Still no answer to it? I’m giving a legitimate question made to forward the conversation, for it to be brushed off by two people and called “cope” is hilariously hypocritical.
I’m not sure what conclusion you’ll come to when you’re arguing with someone who I can guess with 100% certainty just shills on multiple online boards at the same time. You can check his post history to see how the goalpost moves
Ah, think I misread your comment.
It is insanely hard to reach conclusions with people of his caliber.
Simply seeing how he steered this conversation off-topic is enough to prove such.
Hell, I checked his comment history… It’s hilarious how true it is.
He’ll do anything in the world to try and show up Russia as incompetent, even conflating 1 singular ATGM kill from years ago to every helicopter kill in the war… And calling a 2010s ATGM with terminal guidance + advanced maneuvering techniques “primitive”.
Not going much into this but i have seen atleast 3 in the last years
1 Like
As you say, colleague.
Coolio, do you have any videos to them? I’ve only seen what I believe was the first.
Two. In exactly the same spot. I might be wrong, but it was likely the same ATGM crew. I don’t know why two helicopters would hover in the same place — maybe it makes it easier to distinguish a tank from a farm tractor — but I don’t recall seeing a circus like this in any other war, lol.
1 Like
The F-35’s computers were installed when America had chip manufacturing processes similar to what Russia uses in ~2013-2014. This is just nonsense.
The speed of a computer in 2010 from Russia is more than enough to run the equipment on the F-35 in 2020. Moore’s law ensured that computer processor efficiency and speed plateaued by that time… Anything faster isn’t necessary at all for such a platform. Efficiency and reducing heat & power requirements at that point is what matters and the Su-57 doesn’t have these issues since it is not forced to be as compact or constrained by size & weight requirements for carrier use.
Y’all should get back on topic
1 Like
Here’s the Google translated image for reference:
Do note that just the nanometer number isn’t enough to tell how good the process is but, 28nm, while ancient, is better than I expected. PowerPC though, that’s a name I haven’t seen in a long time, and the chip oddly seems limited to 8gb of RAM.
Damn, props to them.
I doubt you recall your last deployment either, or especially a peer/peer conflict.
The processors in the AN/APG-77 and AN/APG-81 radars are also based on PowerPC architecture, if I’m not mistaken.
1 Like
I clearly remember that the Americans didn’t ride into frontal assaults on their artillery tractors and golf carts in Iraq and Yugoslavia. And you two somehow still haven’t explained to me why.
Because it isn’t a part of the conversation and is simply an attempt to misdirect the topic. Not one single person in this thread but you cares about russian ground capabilities, nor infantry effectiveness. The topic is on aircraft, either stick to it or leave.
Considering that F-35s are currently being upgraded with the TR-3 spec because the old system wasn’t enough for the upcoming Block 4, no the old US computers aren’t enough. Also, do note that the USA has control over the largest pool of experienced computer science professionals, on account of having the vast majority of worlds leading hardware and software companies within its boarders so it can squeeze the absolute most out of its hardware.
Interesting, I figured that they would have moved to another platform by now, but we all know how allergic governments are to change. They probably were using PowerPC an those radar’s predecessors also and probably didn’t want to spend time rewriting and validating a ton of code just to move over to another platform though.
Sorry, if in your world of pink unicorns aviation exists on its own, but in the real world, the task of aviation is to support ground troops. If in 1991, the American command, after losing a couple of dozen planes in the most incompetent way, had switched to ‘literally the most effective suppression tactic’ of bombing fields with unguided rockets, the Americans would probably have had to storm Iraqi positions head-on, attaching garden gates to their LAVs. And losses would have been replenished in Louisiana prisons, offering pardons to thugs for participating in the war. But history doesn’t have a subjunctive mood, and we know Desert Storm as it was. So this isn’t an attempt to misdirect the topic.
1 Like
Perhaps this architecture is best suited for real-time systems.
Could be, I have read about it in a book before due to its “battle” against x86, otherwise I don’t know much about it.
Which a 5th gen air superiority fighter would be entirely incapable of doing…?
Do you think this is a “gotcha!” moment for your argument? Or have you legitimately forgotten what the topic is…
In 1991 there was no peer conflict that America was engaged in. They were not fighting enemies with 9K331s, with the best anti-air systems being rudimentary 2K12s firing missiles that were designed in the late '50s. If Iraq had been flying F-4Bs, their air force would be about as modern as their air defense network.
The most modern thing they had were MANPADS… They were nothing but dual band IR platforms with very limited IRCCM capability, and they still managed to down Tornadoes and F-16s. Most close-calls and legitimate damage of aircraft were due to a large majority of sorties being sent out with Mk82s and Mk84s, and a large amount of CBUs.
Hell, put a B-52 against any national superpower in the modern era and it would be gone in minutes. No amount of SEAD/DEAD can eliminate MANPADS with ranges of upwards of 10km slant / 7km vertical carried by quite literally any grunt on the ground.
America hadn’t had to resort to rocket runs with its heavy use of cluster munitions during the time. The Gulf was littered with white phosphorus and cluster munitions, rockets were the absolute least of America’s arsenal during a time where there was little to no regulation on munitions use on irregular forces and militias.
Funny, I didn’t know this entire tirade about Iraq had anything to do with
4 Likes
Umm, are you even aware of what the Ukrainian army was like in the first 3 months of the war? I have some shocking news for you.
Was I talking to a madman this whole time?
The 2K12 was developed in the 60s, with four modifications of the complex since then, the latest of which was adopted in the late 70s and produced until the mid-80s. Where do you get your information on weapon systems?
1 Like
Bit of an over simplification. It was detecting them, and only because it knew where to look. Completely different from an initial invasion and having to 360’ your sky’s.
They also can’t keep them on. When the f117 was shot down, they knew where to look and ONLY once it was close enough they popped it on and went for it(I’m like 95% sure of this exact order of events). And it ONLY did that because it had Serbian sources in Italy that relay to them no sorties took off in order to run SEAD/DEAD.
The only radar that could track them is a rather large and obtuse radar that is as defeat-able as it gets, and the only reason it could was because they knew where to look, it was undefended and the pilots were over confident.
Radars like that wouldn’t work in combat these days because the minute it pops on harms are slinging, because sorties are multi layered for stuff like this.
While this is a bit of an overboard response, the f117 was absolutely a fluke and will never be repeated.
This wasn’t some “Serbs figured out and broke stealth 30 years ago.” It was simply and complete and utter failure/fluke.
I mean the Rafael shot down an f22… when it was running clean and the f22 had fuel tanks and all.
There was some engagement where typhoons took on f22’s again with similarly disadvantaged f22’s and disadvantaged scenarios and the f22 still came out on top a lot. The only claim the euro fighters could make was that they won some of the times. When they were running low fuel and no armaments and the f22 was fully decked out if memory serves correctly.
I think people severely underestimate just how good the f22 is, because thankfully it’s always training exercises and stat comparisons of known aspects and not seeing what happens in reality.
1 Like