No F-106s have AWG-9 radars. No fighter is going to have a RCS of 3-5 m square unless it's clean (and I think I do recall calculations for all 4th generations from Eurofighter to MiG-35, clean or not). No clean fighter can engage in meaningful combat. What's wrong here?Beowulf wrote:Neither type of xESA is necessary for TWS operation. The AWG-9 is capable of tracking 24 seperate targets at once. With the improved electronics available in the late 80's compared to the 60's, the tracking range for both the MiG-31 and F-106H are likely to roughly identical. Also, the F-106 probably has a much lower RCS than 15m, an average fighter is 3-5m2.
The practical speed of re-orienting a mechanical array would be a pressing issue when engaging in missile combat. Electronically scanned arrays give true multi-tasking capability to the pilot - the mechanical radar would take 12-14 seconds to complete a scan, meaning it's true multi-target tracking abilities would be rather lacking.Beowulf wrote:PESA is not required for multiple target tracking.
I'm talking about F-106A successors as well. None had radical engine improvements installed, or planned. Most upgrades concerned avionics. So where's the difference from F-106A? Next issue?Beowulf wrote:The F-106A has those limits. Improved engine technology would allow greater speeds to be achieved.
No, the MiGs would be carrying not AAMs but Kh-31Ps as additional armament, to supress ground radars. Makes sense - the Costas have nothing to protect their radars with, while the Kh-31's range would allow the MiGs to suppres the radar network from quite a distance.Beowulf wrote:However, all of it's armament is internal, which greatly increases sustained speed (due to lower drag). Additionally, if you're carrrying more than 6-8 AAMs, you're probably got more than you can use.
I haven't seen that any planned or actually improved F-106s had a better ceiling, or it was mentioned that projected versions had better ceiling. Have you? Because 3 kilometers is a lot. Basically, it would be difference of life and death since the MiG-31s would be totally covering the area and seeing every rising asset in the region.Beowulf wrote:See answer to 3.
Because First World military power Tian Xia is totally comparable with Costa! Oh wait, I smell bullshit. How many AFBs does a typical Third World nation undergoing a revolution have? What are it's sortie rates? Stop bullshitting Beowulf, or I'll go down through every single minutiae about Third World wars, and we will see how really capable the Costas would be in pulling off an aerial battle with 100+ machines.Beowulf wrote:Because only having two AFBs is retarded? I have closer to 60 different airbases (precise number not available because I don't have my unit list with me at the moment).
Really? So British and Soviet engineers are idiots? Or maybe because they actually conducted trials of the system against torpedoes, they can speak more about it than those who didn't do shit? Because they actually did; and the systems went through several generations (Hedgehog-Squid-Limbo for the British, MBU-200-600-RBU-1000-6000-12000 for the USSR) at each iteration the system could have been abolished. The trials must have spoken otherwise. Torpedoes haven't become more invulnerable since the 1970s really, so what the hell are you talking about?Beowulf wrote:By nearly every naval engineer on the planet. If it was effective, it'd see significantly more use.
That looks more like reality. The carrier could technically sink, but I doubt that the flotilla will abandon it. The fight for survival would be extremely fierce with all ships doing everything they can to stop it from sinking. The effectiveness of the RBU system can be doubted, but there were trials against torpedoes, so were it really useless, it won't have survived the first iteration of Soviet trials. After all, heavy Soviet torps aren't that much different from US torps.Anyway, hows this for casualties:
Carrier damaged
1 kirov damaged
That certainly looks more realistic. I'm still skeptical about the abilities of the mechanically scanned arrays to correctly be able to engage many targets, but you're right in that here it doesn't matter. The F-106s outnumber the attackers.30 MiG-31s destroyed
some number of B-1B destroyed
30 F-106H destroyed
3 Su-30MKI destroyed.
48 A-4SU destroyed.
The B-1Bs would be cannon fodder if they entered the battlezone, and doing it to drop gravity bombs in a middleo f an air war is patently stupid in my view... so I think they veered off as soon as it got heated.
Fine. I doubt there's a possibility to inflict any greater casualties even with total air supremacy in such a short time. I really doubt it. Like I said, I won't be shy to look into minutiae of Iraq war and Yugoslavia war to see if that's mildly realistic.Literal decimation of the 1st and 5th divisions (10%)
P.S. Technically this could be my final post here for several days. I am in the process of learning Chinese which is very hard and consumes lots of free time and memory. Probably I'll not be at the forum for a week or so.
So I hope this casualty count would be agreed on by others. I think the discussion has served us well. Meanwhile I'll look into THird World wars like I said.
), but the F-106H was pretty much one of the pinnacles of Sheppish twinkery. Guided by a decent hardened ground radar system, they make amazing missile launch platforms, and despite its' many amazing performance categories the F-22 (and by that same token, the MiG-31M used by the Baernish to engage the Costans) is -not- perfect. They can be killed by sheer number of missiles, which (I suspect) was how Shep's air force dealt the MESS air armada the blows it did and how the Costans could have achieved any kills against modern interception aircraft.
"
- PeZook
