Ask anything Thread


TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
As a humorous aside, on the same day, I remember there was a M113 puttering outside. I was thinking "How do people fit in those things?" It was barely larger than a big van. It looked so stupid to me, lol.
They fit people in those things by cramming them on top of each other. Back when the M113 was introduced troops didn’t wear as much kit as they do today and the general American soldier was actually smaller in hight and build (not fat, like some would interpret but muscle). The M113 is basically an aluminum box with benches on either side. This is part of the reason why the M113 has been phasing out of US service as time progressed from the 50s NATO soldiers in general got bigger as their nations food supplies improved. (This can also be seen in the difference between the DPRK and ROK soldiers in which Northern soldiers are generally scrawnier and shorter than their southern cousins.) The other is that the protection needs went up as well.
 

supersnoop

Junior Member
Registered Member
if you want, go to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and into the search window cut&paste
Тор внутренность

(in Russian, Тор is the AA system reportedly used, and внутренность is interior in the present context)

maybe you'll see what you seek, just don't quote this to nitpick
I didn't think of Yandex, perfect!
I found this:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for anyone who is interested.

I wouldn't call myself literate, but I saw the title:
Немного про ЗРК "Тор" 'Something about "Tor" SAM System'
I knew that was it.

IMG_0042.jpg

Not exactly showing all the detail on the operator console, but some good stuff.

They fit people in those things by cramming them on top of each other. Back when the M113 was introduced troops didn’t wear as much kit as they do today and the general American soldier was actually smaller in hight and build (not fat, like some would interpret but muscle). The M113 is basically an aluminum box with benches on either side. This is part of the reason why the M113 has been phasing out of US service as time progressed from the 50s NATO soldiers in general got bigger as their nations food supplies improved. (This can also be seen in the difference between the DPRK and ROK soldiers in which Northern soldiers are generally scrawnier and shorter than their southern cousins.) The other is that the protection needs went up as well.
Honestly, when I thought of this, I also thought, "maybe I am not remembering correctly", but then I quickly googled the dimensions of M113 and a Sprinter van, and it was about right. Better food security and fitness training has really made quite the physiological changes in a short period of time.
 

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
I hope you don't mind two questions, which don't fit specifically in a certain thread:

1. Do we know the pilot-to-cockpit or aircraft ratio of the PLAAF and NA for a regular regiment/brigade?

2. Is there anything known about either the English or Russian (language) skills of the PLAAF pilots? Point is, they somehow have to talk to others during foreign exercises. According to a source I have, at least Russian is not widely used.

Best,
Deino
 

subotai1

Junior Member
Registered Member
I hope you don't mind two questions, which don't fit specifically in a certain thread:

2. Is there anything known about either the English or Russian (language) skills of the PLAAF pilots? Point is, they somehow have to talk to others during foreign exercises. According to a source I have, at least Russian is not widely used.

Best,
Deino
On the language subject, English is mandatory in Chinese schools, starting in primary school and has been for about 20 years. Although a lot of that is reading and hearing based. Pronunciation is not as emphasized. But that being said, it's a matter of adding aircraft and military terms to their vocabulary and practicing pronunciation.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
On the language subject, English is mandatory in Chinese schools, starting in primary school and has been for about 20 years. Although a lot of that is reading and hearing based. Pronunciation is not as emphasized. But that being said, it's a matter of adding aircraft and military terms to their vocabulary and practicing pronunciation.
That's right, English is the international standard for Aviation Communications, it does get convoluted at times, and listening to accident reports, it obvious that poor understanding of instructions often is one of the factors leading to traffic and other conflicts, but that is the standard... English does have a lot of nuanced meanings often imparted by the inflections....
 

Viktor Jav

Senior Member
Registered Member
Does anyone know what is the Chinese slang for their aircraft warning systems ? Usually such systems are called rather insulting names which is understandable like the "B****ing Betty" and "Sonya" (As it gets on ya nerves) by Western pilots and "Nagging Nadia" and "Rita" by the Russians/ Eastern European pilots.

Would be interesting to see what kind of name annoyed Chinese pilots give their's.
 
Last edited:

Haris Ali

New Member
Registered Member
Hello, Can anyone knows how PL-15 and Meteor stack against each other??? And whats the difference between Dual Pulse motor and Ram Jet engine???
 

ougoah

Senior Member
Registered Member
Hello, Can anyone knows how PL-15 and Meteor stack against each other??? And whats the difference between Dual Pulse motor and Ram Jet engine???
I think PL-15 range isn't as great as Meteor's? Then again there isn't much accurate and reliable info on the PL-15 out there. Claims are 150km range or thereabouts. I personally don't know if and how ramjet is superior to rocket for applications on air to air missiles. Perhaps they do offer higher speed and greater range as evidenced by MBDA going with ramjet and the artworks suggesting PLAAF ramjet AAMs. Ramjet is a popular choice for Russian, Chinese, Indian, and Japanese anti-ship missiles though.

Dual pulse motors is what online posters are calling PL-15's capability of providing final stage boosts. Typically most AAMs have rockets that burn for under a minute when the missile is launched. After this point, the missile has nothing propelling it anymore and is carried by this acceleration and its momentum. It can trade some altitude (potential energy) for kinetic energy but it is going to struggle to hit a fast and maneuverable target at the edge of its declared range. The lower the kinetic energy of the missile, the far less likely it has a good chance of hitting its target. Therefore PL-15 uses some method maybe liquid fuel engines or multiple stages to provide it with more energy when it is closer to final interception stages. This also allows it to re-calculate optimal flight paths that maximise its kill probability. It of course also extends its declared range but at the edge of this range, it would also have lower chance of interception. Essentially it just provides the missile with greater kill probability at the same range compared to other missiles with lower range since its G limit should be more or less the same as modernised MRAAMs.

I would consider the PL-15 as a superior PL-12 is every aspect except for space and weight required to carry it. It's also much more expensive hence why PLAAF still uses the PL-12 as the main backbone MRAAM. Probably to be replaced to newer smaller variants of the PL-15 and other A2A means including new technologies, platforms, and doctrines. For now, PL-12 offers the best capability to price ratio for sure. For higher end opponents, there are superior but much more expensive weapons. PL-12 is still probably as good or better than what 70% of the world's airforces currently use.
 

Top