these people are the cruelest possible !! can't think of a harsh enough punishment for them.
wonder how difficult it would have been for them to first kill the animal properly.
for once, I would be happy to believe in the existence of hell.
This series of radio calls became a familiar prelude to some unique aerial combat encounters last November  as some of USAF's best fighter pilots flew no-holds-barred fights in and against an F-16 like no other in the world-one with a thrust-vectoring engine nozzle. Their purpose: to test the tactical utility of thrust vectoring and post-stall maneuvering.
The multi-axis thrust-vectoring F-16 had already impressed a small group of Lockheed and USAF test pilots during its initial envelope expansion and development flight testing. In only four months, the airplane, previously limited to twenty-five degrees angle of attack, was cleared to perform such maneuvers as the Cobra, J-turn, and helicopter to unlimited AOAs. But whether this capability would have real tactical utility was left for the operational phase of the test program.
Critics of post-stall maneuvering argue that fighters should never get slow. They equate low speed, regardless of agility, with presenting an easy target. Proponents argue that vectoring offers a decided agility advantage as aerial encounters progress and combatants become slower. The debate has been mostly theoretical.
That's why the pilots from the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron at Nellis AFB were called in to fly the F-16/MATV. The 422nd Squadron tests and develops tactics for new equipment and systems for operational F-16, F-15, A-10, and F-4G squadrons. Typically, the squadron performs this operational testing after the folks at Edwards AFB (and a few other test sites) complete developmental testing.
The 422nd chose two of its top F-16 pilots, Maj. Jay Pearsall and Capt. Jim Henderson, to fly in and against the F-16/MATV. Pearsall has over 2,400 hours in the F-16. He has completed F-16 tours at Kunsan, Luke, and Spangdahlem. Besides completing several operational tours in the F-16, Henderson, who has 1,900 hours in the F-16, also served as an F-16 instructor pilot. Both pilots are graduates of the USAF's rigorous Fighter Weapons School.
Pearsall and Henderson participated in the early planning stages of the program and then flew the F-16/MATV soon after the envelope was cleared by the F-16 Combined Test Force at Edwards. The CTF consists of Lockheed, General Electric, and USAF test pilots, engineers, mechanics, and technicians. Thanks to these people and a great design team, the envelope expansion phase was so successful that no restrictions were placed on the aircraft for the operational phase. However, the 422nd pilots were asked to keep the throttle at military power or higher when flying above the Category I limiter (above twenty-five degrees AOA). Doing so would keep the thrust and the resulting vectoring force high. (Throttle chops to idle were tested earlier in the flight test program and showed no problems other than reducing the vectoring force.) The altitude floor for the air-to-air engagements was raised from the normal 10,000 feet to 20,000 feet as an added safety precaution for an aircraft with a prototype system.
The 422nd pilots rotated between MATV and the bandit or aggressor aircraft, which were F-16 Block 32 aircraft from the 422nd Squadron. The pilots flew one-vs-one engagements first. The weapons simulated during the evaluation were the F-16's standard gun with increased range PGU-28 bullets, AIM-9Ms, and AIM-120s.
Throughout their evaluation, the 422nd pilots were encouraged to fight their best BFM (basic fighter maneuvers). The engagements were no duck shoot. The goal was to get a no-kidding reality check on the usefulness of thrust vectoring.
The one-vs-one engagements started from offensive and defensive perches (positions in trail or in lead of the bandit) as well as from neutral or head-on passes. Initial speeds ranged from 435 knots down to 250 knots. The lower speeds were used to represent a fight that had already progressed through several turns.
The F-16 already possesses awesome maneuvering characteristics. But vectoring allowed the offensive pilot to get a quicker kill, and it helped eliminate some of the common mistakes of overshooting or getting stuck in lag (a situation in which the aircraft can't quite get its nose onto the bandit because of the AOA limiter).
The bandit was still able to shoot at the airplane, but the shots had a lower probability of kill because the F-16/MATV was more elusive than a standard F-16. In addition, the known ability of the F-16/MATV to use post-stall maneuvering caused the attacking pilot to feel somewhat defensive and thereby modify his tactics to guard against any real, or perceived, threat from the thrust-vectoring jet.
From a defensive position, thrust vectoring allowed the F-16/MATV to survive longer. The high-speed neutral one-vs-one engagements displayed the benefits of the F-16 limiter. The limiter allows the pilot to maintain the aircraft's energy in the turns by keeping the airplane out of the post-stall region, where drag is dramatically higher. If the MATV pilot employed post-stall maneuvering too early or at the wrong time, he would indeed slow down too fast and the bandit could gain an advantage. However, thrust vectoring allowed the F-16 to employ that portion of the flight envelope between the normal AOA limiter and the AOA for maximum lift (around thirty-five degrees AOA). As a result, the MATV pilot could take advantage of the F-16's maximum turn capability.
