http://www.alert5.com/2006/04/fa-18f...own-f-22a.html
Вид для печати
Баян однако :) Интересно в каком еще ракурсе пилоты намучились сбивать F-22? :p
Дык, я не понял - это иллюстрация к вопросу о "прокладках"? Как штурмовой утюг умудрился пушкой завалить сверхсовременный суперманевренный истребитель?
С каких пор F18 стал "штурмовым утюгом" ?Цитата:
Сообщение от dentonjc
А мне картинка нравится - приятно видеть F-22 в прицеле.
А там ссылочка к коментариям интересна
С самого рождения. А вы не знали?Цитата:
Сообщение от dark_wing
Чем дальше, тем интересне...Цитата:
Сообщение от dentonjc
Все-таки ваше мнение ошибочно.
В силу относительности всего сущего мнение любого человека о любой сущности ошибочно, я по этому поводу не комплексую :)Цитата:
Сообщение от dark_wing
а где побольше таких фоток насмотреться:)?
Да это для рекламы Super Hornet.По идее она и близко к F-22 не должна приблизится.Он ее должен за 50км сбить.
это гунзо так что всё намана, оба у обоих в прицеле были и в подобных ракурсах, в реальных гунзовских тренировках других не видел, ф-18 такой же истребитель как и все,, "да из тебя какой солдат... тебя хоть сразу в медсанбат...
а из меня такой солдат как изо всех" в.с.
кстати о сбитии за 50км, любое излучение фиксируется, так что сбить за 50км пожалуй ниодним из видов ракет так просто не получится, а вот когда бой перейдёт на визуальное сопровождение, там кто первый аим-9х(или ракета того же класса) отстегнёт от пилона тот и победит, хотя и она не панацея, так что гунзо не такой уж динозавр как кажется
Это что за язык?Цитата:
это гунзо так что всё намана
Насчет излучения я гдето читал что у Раптора такой радар что он может так излучать что его не уловиш.
Эти детекторы излучения могут засекать только излучение определеной мощности.И если мощность сигнала меньше то он не срабатывает.
Гунзо = Guns OnlyЦитата:
Сообщение от Bird06
тренировочный бой с использованием только пушек.
Я не знаю насколько все разбираются в авиации, но условные поединки происходят по разным правилам :) Это ракурс говорит абсолютно не очем.
Надо мне как нибудь заснять с носа F-18 а потом написать что мой Arrow
подошел внезапно и невидимо пока не gun down Hornet :beer: :)
чем меньше мощность тем труднее прожеч помехи, а наведение на крайнем участке ракеты идёт через гсн так что даже если сам раптор не будет идентефицирован то ракета и её ракурс будут обнаружены вовремя, для адекватного противодействияЦитата:
Сообщение от Bird06
данный ракурс говорит как минимум о двух векторная скорость раптора в сторону хорнета ~0 узлов, хорнета - 200, бой проводится на ближних дистанциях, в нашем случае расстояние до цели 900фитсов, а вот каковы были начальные условия не столь важноЦитата:
Сообщение от RB
почему 0 а не 20(200-180),,, потому что скорость обозначена как иас,, т,е, без маркировки траст,, значит на высоте 15000ф(4.5км) реальная скорость будет близка к 200узлам
но с другой стороны:) слева от индикатора скорости буковка у что она означает не знаю:) но это не важно потому что на той же высоте у ф18е(в игре) та же скорость соответствует тому же значению м, что на фотке, кстати перегрузка на этих же скорости и высоте соответствует 18*уа, какие молодцы эти симуляторщики:)
Интересно как ты будеш противодействовать если ракета на тебя наведется?Тогда уже поздно будет.
Да к тому же Рэптор будет работать вместь с АВАКСОМ он ему всю обстановку будет по линку передавать и свой радар ему включать даже не придется.
Цитата:
Сообщение от MIGHAIL
Ты уверен 210V это скорость Хорнета ?
