Russian Su-27 "Chases" Off NATO Fighter Jet

[MPN11]

Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator

MPN, in the CW any aircraft capable of attacking the UK would not have needed to see its target - conventional or nuclear.

When Fencer aircraft could reach East Anglia their mapping and navigation kit would have got them on target even without radar or visual acquisition.

I wonder why we were allowed to keep working on the subject? Oh, well, water under the bridge.

[weemonkey]

Actually looking again it seems to suffer from pixilation as soon as it gets the clouds as a backdrop..?

[weemonkey]

Originally Posted by melmothtw

Personally, I thought the US mil got its #### together re uniform camouflage in the mid-80s to early 2000s - 3 schemes (woodland, arctic, desert) that seemed to perfectly fit their intended environment while affording the US a look that set them apart from other nations (surely, part of the role of a uniform). They could have added a fourth more specifically tailored to Afghanistan if they needed to, but the environment hasn't changed so why did the camo need

I'd be a bit bashful too with that backdrop! Still 1000% inprovement on the predecessor .

[MPN11]

“I can’t see you, Sergeant Williams!”


Oops ... wrong Thread!

[Deskscribbler]

Sorry if I'm being a bit daft (or stating the bleeding obvious) - but isn't the 'footage' from a computer game? Specifically the 'LockOn' or 'Digital Combat Simulator' series? The Russian media used the same game to present 'satellite photos' of a 'Su-27 downing MH17' a while ago...

[Thrust Augmentation]

B-24D 41-23689 "Minerva".

More interesting assembly ships HERE

[Stitchbitch]

For info interests sake, which F15 is easier to spot in visual range, the light grey C or the ‘shoot me down grey’ E?

[Hipper]

Originally Posted by Thrust Augmentation

B-24D 41-23689 "Minerva".

More interesting assembly ships HERE

Thanks or that.

I love the one about a third the way down where a Liberator has tail damage caused by a collision with 'another Liberator who didn't see her and got too close'!

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by Martin the Martian

I've often wondered why grey has prevailed for medium/high altitude ops, particularly in the west. PRU blue was the standard finish during WW2 and it certainly seemed to work well.

Depends what you are trying to hide from - PRU blue was used to hide from beneath, both ground and air fo air, but stood out like a sore thumb from above over cloud (Hence the High fighter scheme used PRU blue underneath but Medium Sea grey on top, as there may be a threat looking down)

[MPN11]

My deleted post about other Asembly Ships suggests I should leave the discussion to others. Enjoy.

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by MPN11

My deleted post about other Asembly Ships suggests I should leave the discussion to others. Enjoy.

That is a ill-judged deletion, I did indeed enjoy the contribution, and these incredible assemblers were an eye-opener, if not a blinder! Thank you.

[Tiger G]

Originally Posted by Deskscribbler

Sorry if I'm being a bit daft (or stating the bleeding obvious) - but isn't the 'footage' from a computer game? Specifically the 'LockOn' or 'Digital Combat Simulator' series? The Russian media used the same game to present 'satellite photos' of a 'Su-27 downing MH17' a while ago...

That's what I was wondering in my initial post.....is it real or fake ?? . I didn't think the Eagle driver would have banked away like that so he / she had no visual on the SU ??

[TEEEJ]

Originally Posted by Tiger G

That's what I was wondering in my initial post.....is it real or fake ?? . I didn't think the Eagle driver would have banked away like that so he / she had no visual on the SU ??

Less aggressive in this video Su-27/F-16 over the Baltic.

[Deskscribbler]

Originally Posted by Tiger G

That's what I was wondering in my initial post.....is it real or fake ?? . I didn't think the Eagle driver would have banked away like that so he / she had no visual on the SU ??

It's bizarre, I'll give it that! If it's real, it's very odd indeed - and knowing the Russian's love of fakery at the moment you never know...

[meleagertoo]

Originally Posted by Monarch Man

Lets be honest an interception is designed to show presence and a response, a little negative G and top rudder would have made the Flanker driver look silly and unprofessional.

I'm doubtless not the only one unversed in combat tactics who doesn't understand the significance of that. Can you describe the why's and wherefores of that manoeuvre?

[NutLoose]

'Twas the Flanker that departed, the F15 remained, so far from being chased away... as for the he wouldn't see him turn, his wingman would as I assume he was filming it.

[hoodie]

Filming was from an intercepted Russian aircraft, apparently. Source of video is Russian, anyway.

[Asturias56]

I think camouflage is wise.

But painting every plane the same is stupid.... simple OCR can pick up a known pattern pretty quick. You should use the colours and the general design but vary it from.plane to plane at random.. but that's not the military way I guess........

[weemonkey]

O/T

Originally Posted by MPN11

“I can’t see you, Sergeant Williams!”


Oops ... wrong Thread!

Close!! Just need to get rid of obviously human round heads, pink faces and stupid black guns!! Note how black unit marking stands out on the helmet of observer!

[Asturias56]

and the flag.......................