It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ukrainian Su-25 warplane detected heading toward Malaysian Boeing

page: 33
38
<< 30  31  32    34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: StateOfWar
SU-25 top altitude is 10000 meters with full load out, 12600 meters with 2 R60s, and peak altitude on a bell at 14000 meters clean.

Go here, read, buy sim, load, test your self;

lockon.co.uk...

If in doubt, the very same company was contracted by Unites States National Guard to supply a full featured flight sim for A-10 Thunderbolt.

This product has been released over 15 years ago and is a well established benchmark in the military aviation flight simulators.

All flight data modeling is based on actual test flight data gathered from actual platforms by direct data transfer.

Get the sim, create a mission and test it out your selves.

SU-25 can easily intercept a huge commercial liner at cruise altitude.



LOMAC is not an overly accurate flight Sim. It is a very good one...but not terribly accurate in regards to exactly how the aircraft operates. DCS is a bit better, but overall still not accurate to levels of realistic flight training, from what I can tell. I have played and followed the game's development since SSI's Flanker 1.0 in the 1990's. I know the game well. In how an Su25 takes on a mission, yes the game seems accurate, let alone the A10C. But I wouldn't take it for scripture.

I would suggest getting info from an actual (peer reviewed would be best) book or website that doesn't make video games.

Just my 2 cents.




posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

originally posted by: StateOfWar
SU-25 top altitude is 10000 meters with full load out, 12600 meters with 2 R60s, and peak altitude on a bell at 14000 meters clean.

Go here, read, buy sim, load, test your self;

lockon.co.uk...

If in doubt, the very same company was contracted by Unites States National Guard to supply a full featured flight sim for A-10 Thunderbolt.

This product has been released over 15 years ago and is a well established benchmark in the military aviation flight simulators.

All flight data modeling is based on actual test flight data gathered from actual platforms by direct data transfer.

Get the sim, create a mission and test it out your selves.

SU-25 can easily intercept a huge commercial liner at cruise altitude.



LOMAC is not an overly accurate flight Sim. It is a very good one...but not terribly accurate in regards to exactly how the aircraft operates. DCS is a bit better, but overall still not accurate to levels of realistic flight training, from what I can tell. I have played and followed the game's development since SSI's Flanker 1.0 in the 1990's. I know the game well. In how an Su25 takes on a mission, yes the game seems accurate, let alone the A10C. But I wouldn't take it for scripture.

I would suggest getting info from an actual (peer reviewed would be best) book or website that doesn't make video games.

Just my 2 cents.


If I were to say I have relatives at Zhykovski that make this stuff happen, do you really think that would give any credit around here? Don't think so, I'd immediately be branded as some Putins personal disinformation agent and will be banned faster then a SR-71.

SU-25 high wing loading makes an incredibly agile platform, it has no problems at all at high alt.

If you have the original Flanker 1.0 manual, feel free to scan that page which describes the choice for theater operation, and make a thread named "Crimean crisis precisely predicted by a Russian flight sim back from 1995"

If you followed the sim, you of all people know that this exact scenario was nothing new to Russians, and the only surprise left now is; "they went totally insane and are actually trying to do it, God help us all..."

Two decades ago this entire script was already played out in a computer game, how stupid did we get to actually not see it happening right in from of our eyes.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: StateOfWar

If you look at this video from 1995. At 5 min 34 sec. Does it prove that the SU flies above 8000m. The Su are loaded With 2 x R-60s. You can see that when they land. Because this would prove that the SU is actually very capable of flying With Air to Air missiles at 8690m. That Equals: 28 510 ft.




edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

Easy, and that's level flight. At peak altitude it momentarily reaches 46 thousand feet. 30K is standard altitude for all modern turbofan engines.

Seriously, business class jets are plowing the skies at 30k every day on much less thrust to weight, and that's with leather chairs, hookers and tons of booze on board, but a dedicated military jet is all the sudden not capable of doing that just because it does not fit the false flag opp. Ok then.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: StateOfWar
a reply to: spy66

Easy, and that's level flight. At peak altitude it momentarily reaches 46 thousand feet. 30K is standard altitude for all modern turbofan engines.

Seriously, business class jets are plowing the skies at 30k every day on much less thrust to weight, and that's with leather chairs, hookers and tons of booze on board, but a dedicated military jet is all the sudden not capable of doing that just because it does not fit the false flag opp. Ok then.



Thank you
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Hey, EVERYBODY looking at the Russia / Ukraine topics here should definitely take a look at this new thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

New information (or disinformation) on a sophisticated psychological warfare program of the Russians.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 08:27 PM
link   
All people looking at the Russia / Ukraine topics here should definitely take a look at this new thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

New information (or disinformation) on a sophisticated psychological warfare program of the Russians.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: StateOfWar

Your claims certainly don't match the specs provided by the manufacturers. Sukhoi states the Su-25's service ceiling (unarmed) is 23,000 feet. Boeing states the 777's service ceiling is 43,100 feet. Sukhoi states the Su-25's max mach is 0.82. Boeing states the 777's cruising speed is 0.84 mach. So how do think the Su-25 is going to catch up with a 777 when its max speed is slower than the 777's cruising speed and its flying at least 10,000 feet over its service ceiling?