я уверен, что в нашем случае 210 это скорость сближения хорнета с целью,, скорость хорнаета(воздушная) 183Цитата:
Сообщение от RB
кстати,, вот почти аналогичный угол в f-18e(ot jane's):)
дико извиняюсь, а вот символ слева (над буквой М), похожий на обкусанный знак бесконечности - он что означает?
Угол атаки.
Альфа.
ну это наверно в недалёком будущем, основной дистанс средний и дальний пуск проходят по связке с радаром носителя, а противодействия такие же как от радара, ракета ничем по сути своей от него не отличается если гсн активная,, и противодействия соответствующие, 3-9 дэкой и диполи, всё стандартное,, на определённых ракурсах и аим9х соскакиваетЦитата:
Сообщение от Bird06
Вот что прочитал в американских комментариях к этой фотке... Кстати ктонить перевести может ?
" Let me begin by saying that while the Super Bug did get a simulated "kill" on the Raptor, its not the first time it has happened and does not present an embarasment to the Air Force. Nor does this show the Air Force is wasting billions on the 22.
F-15s out of Langley AFB have bagged simulated kills of their own in engagements against the F-22. That is what Air Force Captain John Echols, detached to the 27th FS said in the recent edition of Air Force Magazine.
Quoting Echols "the F-15s at Langley 'do a real good job' as adversaries and that sometimes the F-15s 'win' against an F-22, but [those kills are] a rare event. When it does, it provides ample fodder for tactics evaluation."
The gun kill on the Raptor by just happened to be a rarity. In any case it will help make the Raptor driver a better warfighter if you ask me. The purpose of Red Flag is to train our pilots is it not? As I said on a forum I frequent, the Navy is merely spinning one seconds worth of HUD footage. Given the 22's performance to date, I feel that it is worth the investment."
А что значит перечеркнутая надпись GUN на HUD?
Скорее всего режим "тренаж", т.е. когда оружие не будет стрелять ни под каким предлогом %)
да, или имитация или неготова.
нули - элапсед тайм вычисленный. а на таких дистанциях и в ганс невычисляется. не разобрал что за чёрным квадратом. наколенник плохо передаёт детали, гляну на напольнике.
скорость поступательная всегда слева. справа вертикальная.
Ракурс красив, вот только толку с него... Напоминает съемку гункамеры с "боев" F-16 vs MiG-29. Ракурсы хороши, но поразить противника (в том ролики - МиГи) - если только случайно.
Кинь ссылкой ПЛЗЦитата:
Сообщение от Max Ader
Sen-Sor
Была на Авиабазе, до "перестройки".
http://forums.military.com/eve/forum...#5230033001001
Продублирую здесь на всякий:
A standard safety rule, which was in effect during this mission, is maintaining 1000ft of separation. Below is the text of two emails I received about it. The first is from the technical director of air-to-air testing of the F-22 out at Nellis, and the second is from a pilot in the 27th Fighter Squadron (F-22) at Langley AFB.
Here's the first email. At this time he hadn't heard about it yet, so he could only tell me about the HUD symbology visible in the two video frames:
"Jim, Nope, I have not heard of it. Here are my comments:
1. One cannot make an assessment from one or two pictures of gun camera video. One needs to see the video from the time the pilot squeezes the trigger and hence the "witness mark" in the upper left corner of the first picture. Also, with Director type of gun sights, there is usually a BATR or RATR (Bullets At Target Range or Rounds At Target Range) display that comes on which accounts for the bullet time-of-flight (which in this instance would be about .33 seconds based upon a slant range of 1000 feet and an average bullet velocity of 3000 fps (I believe the muzzle velocity of a 20 mm round is around 3300 fps when it leaves the barrel of the gun) that allows the pilots to make an assessment of how good their gun shot was in the debriefing. Since this probably happened between a pilot of the 27 FS at Langley and an F/A-18 pilot from Oceana, I will ping one of my buds in the 27th to see if anyone wants to fess up and opine. I would imagine that this happened on a Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM ride) and may even have come from a defensive BFM setup with the F/A-18 off of the perch at 3000 feet. It would be interesting to know the actual particulars of how this particular simulated gun shot came about.
