Your Nation's Air Force Mark II:

[San-Silvacian]

The need of new training craft... So i make it.

DIP (Development in Progress)
(Image)

Her name is Shelenia Irene. Born as advanced trainer craft, but used by our border guard as light fighter to engage dragon riding sky pirates, she is armed with low cost IR guided multipurpose missile. Her sensor suites are simple consist of small with circular antenna of 40 cm in diameter, a heresy in the eyes of Vihenian radar designers who favor the largest possible antenna. but they can't do anything to since the target is not small thereby require no multi decibels of power aperture products of larger fighter such as Shelenia Blanchett.

The radar is an FMICW AESA type named as "Rezeda" Also called as "Little bird" Due to the nature of its FMICW (Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave) operations the peak power of the radar is relatively small with only 400-500 watt peak power with duty cycle of 60% The antenna hardware is also very light due to absence of multiple doppler filter network often found in our typical fighter radar. Her detection range is around 100 Km for dragon sized target with RCS of 20 Sqm. Rezeda is also equipped with NTCR (Non Cooperative Target Recognition) mode to allow identification of dragon species based on modulation of their wing movement.

Other sensor suites includes optical threat warning system to warn pilot of incoming missile or dragon preparing fireball or beam strike. Conventional RHAWS is also fitted with some addition of sensor to detect emission of magic attack preparation, allowing pilot to take evasive action or engage the magician using guided missile.

In propulsion section, Irene is powered by two turbofan engines with no reheat, providing maximum speed of Mach 0.9.

Well the one depicted above is the trainer version. The fighter one will have circular nose.

*licks lips*

YaK-130 + F-16.

Is good.

Not an orbital fighter just because its ceiling is classified. The top speed of the F-15 is classified, doesn't mean its trying to be pull a Back to the Future on us though.

That's what you think. Little known fact: US won the battle of Yorktown due to overwhelming air superiority thanks to time traveling F-15s. If I was at home right now I'd show you guys some historical proof.

[Oaledonia]

Actually none of that is true. Ideal air force:

1) JAS 39
2) Some helicopters
3) Some prop trainers

brazil?
actually we do have a few transports. and yeah, i know you're kidding.
i still wish brazil would have accepted russia's offer to participate in the development of the PAK-FA and Su-35. but our president selected the puny gripen instead, becuase it was the cheapest and commie ex-guerrilla fighters don't like to fund the military.

on the whole F-22 vs PAK-FA thing: while i agree that the F-22 is way stealthier and superior in most areas: assuming pilots of equal skill, wouldn't the PAK-FA perform better in dogfights, due to the leading-edge root extensions, independent thrust vectoring nozzles (ability to control yaw instead of just pitch) and the IRST system?

F-22 can thrust vector.

[Helvagon]

Much of our military information is classified, but we do have space fighter units able to travel extremely fast circling each one of our planets. The military is rather small though, as we are thousands of light years away from the closest other civilization.

[The Akasha Colony]

It's kind of interesting to think though that the F-22 might indeed be an orbital fighter since it's ceiling is classified and it uses near full-pressure suits everywhere but for the helmet.

It can't be an orbital fighter, since air breathing engines don't work in orbit (where there's no air) and there's no such thing as "almost airtight," if the helmet isn't, then the suit as a whole isn't. Especially given that the helmet is kind of the most important part.

[The Corparation]

It's kind of interesting to think though that the F-22 might indeed be an orbital fighter since it's ceiling is classified and it uses near full-pressure suits everywhere but for the helmet.

It can't be an orbital fighter, since air breathing engines don't work in orbit (where there's no air) and there's no such thing as "almost airtight," if the helmet isn't, then the suit as a whole isn't. Especially given that the helmet is kind of the most important part.

Nonsensical. Who needs an airtight helmet in space? There's no air. Ego no need to have an airtight helmet. Checkmate astronauts.

