet u pravu da je poceo od jednog pa uvodio drugo. Meni je malo nelogicno i to sto se potencira samo da Miraz prilazi prikriveno u niskom letu, mozemo situaciju postaviti i obratno.

Sve u svemu svi smo razumeli ko sta prica ali bi bio sad stvarno red da se prestane jer ste poceli da se svadjate i inatite kao u kafani. Evo, ja iskreno priznajem da do skoro nisam imao pojma da smo Migove nabavili vec 85' (nikad nisam proveravao podatak ali sam ne znam ni sam zasto, mislio da smo iste uzeli 86/87'). Covek nema razloga da se stidi greske, i to stoji sto je receno od strane neshe (ovako mi je lakse jer cesto progutam neko slovo iz tvog nika). Kad bi znao sve vezano za avione, to mi ne bi bio samo hobi, ljubav, strast (nazovite kako hocete) vec profesija, i to odavno. Sad bi radio za neki biro ili kompaniju, svako od nas.

Dopuna: 29 Sep 2010 0:47

flyby68 ::procitajte ovo...
...zar doista mislite da nisu prikupili podatke iz svih lokalnih intervencija i da dobro prate sta avijacija NATO radi ?
Pa naravno da prate, to je medjusobno, a ko je rekao da ne?

Nego zamislite ako se ovakve diskusije vode danas, sta ce tek biti "sutra" kad T-50 udje u seriju? Da li ce prvi vidi i pucaj biti od znacaja zavisice samo od toga ko ce imati po procenama veci stelth ili ne mora ni to, prosto vecu mogucnost da na bilo koji nacin detektuje onog drugog. A onda ce naklonjeniji jednoj od strana kao i uvek da forsiraju bas ono sto njihov kanditat ima. Ako T-50 bude u situaciji prvi da vidi, ta sposobnost ce biti gotovo sve i najbitnija, a to isto ce vaziti za F-22 sa druge strane. Ali ako se za jednog ispostavi da je u tom pogledu inferiorniji, to ce onda biti poslednja stavka jer ce tad kao po vec mnogo puta ranije ispisanim scenarijim protivnik lako izmanevrisati nadolazece rakete i uvuci ovog drugog u deo gde ima prednost i iz prve ga oboriti. Moram vam priznati, jedva cekam.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

miodrag2 ::Mean , lepo sam rekao , ali ovog puta nisi , za razliku od neshaoct-a , shvatio ispravno . Rekao sam da svako lansiranje sa daljine vece od raspona 25-30km nema sanse za pogodak . Racunao sam da je najveca optimalna daljina za lansiranje u tom rasponu , od 25-30km . Ispalo je da je na gornjoj granici .
Sve preko toga verovatnoca pogotka bi bila sve manja .

Ok ja sam samo reagovao na tvrdnju da nema nikakve sanse. Posto sam te razumeo da preko 30km nema teorije da pogodi metu.

Dopuna: 29 Sep 2010 1:02

zixo ::Da ali cisto sumnjam da bi pogodio Mirage-2000 sa 20-30 km daljine.

Pa cemu ce mu onda radarski vodjena R-27?

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Migovi-29 su nabavljeni(proizvedeni) 1987/'88.Tako da bi i Mirazi-2000,da su kojim slucajem oni izabrani,bili kupljeni(sisli sa proizvodne trake) u manje-vise isto vrijeme.Mozda i koji mjesec kasnije zbog manjih proizvodnih kapaciteta/sporije proizvodnje u Francuskoj u odnosu na SSSR.Tako da 1985/'86. ne dolaze u obzir,a ovdje se te godine najcese spominju u vezi sa Mirazom-2000.Ove godine su od vaznosti i zbog motora,...,radara i rakete(Super 530D) na nasim,hipotetickim,Mirazima.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

vlada78 ::Sto na 5g ? Jel to Gripen ne moze vise ?

Ma na jednom Gripenu je leteo Amer i cela vezba je bila da se NATO i Svedjani bolje upoznaju.

Evo ceo tekst.

Citat:NATO TEST FOR GRIPEN
By Stefan Petersen
...

Flight Lieutenants Dan Eriksson and Adam Nelson manoeuvre their two ”Griffins” behind the MiG-29G piloted by US Major Doug ”Vinnie” Russell – the American exchange pilot from 1 Squadron of Fighter Group 73 ”Steinhoff” is leading this ”2 versus 2” mission. Stoini manoeuvres our MiG-29GT two-seater into position and we carry out the planned photo shoot before the four jets break off: Mindreader has issued fresh instructions relating to the real mission objective of providing neutral Sweden with the opportunity for air combat training to NATO standards.