Thrust vectoring and post-stall maneuvering did improve the F-16's air-to-air capability as airspeeds decreased and as the one-vs-one neutral setups progressed to offensive or defensive positions. Of course, the neutral setups were against another F-16 with good vertical capability. Against a dissimilar aircraft without such a high thrust-to-weight ratio, the F-16/MATV would have a distinct advantage because it could exploit post-stall maneuvering earlier in the fight.
For the one-vs-two engagements, the 422nd sent Capt. Dave Dodson as a dedicated bandit. Dodson, with over 1,000 hours of F-16 flying time, has a background that makes him a most formidable adversary. It includes a tour flying nothing but air-to-air engagements in the F-15C and a tour as a dedicated F-5 and F-16 aggressor. Like Pearsall and Henderson, Dodson is also a graduate of the USAF Fighter Weapons School.
In the one-vs-two engagements, Dodson flew exclusively as an adversary against the F-16/MATV while Pearsall and Henderson switched between the adversary and the front seat of the F-16/MATV. The three pilots flew a total of sixty-two one-vs-two aerial engagements.
In these encounters, the bandits tried to send the wingman high to gain an advantage in the fight-along with trying everything else in the fighter tactics handbook. Their strategy was to attack the F-16/MATV from above while it countered an aggressive lead bandit. Employing this strategy successfully would support the critics' main argument against post-stall maneuvering. That is, any advantage offered by post-stall capability could be easily overcome by multiple bandits.
The actual results, however, may surprise these critics. The MATV aircraft was able to hold its own in these lopsided contests, and it was often impressively offensive. Post-stall maneuvering forced the bandits to modify their tactics and to reduce their mutual support to counter the thrust-vectoring opponent. Although the bandit wingman tried going high, the F-16/MATV would use its post-stall capability to get a shot at or, at least, threaten the high wingman before continuing to fight the lead bandit.
The evaluation also showed that the gun (with the increased-range PGU-28 bullets) was the weapon used most of the time because of the close ranges and short reaction times associated with the dogfights. Missiles were used only a portion of the time. And most of the missile shots were fired within the standard AOA envelopes for the missiles. (High-AOA missiles are in development. In fact, a specially instrumented AIM-9M was carried on the F-16/MATV's wingtip during several flights to gather vibration and loads data on the impact of the high-AOA environment on the missile itself.)
The pilots of the 422nd commented that while thrust vectoring would never be a substitute for a good understanding of basic air-to-air fighting skills, the capability significantly improves the airplane's lethality.
The F-16 would also benefit from the ability to carry air-to-air missile loadings presently limited to around fifteen degrees AOA (asymmetric missiles, for example) out to the maximum lift AOA of thirty-five degrees and beyond. This advantage, however, was not specifically addressed in the flight test program.
So it appears that the debate over thrust vectoring has moved from the chalkboard to the cockpit. Whether this capability, which is designed into the F-22 Air Superiority Fighter, will find its way into future versions of the F-16 remains to be seen. Those who have witnessed what this capability can do in the air, however, have been favorably impressed.
James Sergeant was the flight test engineer for the F-16/MATV program.
jamwal wrote:Nitesh wrote:jamwal wrote:Squadron leader Jamwal
good shooting squadron leader, but job is not yet complete you need to kick more chinkis butt .
With great pleasure
Russia has officially notified China of the fact that the production of J11 jet fighters, which copy Russiaâ€™s Su-27SK aircraft, violates international agreements. Moscow promised to launch legal proceedings to protect its intellectual property.
Russiaâ€™s attempts to settle down on Chinaâ€™s arms market have been made to no avail, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta reports. Chinese pirates have entered a new level of activity. They mastered the production technology and developed the Chinese production of Su-27 analogues with a view to subsequently export the planes to third world countries.
The military cooperation between Russia and China has not been very successful during the recent couple of years. Russiaâ€™s arms exports to China dropped by 62 percent. In addition, Russia does not sign any new defense cooperation contracts with China. For the time being, the two countries simply execute the previously signed contracts, the sum of which total about $1.8 billion.
It is worthy of note that China used to be a major buyer of Russian-made military hardware. At present moment, China gradually becomes a large exporter of arms.
The Shenyang J-11 is an advanced fighter in the People's Liberation Army Air Force. It is a Chinese-redesigned, Chinese upgrade of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27SK.
The new J-11 is a Chinese redesigned version of the Sukhoi Su-27SK air superiority fighter. Sukhoi originally provided kits to Shenyang Aircraft Corporation upon an agreement in 1995, but over time there were to be increasing Chinese content in the aircraft, with up to 70% of all Su-27 ordered by the PLAAF to be Chinese-made. It has been reported that Sukhoi agreed to an upgrade program, allegedly in 2001, with improved radar and attack avionics.