[San-Silvacian]

btw corp

[The Corparation]

btw corp

(Image)

Exactly. Pictures never lie people. It was the good ol USAF that swing the tide of the revolutionary war in favor of FREEDOM.

[United states of brazilian nations]

brazil?
actually we do have a few transports. and yeah, i know you're kidding.
i still wish brazil would have accepted russia's offer to participate in the development of the PAK-FA and Su-35. but our president selected the puny gripen instead, becuase it was the cheapest and commie ex-guerrilla fighters don't like to fund the military.

on the whole F-22 vs PAK-FA thing: while i agree that the F-22 is way stealthier and superior in most areas: assuming pilots of equal skill, wouldn't the PAK-FA perform better in dogfights, due to the leading-edge root extensions, independent thrust vectoring nozzles (ability to control yaw instead of just pitch) and the IRST system?

F-22 can thrust vector.

i know that, but AFAIK they're not independent (if a nozzle moves up, the other does as well), and the PAK-FA can move thm independently, allowing for faster rolls. correct me if i'm wrong though, i'm not sure about what i'm talking here.

[Kassaran]

My bad, not orbital, but pretty damned close...

The link given for the problem with the clothing about a page back I believe has an article that states what I have, but in more learned words... as for the F-15's, they look as though they were photoshopped in over what truly was supposed to go there. A pair of stolen USAF PAJ-FA-22 Supermetafighters. Because the united world government still hasn't revealed itself to the public though, we are forbidden from seeing its trademark 5th Gen fighter.

[San-Silvacian]

My bad, not orbital, but pretty damned close...

The link given for the problem with the clothing about a page back I believe has an article that states what I have, but in more learned words... as for the F-15's, they look as though they were photoshopped in over what truly was supposed to go there. A pair of stolen USAF PAJ-FA-22 Supermetafighters. Because the united world government still hasn't revealed itself to the public though, we are forbidden from seeing its trademark 5th Gen fighter.

The bold is were my brain officially stopped working.

Like what the fuck kind of retarded shit are you spilling out.

[The Corparation]

[quote="Kassaran";p="19795613"]My bad, not orbital, but pretty damned close...

The link given for the problem with the clothing about a page back I believe has an article that states what I have, but in more learned words... as for the F-15's, they look as though they were photoshopped in over what truly was supposed to go there. A pair of stolen USAF PAJ-FA-22 Supermetafighters. Because the united world government still hasn't revealed itself to the public though, we are forbidden from seeing its trademark 5th Gen fighter.[/quote]
The highest flying air breathing aircraft was the blackbird family who had ceilings of around 27km up. The edge of space is usually defined as the karman line, it is 100 km up. Furthermore passing the karman line doesn't mean you're in orbit yet. The F-22 cannot hope to match the altitude of the blackbird. The blackbird can't even get close to the edge of space. The f-22 is not "close" to an orbital fighter.


(*a mig 25 beat it's maximum altitude achieved but that was achieved with a zoom climb it couldn't do level flight as high as the blackbird)

[Kassaran]

The highest flying air breathing aircraft was the blackbird family who had ceilings of around 27km up. The edge of space is usually defined as the karman line, it is 100 km up. Furthermore passing the karman line doesn't mean you're in orbit yet. The F-22 cannot hope to match the altitude of the blackbird. The blackbird can't even get close to the edge of space. The f-22 is not "close" to an orbital fighter.


(*a mig 25 beat it's maximum altitude achieved but that was achieved with a zoom climb it couldn't do level flight as high as the blackbird)

Fine, not orbital, but still, it's pretty high up there when you compare it to everything else we use. Now as for what I was saying, and before you all continue to call me out for my misinterpretations made by my dimunitive 18 year old mind:

Experts told a Congressional Committee on September 14th that the F-22 is different from all previous fighters. Itroutinely flies at altitudes above 50,000 feet. The plane's maximum ceiling is classified, but iexperts say the F-22 flies much higher than either the F-15 or the F-16. It also flies much higher than the F-18.