The visit of six JAS 39's from F10 wing from the southern Swedish base of Ängelholm to Fighter Group 73 ”S” in Laage, North Germany, is a premier in two respects: not only is this the first time that the Gripens have trained with a NATO squadron, but it is also the first time they have flown operationally outside Sweden.

”Our security policy is in the process undergoing a change of orientation, away from pure defence of the homeland to operations in Europe,” explains Squadron Leader Per Alriksson, the Swedish project officer in charge of the transfer. ”From 1 January 2004 a squadron of Gripens is to be available as a Swedish Rapid Reaction Force for missions on behalf of the European Union or under the mandate of UNO, and as these missions often follow NATO standards, we need to familiarise ourselves with their procedures.”

Flight Lieutenants Eriksson and Nelson are doing precisely that: Mindreader has guided the two sides to within 60 km of each other in air combat zone ED-R 206/306 above Laage, and the fight can now begin. We are the bad guys: the two-seater is acting as a bomber and the single-seater MiG as its escort. The two Swedes, whose callsigns are ”Viking 1” and ”Viking 2”, are supposed to be intercepting us.

But we are a practice target with clipped wings: whereas the Gripens only have to observe the Mach 0.9 speed limit, the MiGs are not allowed to use afterburner or to pull more than 5g when turning either. Thus it is only a few minutes before Stoini and I fall victim to Viking 2, while Vinnie is ”taken out” by Viking 1.

These restrictions, which have been imposed at the request of the Swedes, are not without good reason. ”For us this is the first step in a new direction,” says Squadron Leader Alriksson. ”We want to concentrate on the standard procedures and radio messages and the basic geometry of NATO interception procedures, which have a number of differences compared with the ones we are used to in Sweden.” Before coming away to Germany, the Swedes had already run through the English-language radio calls.

Another major concern of Sweden's, Alriksson adds, is at this early phase of its realignment of security policy to get through the operation without any incidents. ”Simply avoid any risks.”

To accustom the twelve pilots from Ängelholm to flying in NATO airspace, each of them has completed a ”1 versus 1” mission – one Gripen versus one MiG – at the start of the five-day visit to Laage before trying their hand at the more demanding ”2 versus 2” missions. ”That is the main focus of the training,” says Squadron Leader Markus Treinies, project officer on the German side. Altogether, eight missions like this are to be flown during the week, one of them at night. ”The climax is then the ”3 versus 2 plus 2” scenarios – four flights of three Gripens versus four MiGs, with two of the MiGs acting as bombers and two as escorts. Here the Gripens can use quite different tactics from us, thanks to their highly developed datalink system.”

This technology permits up to four JAS 39's to exchange all the important information from radar and other sensors in real-time during a mission, so that every pilot has a complete picture of the air situation of the entire formation, even if individual aircraft are some distance apart.

In the extreme case, one Gripen can lead three others whose radars are switched off into battle and function as their eyes. The opponent receives only a single radar warning and may not realise that the threat is actually four times as great as he thinks until he has been shot down by one of the three ”silent” jets. ”Information superiority” is the term used by the Swedes to describe their concept of waging air warfare.

But in practice Viking 1 and 2 hardly need to deploy such technical tricks to emerge victorious in an exercise scenario in which the MiGs are at such a disadvantage. The two-seater does not have any radar, and the best indicator that the ”Griffins” will shortly be with us again is the frantically flashing radar warning receiver in the cockpit, which indicates that the Swedish Ericsson-PS-05/A pulse Doppler radar has already passed our plane's details to the on-board computer of a Gripen as a target. This time we are ”killed” even more quickly than on the first engagement, and even Vinnie in his radar-equipped fighter aircraft cannot remain in the fray for much longer.

It is largely thanks to the American major that Fighter Group 73 was the partner for this first training week. He had met Wing Commander Per Nilsson, captain of 2 Squadron of Wing F10 three years earlier in the USA, where Nilsson was attending a staff training course in Maxwell as a non-NATO exchange officer. ”I already knew at the time that I would be going to Laage as an exchange pilot,” explains Major Russell, ”and we decided to stay in contact. Perhaps there would be an opportunity to fly together.”

Ängelholm is actually very close to the German base: the two airfields are separated by only 250 km as the crow flies, 27 minutes from take-off to landing. The visit was originally planned for September 2001. It had to be postponed once, but now Nilsson is there with his squadron.

The Swedes travelled by a combination of land, sea and air. As well as the six jets which flew in, a C-130 Hercules took care of the transportation of materiel, while most of the approximately 50 men and one woman in the detachment plus the necessary vehicles came by ferry across the Baltic Sea.

