Posted: 28 Nov 2005 17:10
Vishnu, not directed at you, that was for kartik and tilak who got into a dogfight of their own! will be cleaning up the other posts as well.
Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
I dont know if he's monitoring this site.Vishnu wrote:Hi ... I really think we should give Moose and Ragin the opportunity to express themselves ..... Thanks
Vishnu
sorry admins - hadn't seen it when posting!khukri wrote:Edited by Admin: The url to news iteam is already posted, why post it again and this time full body?
Vishnu wrote:No Sir ... I am true to my tribe ... DDM till I keel over in factual inaccuracies ... !!!
Is it possible to send it accross to vivek@msgs.zzn.comPV Mathew wrote:luckily i saved all of them till they were taken off. must be either an IAF complaint or USAF or both
I guess some body might have visited F-16 admins in UK and gave them an offer they could not refuse
viveks wrote:Is it possible to send it accross to vivek@msgs.zzn.comPV Mathew wrote:luckily i saved all of them till they were taken off. must be either an IAF complaint or USAF or both
I guess some body might have visited F-16 admins in UK and gave them an offer they could not refuse
I posted most of Moose's posts on another website to create "awareness" ..could post them all back here so someone can save them and use them for reference later on.Himanshu wrote:Is it possible to have those transcripts over here....
OK Guys, here it is (the transcripts).PV Mathew wrote:viveks wrote: Is it possible to send it accross to vivek@msgs.zzn.com
Can the BR and IAF admins advice please, as I am a us resident and dont want copyright problems.
Can someone registred on f-16.net (stealth-spy i think) ask Moose, ragin please
Not wishing to say your dad was wrong, but there were two attacks on Kalaikunda, KKD for short. first atttack by the paf destroyed six aircraft and they went back unscathed. second attack by paf destroyed two aircraft - but was intercepted by our hunters which shot down one/two/four depending on which version you believe. There were no Gnats at KKD.viveks wrote: He saw the dog-fight with his own eyes at that time. He said that the hunters had just returned from bombing their bases, puki dudes followed them to the air -field and the battle took place above the base itself. But the air-field was intact. Puki dudes did mount the attack but the attack was not effective enough. Our very own Gnat fighters took them down.
PV Mathew Posted: 29 Nov 2005 12:22 am Post subject: Re: f-16net Ragins, Moose quotes and photos
With all due respect, a heat seeker seaks heat, not smoke ... otherwise designing counter measures would be exceptionally easy.joy_roy wrote:One thing i would like to point out is the fulcrum`s engines does tends to smoke a lot ...as moose mentioned...and also as we can see in the part 2 of MISSION UDAAN.This might not help fulcrums fighting in a WVR situation and a heat seeker missile after her.
where there is smoke there is of course there is fire and hence heat!!!eklavya wrote:With all due respect, a heat seeker seaks heat, not smoke ... otherwise designing counter measures would be exceptionally easy.joy_roy wrote:One thing i would like to point out is the fulcrum`s engines does tends to smoke a lot ...as moose mentioned...and also as we can see in the part 2 of MISSION UDAAN.This might not help fulcrums fighting in a WVR situation and a heat seeker missile after her.
All AC engines produce heat and smoke. The question is whether an engine producing more smoke has a higer heat signature than the one that does not produce as much smoke.Uday wrote:where there is smoke there is of course there is fire and hence heat!!!eklavya wrote: With all due respect, a heat seeker seaks heat, not smoke ... otherwise designing counter measures would be exceptionally easy.
A heat seeker seeks heat???????? Silly me....I used to think that they are after the pilot`s autograph . Anyway....a smoking engine leaves a trail of hot smoke behind it which is pretty helpfull to a heat seeker.eklavya wrote: With all due respect, a heat seeker seaks heat, not smoke ... otherwise designing counter measures would be exceptionally easy.
Absolutely - especially with an overcast of stratiform clouds. The smoke could be spotted from >20 kms.Dileep wrote:....And would anyone really distinguidh the smoke in our hazy skies?