Jet Performance Graphs

[SIK1]

Using simple trig and not accounting for bullet drop. The two degrees up angle of the gun would mean at 1,000 ft the impact point would be three feet high. So at a nautical mile (5,000 ft) the bullet would be fifteen feet high. An aircraft traveling at 400 mph would cover that mile in nine seconds.

[eagl]

No, it means neither.  But continue attempting.  

I would like to know his opinion on the Irbus-E and the MSP-418K and KNIRTI Sorbstiya jam pod.  All three have been touted as significant upgrades, and the KNIRTI is deemed better than western equivalents, by analysis.

Just about everything kicks butt on the F-15 radar in peacetime...  Feel free to extrapolate ANYTHING you like from that, because the truth is probably even more weird than whatever you think is possible.  But in my experiences against various sorts of jammers *in peacetime*, it has still been effective enough to employ weapons.  There is a pretty big benefit to hauling around that large of a radar, especially matched to relatively modern digital processing.  Unfortunately that's all I can say about that.

I don't have any info on the latest counters to the US radars, but of course if I did then I still couldn't say what I thought of them   I will say that fighting against even an older jammer is a pain in the butt because even if the radar can handle it, your tactics have to change on the fly.  To put it mildly, it is challenging.

If you really want to know more about the eagle radar, go to amazon and buy a handful of books on radar theory, and then assume that the F-15 can do everything the book talks about, even the hypothetical stuff, because any time they want to put in a new radar mode it is a matter of reprogramming the computers that do all the processing.  The antenna and basic tx/rx hardware passes really good info to the signal processors. Then think about the fact that the books don't cover some of the really strange tricks you can do with a radar.

Radar vs. jammer stuff is all back room geekery...  If we get a chance to see a new pod in action, or better yet get our hands on one and figure out how to make it work in full-up wartime modes, then it is only a matter of time before our radar gets an anti-jam mode to deal with it.  Same with the AMRAAM...  And of course, anything that emits can be homed on.  And when any competing jammer manufacturer gets ahold of any details on our countermeasures, then the jammer will be modified.  So you hold back a bit until you really need the capability, and hope the bad guys didn't get good enough intel or anticipate whatever special modes you're going to use when the crap really hits the fan.

[eagl]

Using simple trig and not accounting for bullet drop. The two degrees up angle of the gun would mean at 1,000 ft the impact point would be three feet high. So at a nautical mile (5,000 ft) the bullet would be fifteen feet high. An aircraft traveling at 400 mph would cover that mile in nine seconds.

The bullet drop changes every foot based on energy depletion of the round in flight.  The bullets start off going really fast and then slow down fairly rapidly.  Even the new PGU rounds that get another 40%ish of useful range are a challenge to strafe with.

If you want to see how weird it can be, take a plane in AH, and try to do some strafing while near stall speed, flaps up.  Make sure convergence is at the maximum possible too.  The plane isn't flying anywhere near the direction the guns are pointing.  To get any sort of dive angle without speeding up, you'll have to have the gear down I guess...  Or take up one of the planes with dive brakes (not flaps, since that changes the wing camber and increases the effective angle of attack so the gun wouldn't be pointing up as much with flaps down).  Maybe an f4u with gear down at very low speed might show the effect... I don't know if it will work or not in the game because I don't have it installed at the moment.

[Bodhi]

Ya know Eagl, I was thinking of the statement that you made about the F-15 and every country with the option wants one and it brought up to things. 

1.  The Shah and Iran and the F-14 to counter the Mig-25's.

2.  Japan and the original intent to sell Japan F-22's. 

The first is so old and thanks to Grumman technicians will never come back to haunt us.  Plus the Tomcat was the best (all real life results aside)

The second is still kind of weird that the Japs never got to buy an aircraft that would definitely have decreased unit cost with production order increases and the US could have ended up with more F-22's....

Makes ya kinda wonder.

[Penguin]

If you want strike capability, why use an air-superiority fighter when you have the good old A-10?

-Penguin

[mensa180]

Because A-10s can't clear the skies by themselves.

[Penguin]

True, but they shouldn't have to; there's no such thing as a free lunch.  If you want the plane to be a strike fighter, it won't be a great air-to-air fighter.  It's like trying to do air-strikes with a Spitfire/109 rather than a Thunderbolt or 190. 

That's why you have many classes of fighters, to deal with everything effectively.  Also, just pondering here, but I don't think that our real-lifel enemies, the Taliban/Al Queada/Myriad Arab Mafias don't have an air-force to oppose us doing air-strikes.

That means that a Predator, or rather, a bunch of predators, would be the way to go.  They're cheap, easy to fly, and nobody gives a darn if they get blown up.  Not only that, but the new versions can carry far more missles than the current predator (if only you could get a Vulcan cannon on that thing!).

In conclusion, we aren't about to fight an air war any time soon. Which means it's a good idea to focus on air-to-ground for now, and cross the air-to-air bridge when we find and get to it (hopefully never, war only destroys).

-Penguin