In Laage the Swedes were assigned a separate area, from where they were able to operate their technology completely independently. Only the aircrew are staying most of the time with the host MiG squadron, where all the missions are planned and debriefs are held following the completion, for the sake of simplicity.

This debrief turns out to be quite one-sided on our flight, although the MiGs have done their best to avoid making things too easy for the Vikings. On the third and last ”set-up”, Stoini and I are soon out of the picture, as before, but Vinnie sticks around bravely and tries to get in a position to fire himself. Then at an altitude of 9,000ft (2,750m), a dogfight even starts up, but Viking 1 gains the upper hand, as planned. ”OK, terminate,” we finally hear our American formation leader say over the radio.

One of the most serious differences between the Swedish and NATO ways of flying is the units used to denote critical parameters: whereas the Alliance count in knots, feet and nautical miles, the instruments in the Gripen show metres and kilometres. ”It is quite new to us to fly with this data,” says Alriksson. ”If we are to improve interoperability, we will have to change our standards in Sweden.”

The major has also discovered some tactical differences. However, the reasons for these lie more in the Gripen's ”swing role” capability, i.e. the ability to change missions in flight. ”We work out several plans before taking off so as to be able to respond to quite different situations.” This, Alriksson admits, of course only works because of the datalink facilities in the jets.

The Swedes, accustomed as they are to high technology, are astonished by the performance that is possible on the MiG-29. That the Fulcrum, with its two RD-33 engines each producing 81.3kN of thrust with afterburning, should have considerably more power available than the Gripen is no surprise. The JAS 39 is after all powered by a single RM12 turbofan developed by Volvo from the General Electric F404 turbine and delivering 80.5kN of thrust with afterburning. ”But they have been really surprised by what we can achieve despite the MiG's outdated avionics”, says Squadron Leader Treinies.

”Our radar does not produce a situation display, but despite that we still have a good view of the air combat situation. When you are using relatively unsatisfactory technology against fourth generation fighter aircraft , you develop the necessary instincts.”

Five pilots from Ängelholm have the opportunity to enjoy flying in the second seat of the MiG-29GT, and Squadron Leader Alriksson is one of them. The Swedes would have liked to reciprocate, but ”So far only one Gripen trainer has been officially delivered to the Swedish Air Force,” says Alriksson. Of course there are more trainers in operation, but they are still being flown under the flag of the manufacturer Saab.

The Swedish Air Force has ordered a total of 204 Gripens, 28 of them two-seaters, and a little over one-half of the aircraft have so far been delivered. The first 140 consist of 126 JAS-39A single-seaters and 14 JAS-39B trainers. These are to be followed by another 50 more advanced JAS 39C's plus 14 JAS 39D's, to be built in the Linköping production facility. The C/D versions have different air refuelling equipment, a cockpit with colour displays, a new on-board computer system, an on-board oxygen supply system and other enhancements compared with the A/B models. The C variant is to be equipped with a reconnaissance pod as well. ”From 2006 the Rapid Reaction Forces will also be equipped with the JAS 39C,” says Alriksson.


Dopuna: 29 Sep 2010 1:53

Evo i slika

http://www.fabulousfulcrums.de/NEWS/Gripen7.jpg
http://www.fabulousfulcrums.de/NEWS/Gripen8.jpg
http://www.fabulousfulcrums.de/NEWS/Gripen9.jpg
http://www.fabulousfulcrums.de/NEWS/Gripen10.jpg
http://www.fabulousfulcrums.de/NEWS/GRIPEN001.jpg

