JediMaster

Using a laser to fry a guidance system in a warhead is a bit different. Also, taking out anything the size of a plane or larger requires an increase in power by several orders of magnitude. Rockets are easy, they're fragile. Put a small hole that leaks fuel or buckle the side and ruin the aerodynamics and it will tear or blow itself apart.

The power problem is also nontrivial. A chemical laser generates the energy by mixing the toxic fluids, but a solid state one uses electricity...from the engines? Not even a 747's 4 engines with alternators driving it will power a SSL directly. You need banks of capacitors charging for one shot...then a looooong time to charge it up again. I think SSL's are topped out at 1kw right now? Not enough, not compared to the chemical one.

The day when we can fire a SSL from an airborne platform at a fighter and take it out without getting "lucky" and igniting an external tank or blinding the pilot in the cockpit is still far off. Actually, IIRC the threat of lasers to pilots' eyes is the predominant concern right now. Who needs to shoot them down if the plane will crash on its own once the pilots are blind?

Heh...rain. Don't move to FL!!

I see them every day here, with the 920th Rescue Wing, and they're always flying over my house too.

In fact, several of them had those water buckets slung under to help fight those fires here last week.

As for Marine One, that flew OVER my house (wow what a racket those 53s make) after W showed up for a rally with his brother Jeb at the local stadium (local = 4 miles away) on its way back here where AF1 was parked.

The best part was during the rally some old clueless guy flying VFR flew RIGHT past the stadium and got an F-16 buzzing him for his trouble! Forced to land at Merritt Island Airport and got questioned by the FBI and company for several hours! D'OH!!!

Argh! The wait is killing me!

However, it looks like no Su-25 in DCS anytime soon, so I guess we'll all be hanging onto LOMAC for quite some time!

Narrow view? Some might call it pessimistic, but I call 'em as I see 'em.

2001 was a great film but one of the worst predictors of the future ever made, even with a genius like Clarke behind it. Within a year of its release we had man walking on the moon! Within 5 years, the last man left and no one has returned since...

Computers you could talk to that took up a room! We get computers you can hold in your hand that can't tell you anything except it's crashed!

The only problem with the "black world has it all" theory is that some of the things they supposedly have would HURT the US if they stayed black.

Besides, I can name a dozen things out of SF that I KNOW haven't been done because they're either impossible according to the laws of physics as we know it (hyperspace, lightsabers, transporters) or they require a tech we've not been able to create yet (getting around on something other than primitive rocket propulsion).

Messing with an idea in a lab and saying "done that" is NOT the same as having practical, operational vehicles. The space shuttle, for instance, isn't really practical and is barely operational. On that I would say we don't YET have a good reusable space vehicle.

The Georgians were tracking the UAV with their own radar and saw another plane approaching. The UAV operator must have been told "he's closing on its six" and turned the camera to see it.

What gets me is just how close it gets.

Of course, I'm not so sure about a solid state laser that powerful in just 2 decades. Plus I was skeptical of them using a 767 for it!! It also didn't look right for the beam path. A 747 is being used now because the cockpit is above, leaving space for the laser to go straight to the nose. Here they make it seem like the laser is totally generated from the nose itself.

I just doubt we'll be that far with solid state lasers (to be more powerful than the chemical ones we have today) in 20 years. Those still need a ton of development.

They also made a comment about Su-30s "not flown by any allied nation"--gee, doesn't give much hope of better relations with India, does it?

The weight of a helmet cam would risk breaking the guy's neck.

Finally! This has been drawn out far too long.

Funny, with the latest patches both FE and WOI run much faster now than at release. They're not faster than WOV/WOE, merely as fast at the best of times. So for installs with all stock planes I now have shadows turned on. It also might be that since I now have an nvidia card instead of ATI it does the shadows faster? I don't know.

Yup, I've been using that one for about 10 years now.

I've watched the first half so far. Very good effects, although I question some of their conclusions! I seriously doubt we'll have a B-1R flying in less than 10 years, for instance!

Am I wrong when I'm saying that when You say "TWO WEEKS" that mean You don't know when some file be ready?

No, you are not wrong.

Also I think sometimes the canards are directing airflow onto the wings behind them to prevent accelerated stalls and create vortices and so on. They're quite small on the Typhoon compared to say the Viggen and their overall lift is minor.

Let's face it--the under-25 American Internet community tends to be a bunch of jerks. Makes me wish sometimes you needed a license to get on the net. Of course, you don't need one to have kids, and you know some people shouldn't be parents, so...

Because they're always infesting my hovercraft!!!!!!

I'm surprised they never attached a couple of small jets to the KC-130s for those instances, like they used to do on the others in the past.

If you guys haven't heard it, you should definately pick up David Gilmore's recent album On An Island for more of his incredible guitar work.

I was considering it, but I haven't had the chance to hear any tracks yet.

At least it's not a Quickshot.

Just a slight difference in price!

That was when EA's F1C 99-02 came out AFAIK.

Unguided rockets should be called "go anywhere but the target" rockets.

Yes, it's ok that you kill people as a criminal and blow stuff up for random purposes but WATCH OUT you might see some skin??

Sorry, that doesn't fly. Killing is evil, a person not wearing clothes is not.

I've never flown in a military plane, only civilian, and to a one they've all bored me.

I've been in jets, props, and helos (both piston and turbine, and even one EC with a shrouded tail rotor), but I get more thrill from watching a Harrier or Hornet or Eagle landing at the base here!

Being a delta, you'd expect the 2000 to have a higher stall speed than a Hornet. However, it's also FBW so I'd think as long as the 130 is going as fast as it can there shouldn't be a problem. Not like the old days when the USAF still used KB-50s to refuel jets requiring the 50s to go into power dives to keep above the jets' stall speeds!