However, in 2004, Russian media reported that Shenyang co-production of the basic J-11 was stopped after around 100 examples were built, citing a source within the PLAAF suggesting that the basic Su-27/J-11 was no longer meeting PLAAF requirements. The PLAAF later revealed a mock-up of an upgrade J-11C in late 2002. It was equipped with Chinese anti-ship and PL-12 air-to-air missiles presumably for the role for a maritime strike aircraft.
The Sukhoi Su-27 (NATO reporting name 'Flanker') is a jet fighter plane originally manufactured by the Soviet Union, and designed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau. It was intended as a direct competitor for the new generation of American fighters (which emerged as the F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, and F/A-18 Hornet), with long range, heavy armament, and very high agility. The Su-27 most often flies air superiority missions, but is able to perform almost all combat operations. Its closest American counterpart is the F-15 Eagle.
Prepared by Dmitry Sudakov
The Su-27 air defense fighter can also carry out escort missions in support of Tu-22M, Backfire NATO nickname, as well as other bomber/attack aircraft such as the Su-24, Fencer NATO nickname. Despite its size and weight, the Su-27 and its derivatives are the most maneuverable aircraft ever flew.
The Su-27 Flanker features an integrated Infrared Search and Track (IRST) system located in front of the cockpit's canopy. The IRST system together with a helmet-mounted sight, the R-73 advanced short range air-to-air missile, and Su-27's maneuverability outperforms any existing fighter aircraft in a short range air-to-air engagement, The Su-30MKI features canard fore planes and AL-31FP thrust vectoring control engines achieving the super-maneuverability concept. Super-maneuverability means that the airplane can aim at any direction within seconds to fire an air-to-air missile without changing its bearing. Super-maneuverability can be used in many situations during a mission.
The LCA is billed to be the worldâ€™s smallest, lightweight, supersonic, multi-role, single-seat fighter designed to function as IAFâ€™s frontline, multi-mission tactical aircraft. Although the term light can be misleading because the LCA will be able to deliver as much ordinance as the much larger MiG-27s. It is primarily intended to replace the aging fleet of IAF Mig-21s. Some of its characteristic design and functional features are as follows. It has a delta wing configuration with a single tail fin and no tail planes or fore planes. The airframe is made of aluminum-lithium alloys (30%), carbon-carbon composites (40%) and titanium (3%), that contributes to its lightweight. LCA incorporates modern design concepts and the state-of-art technologies such as relaxed static stability, fly-by-wire Flight Control System, Advanced Digital Cockpit, Multi-Mode Radar, Integrated Digital Avionics System, Advanced Composite Material Structures and a Flat Rated Engine. LCAâ€™s pure delta-wing design implies that it is an inherently unstable platform, which - however - gives it improved aerodynamic efficiency, enhanced agility and maneuverability. Advanced on-board quadruplex computers ensure the stability of the aircraft while flying (called fly-by-wire). Other functional features of the LCA include short take off and landing, excellent maintainability and a wide range of weapon fits. The on-board avionics enhance the role of LCA as an effective weapons platform. The Integrated Digital Avionics Suite of LCA is characterized by its interface with all other aircraft systems such USMS, Propulsion System, Electrical System and Flight control System. The glass cockpit and hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) controls reduce pilot workload. Accurate navigation and weapon aiming information on the HUD helps the pilot achieve his/her mission effectively. A ring laser gyro (RLG) based inertial navigation system (INS) provides accurate navigation guidance to the pilot. LCA has considerable weapons-carrying capability. There are a total of 7 hard points (3 below each wing and one below the fuselage) to carry a variety of missiles, bombs and rockets as per mission requirements. The advanced cockpit and the digital avionics give LCA a very good point and shoot capability with a quick turn around time. LCA has provisions for fuel drop-tanks and in-flight refueling that extend its range and endurance. Further, supersonic speeds at all altitudes and the availability of high performance radar give the LCA effective Beyond Visual Range (BVR) attack capabilities.
the 10 Tejas multi role light combat aircraft of Indian manufacture about to be tested in combat for the first time .
It is the smallest, lightest multirole fighter in its class, and has the most % composite material makeup of any production fighter. This, plus its extremely small size, allows it to have a very low RCS, the TD-2 variant, which featured about half the composite material construction of the final design, apparently has about half the RCS of the Mirage 2000 in the IAF. The avionics, computers, etc. designed for the LCA are all Indian, have already been flight tested, as they make up much of the components on other aircraft, significantly the Su-30MKI, which benefited from the tech spin offs. It is designed to be very easily upgradable with new technologies.
The low weight but yet very strong composites also allow for a large thrust-to-weight ratio without compromizing on weapons payload. When the Kaveri engine, which is farther behind on design than the aircraft itself, will be inducted in the 2012 timeframe, it will allow the aircraft to be capable of supercruise. Till then, it will be powered by upgraded American GE F-404-IN engines.