General Gregory Martin (USAF-Ret) testified before Congress on September 14th that, in fact, the F-22's high-altitude capabilities are more comparable with a U-2 Spy plane, or the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft than they are to a conventional fighter.

Both spy planes fly so high that pilots are required to wear full pressure-suits. Those suits look just like the orange spacesuits -- which used to be worn by astronauts for launch aboard the space shuttle.

But a fighter pilot cannot where a bulky space suit. For one thing, the helmet of a spacesuit is attached to a neck ring, and that means the helmet is immobile. In a dog-fight, the pilot would only be able to see in front of him -- posing a significant risk that he could be shot-down by an enemy coming in from behind or from the side -- an enemy he might never see.

Source: http://articles.ktuu.com/2012-09-22/cold-weather_34045939/2

[Oaledonia]

F-22 can thrust vector.

i know that, but AFAIK they're not independent (if a nozzle moves up, the other does as well), and the PAK-FA can move thm independently, allowing for faster rolls. correct me if i'm wrong though, i'm not sure about what i'm talking here.

The PAK-FA uses terribad engines, you know.

[San-Silvacian]

PAK-FA doesn't even have its production engines lol

[Purpelia]

PAK-FA doesn't even have its production engines lol

That plane is the Duke Nukem Forever of aircraft.

[Premislyd]

So looking for a sensible replacement for my F-14Ds and am kinda torn between either the Gripen or Rafale.

The only problem is that they seem on the "light end" and would be better off replacing my F-16Ns with them, rather than the F-14D.

[San-Silvacian]

So looking for a sensible replacement for my F-14Ds and am kinda torn between either the Gripen or Rafale.

The only problem is that they seem on the "light end" and would be better off replacing my F-16Ns with them, rather than the F-14D.

Rafale rapes ur stuff

[New Emphillon]

So out of a mix of boredom and curiosity, I decided to look for an aircraft that I wanted to at least try to modify, not for my nation's military, but just to see if it was possible. Since I've been playing Wargame: Red Dragon for the past week in my spare time, I saw the Il-102 and its capabilities in the game (probably umped up to make the aircraft effective in-game) and I wondered if it could possibly have been effective in battle if the Soviets hadn't dropped the prototype back in the 1980s for the Su-25.
After going over the aircraft's statistics and its design, I would sum up the Il-102 to be Ilyushin's attempt at trying to make a modern CAS aircraft with a touch of World War II-era design features, such as a rear cockpit built in to allow a rear gunner to control a remote controlled GSh-23L cannon on the tail of the aircraft and a good amount of armor to protect the aircraft from ground fire.
That being said, I've compiled a list of changes that I think would make the aircraft at least capable of surviving one combat mission:

1.) Lose the armor- it only makes the aircraft sluggish and puts more stress on the already weak engines. Why Ilyushin thought that adding armor to the Il-102 was a good idea during an age of military technology that moved away from AA guns and towards missiles is beyond me.
2.) Modify or switch out the engines- The prototype Il-102 used a non-afterburning version of the Mig-29's engines and the engines only had a service life of 2 years, a problem that would have been a financial nightmare for the Soviet Air Force.
3.) Get rid of the rear cockpit and turret- There is no point for the aircraft to have had these features in the first place, as it wouldn't have really protected the Il-102 and it only adds unnecessary weight to an already heavy aircraft. Ilyushin apparently had its head still stuck in World War II and the decade following it when it built this aircraft.
4.) Add modern electronics- it would be pretty expensive, but if a nation really wanted to put the money and effort into it, why not.
5.) Add modern ECM system

Now, there are a few problems with this, mainly the concern of financing such an undertaking. To modernize one aircraft alone would be a financial nightmare for any air force. Once your done with the modifications, one might as well buy a couple of Su-25s if they really wanted to have CAS aircraft. Another problem is the shift in modern military tactics: CAS aircraft, like the Il-102, Su-25, A-10 Thunderbolt, etc., were made to dive at armored columns and tear them apart, though this is not a viable option today. It would be too risky with all of the newer anti-aircraft defense systems around these days, all of which might smoke these aircraft right out of the sky.

