|
|
LTTE banned for another year in India
Full News Article
Velir
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1821
Member Profile
|
 15 May 2008 18:17:12 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Now about the Super sonic B-52..
1.Remove the 8 engines on the wing and mount 4 bigger ones with afterburner closer to the belly set back from the shock wave.
2. Chop off the wings in half and make them swing out for landing / take off and swing in for supersonic flight.
3. Chop shorten the fuselage and make the tail a little smaller.. give it a new pointed nose.
That is your suppersonic B-52. AKA the B1B Lancer.
:))))) |
ModaMutha
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 325
Member Profile
|
 15 May 2008 18:20:03 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Para Kum B:
LTTE might be involved in Jaipur Bombings too. Who ever did it reminded India of the brutality of terrorism.
you said it right. Also we should include LTTE in the:
Bombings In Iraq and Afghanistan aganst Occupiers
Bombings In Turkey, Ukraine
Bombings in Nigeria, Uganda
Bombings in Saudi Arabia Iran
Bombings in Piliyandala, Kepitikollawa, Colombo in SL
and
Bombings in mars, saturn, Moon, and etc..etc..
what you think...
|
Velir
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1821
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:21:12 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Bombings in mars, saturn, Moon, and etc..etc..
what you think...
i think they were also behind the crashing of a couple of mars landers :))
|
gonnamba
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3551
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:25:19 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Bombings In Iraq and Afghanistan aganst Occupiers Bombings In Turkey, Ukraine Bombings in Nigeria, Uganda Bombings in Saudi Arabia Iran Bombings in Piliyandala, Kepitikollawa, Colombo in SL and Bombings in mars, saturn, Moon, and etc..etc..
Man you guys are real glory hogs. Give some credit to uncle Mervyn and Kudu Lal too.
i think they were also behind the crashing of a couple of mars landers
No No that was Chennai when he was testing that sub.. had a little throttle control issue.. ended up in mars.
Edited By - gonnamba - 15 May 2008 18:27:15 GMT |
MarkLevinson
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 21845
Member Profile
|
 15 May 2008 18:27:11 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Velir,
Basic calculations show that a march 3 Brahmos hitting a carrier would have about 8 times the kinetic effect an American harpoon anti-ship would have had....
You forgot something...what they are going to do about Phalanxes and Goalkeepers onboard ships?? |
Velir
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1821
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:33:52 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Marky i did not forget i even posted this
even with a lot of close in weapons systems/air-def missiles.....including those of other ships from the carrier battle group...can it survive a swarm of 50 march 3 (and later hypersonic versions) Anti-ship missiles and about 20 such super cavitating torps?
also note that there are efforts underway to make such anti-ship missiles work as 'packs' (similar to wolfpack tactics of the germans)..by enabling them to 'talk to each other' and sharing sensor/target info as they close in for the final leg of the kill..usually at this stage the missiles accelerate to their max speed.
also note that march 3 is about what? 1km/second?
if these missiles follow a wave-top hugging profile...as they are claimed to do...how long will they be in the 'line of sight' of the close in weapons systems and short-range air-def missiles?
and lets not forget the fact that these are hardened against jamming and would probably use satellite navigation in the future...maybe even getting real-time feedback of the target locations..
there is no way a pack of 50 jinking missiles could be taken out by these defences..heck..i doubt even if 10 cuold be taken out
and
PS: the KE is 32 times that of the harpoon
|
andyprem
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1949
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:35:22 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Oh man. That would be worse that putting Mervyn in the Cabinet.
Theoretically it can be done as MBRL does not have a re-coil. But by angling it you are directing the blast from the back on to the water and that will create huge control problems for the vessel. They are not accurate when they are launched by the land based launch vehicle. It will be awful from a sea going craft.
Gons if the MBRL is truely recoilless why would it cause control problems for a Ship ?
I agree accuracy could ne compromised but from a large enough ship the pitch and yaw woild be minimal . |
Velir
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1821
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:40:11 GMT Report for Abuse
|
andy:
Gons if the MBRL is truely recoilless why would it cause control problems for a Ship ?
I agree accuracy could ne compromised but from a large enough ship the pitch and yaw woild be minimal .
its not recoilless...but less than that of conventional arty cos the arty shell uses up All the explosives/popellent 'inside' the barrel and then arcs on a ballistic trajectory to its target while the MBRL rockets burn even for a while after they exist the launcher.
thats why they have less recoil
BUT.
the MBRLS are way less accurate than artillery.
thats why they are used in bunches.. and not singly...no one fires a 'single' MBRL rocket.
the rolling seas. and the noticeable yet less than arty recoil would spoil the aim like hell :)
and it has to be fired when the ship is stable...and we cant be daft to assume the tigers..oops i mean the Peelaist navy would just sit by and watch such a tempting huge-idle target even though its guarded by sln's dvoraas?
:))).
for all intents and purposes such a ship will be a sitting duck!
Edited By - Velir - 15 May 2008 18:41:54 GMT |
gonnamba
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3551
Member Profile
|
15 May 2008 18:41:34 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Gons if the MBRL is truely recoilless why would it cause control problems for a Ship ?
It is not truly recoilless. As each rocket leaves the barrel the blast from the leaving rocket pushes back on the launcher (or anything behind it) for a small time until each rocket clears the launcher by at least 10-15 feet.
Ah.. Velir beat me to it..
Andy / Baka
Andy What asmall world ideed! :)))))
what are you two love birds talking about ?
Edited By - gonnamba - 15 May 2008 18:44:56 GMT |
|
Search All News and Discussions
15 May 2008 18:39:06 GMT 