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

suponik ::Migovi-29 su nabavljeni(proizvedeni) 1987/'88.Tako da bi i Mirazi-2000,da su kojim slucajem oni izabrani,bili kupljeni(sisli sa proizvodne trake) u manje-vise isto vrijeme.Mozda i koji mjesec kasnije zbog manjih proizvodnih kapaciteta/sporije proizvodnje u Francuskoj u odnosu na SSSR.Tako da 1985/'86. ne dolaze u obzir,a ovdje se te godine najcese spominju u vezi sa Mirazom-2000.Ove godine su od vaznosti i zbog motora,...,radara i rakete(Super 530D) na nasim,hipotetickim,Mirazima.
Suponik , ni tada , kao ni sada , evaluacija i nabavka nije isla za nedelju dana . Pisali smo o trenutku kada su avioni testirani , kada se na njima letelo . Trebalo je da neko ode i u Francusku , i u SSSR , oba pilota su isla tamo , oba pilota letela na oba aviona , vratili se u Jugoslaviju , podneli izvestaje , neka se strucna komisija sastala da proceni koji je avion na osnovu svega saznatog bolji u datom trenutku . Posle porudzbine je trebalo vremena da se avioni proizvedu/remontuju i isporuce .
Pogledaj samo podatke za Indijski tender , kada se predvidja zavrsetak tendera , a kada pocetak isporuke aviona . To ti nije los primer , mada su ga Indijci malo preterali .
A iz rasprave si mogao da vidis da to nije imalo veze sa radarom , ali jeste sa raketama , koje su, ako uzmemo i Super 530D , manjeg dometa od R-27 , i to za citavih 10km .
Ja opet kazem , gledano sa ove tacke gledista , Mirage bi verovatno bio bolji izbor . Gledano u trenutku izbora , MiG-29 je pruzao kao avion u celini vise . Mada je pitanje sta bi od svega toga nama bilo vazno , jer ne verujem da bi zbog sankcija avioni 1999.-te bili u boljem stanju da smo imali Mirage-2000 , a ne verujem ni da bi sada Mirage-2000 bili u boljem stanju od MiG-29 koje imamo , jer tek za njihov remont ne bi bilo para .
Salesam , sto se tice F-22 , T-50 , F-35 , Rafale , EF-2000 , meni se nekako cini da ce i dalje sve zavisiti od toga kakav je pilot u avionu , pod uslovom da su avioni potpuno ispravni . A i cini mi se da ce mo bespilotne letelice u ovim ulogama sacekati barem 50-tak godina duze nego sto ti mislis . Ali , to je moje licno misljenje , zivi bili pa videli .

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

miodrag2 ::Salesam , sto se tice F-22 , T-50 , F-35 , Rafale , EF-2000 , meni se nekako cini da ce i dalje sve zavisiti od toga kakav je pilot u avionu , pod uslovom da su avioni potpuno ispravni . A i cini mi se da ce mo bespilotne letelice u ovim ulogama sacekati barem 50-tak godina duze nego sto ti mislis . Ali , to je moje licno misljenje , zivi bili pa videli.
Naravno da i pilot ima svoju ulogu dok god bude bio sastavni deo borbene celine ali opet mislim da je uloga istih dosta manja nego nekad, posebno sa samih pocetaka razvoja avijacije. Mislim da avionu kao sto je F-22 nadomescuje vise nedostatke nego prethodne generacije i da svaki prosecan pilot ima mogucnost da iskoristi njegove prednosti jer mu je sve sazvakano ali problem dolazi i faktor pilota se drasticno uvecava u momentu ulaska u blisku borbu, a cini mi se da je Amerikancima osnosvna zamisao da takve moguce susrete smanje na najmanju mogucu meru, da avion bude taj koji odlucuje pobednika - uz sve prednosti koje ima u vidu napredne elektronike - a ne pilot. I to je po meni njihovo potpuno legitimno pravo, cak bi rekao i potpuno logicno (nekad su prednost bile strele, katapulti, pa topovi, danas su bolja elektronika, radar i rakete i naravno sto je moguce manja radarska uocljivost - oko ovoga se svi sigurno slazemo).

Sto se tice bespilotnih letelica, nikako nisam u poziciji da tvrdim da sam ja u pravu i da ti gresis ali meni to deluje uzasno mnogo vremena s obzirom koliki je napredak postignut do sad i samo iz tog razloga mislim da ce biti pre ali kao kao sto si rekao videcemo. Ono sto je nepobitna cinjenica jeste da ce ti avioni izgubiti draz koju imaju ovi danasnji. Takodje ce verovatno svi biti vrlo slicni i po izgledu i po karakteristikama, a vrlo je moguce da ce pobede, ubedljivo na prvom mestu kao prednost, odnositi vaca brojcanost jedne strane u odnosu na drugu (to kad svi ili oni veci budu presli na njih). Ja ocekujem pojavu istih za 10 do 15, najkasnije 20 godina, u punom zamahu gde ce zatim brzo preuzimati primat i trziste od aviona/pilota. Opet da ponovim (ne tebi licno), mislim na vodjene avione (sa zemlje iz nekakvih bunkera), a ne na one sa takozvanom sopstvenom inteligencijom jer se cesto brkaju te dve nazovimo vrste buducih aparata. Ti sa svojom "inteligencijom" su verovatno neka buduca evolucija sa kojom sam uveren da pocinje i nas lagani kraj (pod uslovom, ako se do tad vec ne samoneunistimo kao planeta). E za te je moguce da ce doci za jedno pedesetak godina, mada licno ne bi voleo da dodju ikad.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

malo novije slike..
mislim da su sve iz ove godine

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

902 ima najlepsu semu farbanja.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Citat:Pa cemu ce mu onda radarski vodjena R-27?

Koje G opterecenje moze da izdrzi R-27R? Mislim da ona ne moze da pogodi visokomanevarski cilj.