The unique cranked-delta design, and the overall aircraft structure with significant wing-fuselage blending, etc. allows for incredible manoverability without the need for canards, which further reduces its RCS compared to similar aircraft, like the Gripen and the J-10. Interestingly, the LCA was initially designed with canards, but were later removed when the mastering of the wing design made for no significant handing improvements with canards. The Navalized version of the LCA, which will enter service on the indigenous ADS carrier in 2012 will incidently have small canards.
The operating cost of the Tejas will be extremely low, and the purchase cost only about $21 million per aircraft, upwards (downards?) of only 1/3 the cost of similarly potent aircraft, like the Gripen, Rafale and J-10, which are roughly in its class (though larger.)
It is a very modern jet in every sense of the word. I'm not playing up my words when I say it will be top of the line when it enters service.
It's been marred by a lot of bad press and even worse reporting, and by tremendous delays caused by post nuke test (now withdrawn) sanctions that had DRDO engineers scrambling to reinvent the wheel.
But the net result was a much better, if harder, learning experience and an aircraft that is almost totally indigenous, from design to avionics to materials. The LCA of then (delay) was a primitive 4th gen, and the LCA of now is a true 4th+ gen aircraft. The difference is between an F-16 block 15 and a block 60 (though the LCA's design is much more modern config that should hold up pretty well in the next 20-30 years.)
Right now, its weapons and avionics suite (already integrated on other IAF aircraft) are equal to or more capable than the Gripens, which probably is its closest equivilant.
The Gripen has slightly more powerful radar for now, however. The Tejas, even in its TD-2 demonstration model has a significantly lower radar signiature than the Gripen, according to IAF pilots who flew both types of aircraft, though in this PV-2 and in the actual production model, the %age of composites will be significantly increased.
The Tejas is supposedly handles better and will be more manoverable than the Gripen and Rafale (the latter which IAF pilots have extensive experience flying on and with, as it was an initial MRCA contender), according to those same pilots.
The engines of both the Tejas and Gripen and will be very similar.
The biggest advantage, though, is cost. Flyaway price of the Tejas is about 5 million bucks cheaper than the Gripen (plus much cheaper lifecycle costs in the Indian scenario against the Gripen), but at the same time will be an overall more capable and upgradable aircraft when it enters service.
Coco Islands are a pair of strategically important islands located in the eastern Indian Ocean, politically administered by Burma under Yangon Division, but leased to the People's Republic of China since 1994.
Geographically, they are a part of the Andaman Islands archipelago and separated from the North Andaman Island (India) by the 20 km wide Coco channel. The Bay of Bengal lies to the west and the Andaman Sea to the east of the islands. The Burmese mainland is 300 km to the north.
The Coco Islands consist of the main Great Coco Island and the smaller Little Coco Island, separated by the Alexandra Channel. Table Island, a third small island located near the Great Coco Island, previously housed a lighthouse but is presently uninhabited.
In an interview to the BBC in 1998, George Fernandes, the then defense minister of India, revealed that the Coco Islands were a part of India until they were donated to Burma by Nehru.
Chinese signal intelligence gathering station and maritime army base
China established a SIGINT intelligence gathering station on Great Coco Island in 1992 to monitor Indian naval activity in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The station also allows China to monitor the movement of other navies and ships throughout the eastern Indian Ocean, especially in the crucial point in shipping routes between the Bay of Bengal and the Strait of Malacca. It may also be used to monitor activities at the launch site of the Indian Space Research Organization at Sriharikota and the Defence Research and Development Organization at Chandipur-on-sea. The Chinese Army is also building a maritime base on Little Coco Island.
he maritime reconnaissance and electronic intelligence station on Great Coco Island in the Bay of Bengal, some 300 kms south of the Burmese mainland, is the most important Chinese electronic intelligence installation in Myanmar [Burma]. The Chinese Army is also building a base on Small Coco Island in the Alexandra Channel between the Indian Ocean and the Andaman Sea north of India's Andaman Islands. These two islands, which have been leased to China since 1994, are located at a crucial point in traffic routes between the Bay of Bengal and the Strait of Malacca. The Coco Islands are thus an ideal location for for monitoring Indian naval and missile launch facilities in Andaman and Nicobar Islands to the south and movements of the Indian Navy and other navies throughout the eastern Indian Ocean.
Construction of the Great Coco Island station began in late 1992 with the emplacement of a 45-50m antenna tower, radar sites and other electronic facilities forming a comprehensive SIGINT collection facility. In mid-1993, some of the 70 Chinese naval personnel began operating the new radar equipment, and by the summer of 1994 the the PLA the radar and SIGINT facilities were complete and ready for use.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests