reply to post by 1000hanz
Fantasies indeed.
Well, maybe if you actually read what my post said, and what your article says, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Reading is
fundamental.
Your source said...:
MiG-29s of the German Luftwaffe have demonstrated their advantage in within-visual-range (WVR) engagements during training missions
against Western F-14, F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 fighters.[3]
Well, sorry for asking, but, would that be the same German Luftwaffe that retired their Mig-29 aircraft in September 2003?
The success of the MiG-29 during DACT was partly due to its ability to use its helmet-mounted sight (HMS) to achieve high off-boresight
targeting solutions for the Archer SRM.
No argument.
In contrast, the U.S. aircraft were only able to lock onto targets in a narrow window directly in front of the aircraft's nose. However, the USAF
and US Navy achieved Initial Operational Capability of the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System and AIM-9X in late 2003."
That in itself is incorrect, both the F-16 and F-15 have short range auto-acquisition modes which are laterally within HUD limits, and vertically 60
degrees above the nose. With a role rate of more than 180 degrees per second on the F-16, this is something not to take lightly.
Your sources, were at the earliest, 2003, or, infact, earlier. U.S. pursued and fielded there helmet display, JHMCS in conjunction with the Raytheon
AIM-9X, in November 2003 with the 12th and 19th Fighter Squadrons at Elmendorf AFB. A full two months after Germany sold there Mig-29s to Poland. Thus
then the whole 'advantage' the migs had was negated. AESA also allows a massive amount of airspace to be scanned simoltaneously, and should allow
the targets displayed ON the JHMCS visor (AESA shouldn't need to be cued at short range). Schelum & MSA cannot do this. Are you going to keep posting
irrelevant data?
Furthermore, it would be nice, if you actually read my posts...:
In reality, Block II & Block III Super Hornets used in an integrated package will have far superior sitautional awareness, countermeasures,
and weapons, with only slight, irrelevant, or non-existent, deficiencies in some key areas, compared to potential adversaries.
The USN or even Australia would be operating in conjunction with JORN, AEGIS, and AEW&C. The radar would be the AN/APG-79, AESA. The weapons would be
AIM-120C-7, or perhaps AIM-120D, along with AIM-9X, or ASRAAM, cued with JHMCS. The Hornet has reduced RCS. So, let me get this straight, with
superiority in nearly every single area, we are supposed to believe the Super Hornet will be inferior, because of some slight, irrelevant deficiencies
in maneuverability? Riiiight. Furthermore, training is far superior here, than compared to potential adversaries, Navy and Air Force have Red Flag &
TOPGUN. Operators of Migs & Sukhois are often the most under trained in the world - Germany 5 years ago does not count. Yet the admittedly superior
Su-30MKI, got its
'brains drilled out' at Red Flag by F-15s with twin bags on the
wings.
As far as I'm concernd this person you talk about hasn't convinced me he even flew it,
Well the information regarding the G-limits, Stability Augmentation System, Shchelum & ARCHER are all public knowledge, and true.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Read the posts.
Nice Avatar you have there are you a boom?
Wish I was....

I don't like it, it looks messy as my Avatar, but as it is a mini-profile background image, I do not know how to delete it.

My old avatar was a F-18F in a vertical climb, and that's what I intend to change it to.
[edit on 5/11/2008 by C0bzz]