What do you think guys? Is there anything else that should be added to the fix list? I want some opinions on this, as I'm still a rookie when it comes to getting technical about a military vehicle.

[United Earthlings]

Or, I could have typed out explicitly why your reasoning was wrong so that other, younger forum members who read it won't be coerced into thinking this a perfectly reasonable course of action to take. To be quite honest, I don't really care how or why you choose to RP but these threads have a reputation of being used as a source of military expertise and hence I and others would prefer the content on here was kept accurate and misleading details were adequately rebutted.

1. For some reason I can't fathom you've decided to exclusively focus on the second IC reason I stated {that being a possible grounding} as that being the primary reason I chose to employ both the F-22 and PAK-FA. That reasoning couldn't be further from the truth.

2. Many RL air forces employ a mixed fleet of Western & Soviet/Russian designs, so for future reference how exactly was I being inaccurate and misleading?

Are you trying to be obtuse or what? "I'm not justifying anything, I just gave reasons as to why I do it." There's no difference there.

For the sake of clarity, I was giving IC reasons not OOC reasons. If you can't tell the difference between the two, then I don't know what to say.

Then surely somebody who is as superior as they claim to the rest of us mere amateurs would be able to find the reasons behind each of the groundings and deduce that very few if any of these groundings were in response malfunctions that were in literal dire need of repair. For example, the USAF knew about the F-22's oxygen problem for years, they only grounded the fleet in direct response to a fatal accident.

Really, what you're proposing is akin to someone buying a new watch when their old watch is in for repair rather than just checking the time on their phone. Back to a previous example, even when the entire F-22 fleet was grounded, there were a multitude of other fighters that the USAF had to defend with.

1. Just curious, but why exactly does "literal dire need of repair" matter as the reason for the grounding? If a fleet's grounded, it's grounded and hence non-operational for however long it stays grounded. This harks back to my original point which seems to have been lost in all the noise, fleet groundings are a lot more common, for whatever the reason, then most would suppose.

2. As promised here's two prime examples plus numerous others. Been quite a few years, but the almost entire grounding of the US F-15 Fleet. and the grounding of the entire Spanish and German Eurofighter fleet.

Plus 3 pages worth of Fleet groundings

what the bloody hell are you smoking

Sarcasm, it's an acquired taste not to everyone's liking.

[Freihafen]

So looking for a sensible replacement for my F-14Ds and am kinda torn between either the Gripen or Rafale.

The only problem is that they seem on the "light end" and would be better off replacing my F-16Ns with them, rather than the F-14D.

attack super tomcat 21 gogo

[Premislyd]

So looking for a sensible replacement for my F-14Ds and am kinda torn between either the Gripen or Rafale.

The only problem is that they seem on the "light end" and would be better off replacing my F-16Ns with them, rather than the F-14D.

attack super tomcat 21 gogo

What

No

The idea is to get rid of the F-14s since they're ugly.

So looking for a sensible replacement for my F-14Ds and am kinda torn between either the Gripen or Rafale.

The only problem is that they seem on the "light end" and would be better off replacing my F-16Ns with them, rather than the F-14D.

Rafale rapes ur stuff

rong

[San-Silvacian]

attack super tomcat 21 gogo

What

No

The idea is to get rid of the F-14s since they're ugly.

Rafale rapes ur stuff

rong

sorry i mean mirage 4000

[Premislyd]

Rafale >>> Mirage 4000 tho

[Freihafen]

Considering your preference for an aircraft that would be in the same weight class as F-14, F-15N is probably the best choice in that regard unless you want to look to Soviet/Russian aircrafts...

[Premislyd]

Considering your preference for an aircraft that would be in the same weight class as F-14, F-15N is probably the best choice in that regard unless you want to look to Soviet/Russian aircrafts...

F-15N would've been chosen over the F-14.

Going from the F-14 to the F-15N is a big downgrade.