2. From the first picture, one can ascertain the following: (1) The witness mark is in the upper left hand corner (dark square) [this means the gun is firing -- DJim] (2) The pilot is at 179 knots (inside the left rectangle), 0.36 Mach, and pulling 1.6 Gs (on left hand side) and with an angle-of-attack (alpha symbol) of 20.3 degrees and his nose is down about 26 degrees of pitch (using the "whiskey" "W" which represents the aircraft's waterline and the pitch ladder where the dashed lines means a negative pitch angle). (3) The pilot is at 1000 ft slant range from the target which can be ascertained from the gun reticule where the One o'clock position indicates 1000 ft. It is also displayed digitally in the view on the right. The fact that the slant range is displayed means the shooter has a radar lock. (4) The pilot has an "IN RNG" indication above the gun pipper which means he is in the gun envelope, at least according to the algorithms resident in the aircraft's software. (5) The target, F-22A, appears to be near a 90 degree aspect angle (ascertained by visually looking at the target, but could be off by as much as + or - 20 degrees ). (6) The shooter has 200 Knots of closure (above the 1000 Ft of range which shows "200 Vc "(velocity of closure or closure velocity)) and is at 15,180 feet (right rectangle). (7) The shooter's velocity vector (looks like an airplane symbol when viewed from behind, i.e., a fuselage with a tail and wings) is at the bottom and just to right of center. This also support s being near a 90 degree aspect angle since the closure would be purely due to the shooter's velocity. (8) The shooter is approximately 90 degrees out of plane of the target since the shooter's orientation is vertical (that is, up and down in the picture) and the target's nose is pointed 90 degrees to the right of the shooter's plane of motion. Most effective gun shots require the shooter to be in the plane of motion of the target. (9) I am not sure what the 7.6 below the G indication means. I would need an F/A-18 TACMAN to figure out what all of the symbology means in this aircraft when in gun mode, but it is very similar to what is displayed in an F-15, imagine that. [this is the maximum G's he's pulled recently, I think during that flight? -- DJim] (10) Finally, I am not sure what the crossed out (X over the word GUN) GUN symbology means. Again, I would need an F/A-18 TACMAN (Tactical Manual). From the second picture, one can ascertain the following: (1) The witness mark is in the upper left hand corner (dark square) (2) The pilot is at 182 knots (inside the left rectangle), 0.37 Mach, and pulling 1.9 Gs (on left hand side) and with an angle-of-attack (alpha symbol) of 19.5 degrees and his nose is down about 29 degrees of pitch (using the "whiskey" "W" which represents the aircrafts waterline and the pitch ladder where the dashed lines means a negative pitch angle). (3) The pilot is at 900 ft slant range from the target which can be ascertained from the gun reticule where the One o'clock position indicates 1000 ft. It is also displayed digitally in the view on the right. The fact that the slant range is displayed means the shooter has a radar lock. {Another way to tell the range would be to know how large the diameter of the gun circle is and divide that into the wingspan of the target. In this case, if the wing span of the F-22A is 43 feet, it would subtend 43 mils at 1000 ft.} This is visual proof that the pilot has just violated the 1000 foot ROE bubble. What isn't clear is how close he came in subsequent video frames before he broke off his attempted gun shot. The only good news is the fact that he is NOT in the plane of motion of the target which should preclude the possibility of a mid-air. If this were the real world and he did put bullets on target and had piece parts come off, there would be a very good chance of the shooter fragging himself by flying through the target's debris. At this altitude and airspeed, the shooter is traveling about 391 ft per second (speed of sound equals 1057 fps time 0.37 Mach equals 391 fps) and therefore it will take him approximately 2.3 seconds to traverse the 900 feet to the target's flight path and overshoot. (4) The pilot has an "IN RNG" indication above the gun pipper