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 03:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: StateOfWar

Your claims certainly don't match the specs provided by the manufacturers. Sukhoi states the Su-25's service ceiling (unarmed) is 23,000 feet. Boeing states the 777's service ceiling is 43,100 feet. Sukhoi states the Su-25's max mach is 0.82. Boeing states the 777's cruising speed is 0.84 mach. So how do think the Su-25 is going to catch up with a 777 when its max speed is slower than the 777's cruising speed and its flying at least 10,000 feet over its service ceiling?


Evidence prove that the SU -25 can fly higher than what the Source is stating. I dont see anything odd With that when it comes to military Equipment.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 05:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Take a look at the video spy66 posted, then feel free to go on youtube to argue in the comment section.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: ALoveSupreme
Hey, EVERYBODY looking at the Russia / Ukraine topics here should definitely take a look at this new thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

New information (or disinformation) on a sophisticated psychological warfare program of the Russians.


That's the way to try and derail topics.

So if one angle simply does not work, then looky here, more bad Russians just for you, quick, run and get your daily dose of hate and fear!
edit on 25-7-2014 by StateOfWar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

No one is saying that an Su-25 can't fly higher than its service ceiling. To quote Wikipedia:


The service ceiling is the maximum usable altitude of an aircraft. Specifically, it is the density altitude at which flying in a clean configuration, at the best rate of climb airspeed for that altitude and with all engines operating and producing maximum continuous power, will produce a given rate of climb (a typical value might be 100 feet per minute climb or 30 metres per minute,[1] or on the order of 500 feet per minute climb for jet aircraft). Margin to stall at service ceiling is 1.5 g.[citation needed]


The maximum height an aircraft can reach while still remaining airborne is its absolute ceiling. However, as a plane exceeds its service ceiling performance and airspeed begin to drop. Even if the Su-25 is below it's service ceiling it can't keep up with a 777. How do you expect to keep up when it's over its service ceiling?



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: spy66

No one is saying that an Su-25 can't fly higher than its service ceiling. To quote Wikipedia:


The service ceiling is the maximum usable altitude of an aircraft. Specifically, it is the density altitude at which flying in a clean configuration, at the best rate of climb airspeed for that altitude and with all engines operating and producing maximum continuous power, will produce a given rate of climb (a typical value might be 100 feet per minute climb or 30 metres per minute,[1] or on the order of 500 feet per minute climb for jet aircraft). Margin to stall at service ceiling is 1.5 g.[citation needed]


The maximum height an aircraft can reach while still remaining airborne is its absolute ceiling. However, as a plane exceeds its service ceiling performance and airspeed begin to drop. Even if the Su-25 is below it's service ceiling it can't keep up with a 777. How do you expect to keep up when it's over its service ceiling?


What if the SU25 didnt keep up but whent head on from an angle?

There were no radar signature that showed the the SU was fallowing the MH17 at 33 000 ft. The SU 25 showed up when it bruke the 16 404 ft tracking altitude for the radar.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: StateOfWar

Business jets are designed with high lift wings that allow them to fly high on a low thrust to weight ratio. Military aircraft are designed with thin wings, that don't provide as much lift, to allow them to maneuver at high Gs.

There's a huge difference.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

So now radar can't see below the ceiling of a loaded Su-25? You really think that Russia doesn't have a radar that can see below that, even at long range? Or is the Su-25 suddenly stealthy?



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

So now radar can't see below the ceiling of a loaded Su-25? You really think that Russia doesn't have a radar that can see below that, even at long range? Or is the Su-25 suddenly stealthy?


I think they have radars that have seen the Whole thing, but the one they used on the debrief was said to be on stand by and only tracked flights above 16404 ft.

I cant use anything else to argue With, because nothing else have been presented.

EDIT: personally i think russia is waiting for the US to present theirs, or that they are just waiting just in case the US come With other accusations.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: StateOfWar

Business jets are designed with high lift wings that allow them to fly high on a low thrust to weight ratio. Military aircraft are designed with thin wings, that don't provide as much lift, to allow them to maneuver at high Gs.

There's a huge difference.


I bet the SU25 wings are made for lift that differ from a fighter jet that does 9+ Gs.

NB i am just assuming now because i havent checked



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

Radar on standby isn't transmitting at all, it won't see anything at any altitude. When it's in standby the transmitter is warming up, depending on the radar 30 minutes or more, but the antenna isn't rotating (if it's a rotating antenna) and it's not transmitting. Most military radar sets will go into standby so they don't have a long warmup period before they start transmitting.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

Radar on standby isn't transmitting at all, it won't see anything at any altitude. When it's in standby the transmitter is warming up, depending on the radar 30 minutes or more, but the antenna isn't rotating (if it's a rotating antenna) and it's not transmitting. Most military radar sets will go into standby so they don't have a long warmup period before they start transmitting.


Well the general said that the radar was on stand by mode and that it only tracked flights above 16404 ft.

So i have to assume that the radar could track flights.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

No, they aren't. You can tell just by looking at them. It's still a supercritical wing. The Frogfoot needs to be able to turn hard at low altitude so that it can avoid ground fire.

The wing of a business jet is almost supercritical, but it has more curve to the upper surface, which means that it generates more lift than a military aircraft will, which means it can fly higher.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 30  31  32    34  35 >>

log in

join