which means he is in the gun envelope, at least according to the algorithms resident in the aircraft's software. (5) The target, F-22A, appears to be near a 90 degree aspect angle (ascertained by visually looking at the target, but could be off by as much as + or - 20 degrees. (6) The shooter has 210 Knots of closure (above the 1000 Ft of range which shows "210 Vc "(velocity of closure or closure velocity)) and is at 15,090 feet (right rectangle). (7) The shooter's velocity vector is off the display. (8) The shooter is approximately 90 degrees out of plane of the target since the shooter's orientation is vertical (that is, up and down in the picture) and the target's nose is pointed 90 degrees to the right of the shooter's plane of motion. Most effective gun shots require the shooter to be in the plane of motion of the target. (9) I am not sure what the 7.6 below the G indication means. I would need an F/A-18 TACMAN to figure out what all of the symbology means in this aircraft when in gun mode, but it is very similar to what is displayed in an F-15, imagine that. (10) Finally, I am not sure what the crossed out (X over the word GUN) GUN symbology means. Again, I would need an F/A-18 TACMAN (Tactical Manual)."
Here's the second email. I've removed the callsigns because I never found out if I should release them publicly and I didn't want to embarrass anyone. One discrepancy I noted at the time was the mismatch between the "3000ft" and the "9000ft." Subsequent clarification was that it was 3000ft:
"Far as Xxxxxx and I could tell it’s the only Hornet gun shot of a Raptor in existence. It was a 27th pilot (but I won’t tell who, not Xxxxxx or I). He was flying a 3,000 foot 300 knot setup against a demo configured super hornet (betting you won’t see the same from a combat configured jet – just a guess). Why they did that and how he ended up there is beyond me – but he did – I’m sure he could have avoided it (unless there was some gross mismatch I don’t know about – like fuel weight). On the 2nd part – it was a gross violation of the ROE (that part I heard about of course), pass pretty close to the Raptor as the pictures tell the story, it was not a 135 aspect bust – just well inside the bubble, at least with 200 knots of closure and the nose in lead. Nothing like having your fangs through the floor to get a fleeting hero shot on a 130 million dollar jet eh? Pretty dumb move on his part – lucky he missed with his 50 million dollar golden BB. (or however much a super hornet costs these days – at least we know it’s less than a Raptor)… Yyyyyy PS – here’s a blurb we sent out a while back – this did circulate all the way through the navy – go figure, even had to answer to guys up on the hill asking questions – sometimes I really miss the Eagle jet… "The Navy rumors are all false. We’ve flown with them on numerous occasions and they have had as much luck seeing the Raptor as a blind man. The only way we can pay them back for Red Air is with BFM because they can’t find us on BVR setups. Our standard deal with them is “you be our ACT/ACM red air and we’ll throw you a BFM bone every now and then.” "The attached photos are being sent out across the Navy. They are the first and only shots of a Raptor getting gunned by a Super Hornet. It was a demo-configured E/F flying against XXXXXX. The setup was 9000’ LAB, 300 knots “fights on.” I don’t know how XXXXX ended up in front of the guy but he did get gunned…and nearly speared as well. Note the range, aspect and closure of the shot. FYI – the bubble is 1000’!"
I'd guess that maybe the F-18 just got through pulling hard around (hence the 7.6G indication below his current G indication and his low airspeed even though he's in a nose-down attitude) to line up the F-22 as best he could in this high-deflection, off-plane, high-closure snap shot. What those two aircraft (and possibly any others that were also involved) were doing prior to these pictures such that the F-18 was able to manage to just briefly get the F-22 in his sights is still unknown. What it demonstrates is that even totally kick-***, massively dominant jets like the F-22 (well, actually the only jets like an F-22 are other F-22s) can manage to get tagged occasionally in WVR if the F-22 driver makes a mistake.
Displacedjim