印度：我们年轻飞行员驾驶的su30MKI跟顶尖飞行员驾驶的E ...

真正的技术诀窍是印度飞行员上天之前喝的那瓶东西

恩...估计阿３是涂油上阵......

]]

]]

原帖由 emile 于 2007-7-9 12:34 发表
如果苏-27对J-10都那么吃力，对台风……:L :L

报道也没说打平啊？？？

;P :D ;P :@ [:a16:] [:a13:] [:a11:] [:a7:]

Match up 侬想怎么解释？ :P


现在是印度方放出风声来啦

皇家空军方暂时未有回应

如果狗斗结果打平 :o

又加上印度方只是年轻选手上阵 :L

那

就在狗斗比赛中， SU30MKI赢啦~~ :D

a3技术还是不行啊，开着有tvc的su30却仅仅根没有tvc的台风打平！我怎么记得有人模拟过有tvc的交换比能上8:1?这是不是说a3飞官的技术只是皇家空军的八分之一:D :victory:

印度真是个有容奶大的国家.:D

或者说mki那个和平尾同步邦定的tvc可以无视了:D

双方进行一系列1V1对抗，双方也无损的回到了基地。这次对抗的意义不是决出胜负，而是让飞行员更好的了解彼此飞机的性能。台风飞行员说MKI的机动性很好，MKI的也说台风的敏捷性很好。

……东方武林女盟主打平了最接近神的女人，满塞！:D

大家去F-16网上守着，那里很多西方对抗的料，这次对抗肯定跑不了。

我最看不惯的就是互相吹捧:@

无论如何，A3敢于远赴英伦挑战其宗主国的RAF，勇气可嘉！

那可是老牌强国，Typhoon不也号称“天下第二吗？

俺们何时才能够出去与人试吧试吧，哪怕跟俄罗斯？——这次J-10到底去不去？？？

中国空军缺乏这样的锻炼，遗憾！:') :')

原帖由 aaasssaaa 于 2007-7-9 12:51 发表
双方进行一系列1V1对抗，双方也无损的回到了基地。这次对抗的意义不是决出胜负，而是让飞行员更好的了解彼此飞机的性能。台风飞行员说MKI的机动性很好，MKI的也说台风的敏捷性很好。

……东方武林女盟主打平 ...

原来这就是打和的意思啊，那基本上参加各种演习的飞机都可以说是打和了嘛， 因为双方都无损的回到了基地;P

这是英文八股．什么东西鸟，对大鸡鸡的优良机动性的资格毫不掩饰　．对小鸡鸡的敏捷留下深刻影响．说了等于没说．:D :D

印度人的意思是这样滴：
第一盘，台风没有输
第二盘，MKI没有赢
第三盘，MKI说“和了算了吧”，台风又死活不肯
;P ;P

等着看西方报道。

原帖由 HH-9A 于 2007-7-9 12:41 发表
Match up 侬想怎么解释？ :P


现在是印度方放出风声来啦

皇家空军方暂时未有回应

如果狗斗结果打平 :o

又加上印度方只是年轻选手上阵 :L

那

就在狗斗比赛中， SU30MKI赢啦~~ :D

小翘嘴吧的英文好得可以啊？你们老师告诉你 match-up 就解释平局？

]]

蓝猫兄弟，逻辑有问题吧，近距离机动如果差不多的话，狗斗反而不灵？？？:') :') :')

走过场，不过瘾。

不过EF2K以没装TVC的机体在狗斗中与MKI打平，也足见“最接近神的人”这一称谓可不是吹的。台风已经领教过MKI最强的一面，EF2K最强的一面MKI还没尝试过呢。:lol

SU30MKI can not even beat Typhoon in dog fight, which should be its stronger area.  :D

原帖由 aaasssaaa 于 2007-7-9 14:05 发表
走过场，不过瘾。

不过EF2K以没装TVC的机体在狗斗中与MKI打平，也足见“最接近神的人”这一称谓可不是吹的。台风已经领教过MKI最强的一面，EF2K最强的一面MKI还没尝试过呢。:lol

看那原文似乎是都没能打平哦，可怜的30，连只用机炮都没有机会:D

原帖由 白云居士 于 2007-7-9 14:29 发表

看那原文似乎是都没能打平哦，可怜的30，连只用机炮都没有机会:D

哪里有阿？SU30MKI can not even beat Typhoon in dog fight, which should be its stronger area. 是bluecatt自己加上去的。

另外，即使can not even beat Typhoon 也不等于 can not match Typhoon ，不能打败就等于不如？

另外只有strong point , strong area的用法还真罕见。证明绝对不是native speaker.

While it does not imply to say that the 1 vs 1 air combat sorties were meant for backslapping each other, it may be understood that in today's aerial combat scenarios of 'beyond visual range' (BVR) capabilities of air platforms, it is highly unlikely that any of the modern-day fighters will ever get into a situation that warrants extreme close air combat, as in the situation simulated in the 1 vs 1 sorties. With a 'kill' criterion of front-gun ranges being mostly under 1000 metres and a visual tracking envelope behind the target for only up to a 60-degree cone mostly for most fighter aircraft of the world, the unlikely scenario gets more exemplified.

But the irony also lies in the fact that while there is a number of counter and counter-counter measures to make the modern missiles with claims of inescapable parameters redundant by using 'chaff' and other active/passive measures, a 'gun kill' is invariably a most certain kill. The pilots invariably begin honing their tracking and combat skills under such close combat situations.


这两段全部是在就该演习中采用炮战的模式而评论，和比赛结果无关。怎么BKC就这么兴奋？ ;P

The exercise that nearly runs into midway by the weekend constitutes mostly mixed missions where RAF F3 Tornados, Hawks and Typhoons are packed together with IAF Su-30 MKIs. The sorties include combat situations of 2 vs 1, 2 vs 2 and upward combinations. The raiders are tasked 'High Value Asset' (HVA) busting on the ground and 'High Value Airborne Asset' (HVAA) busting in the air with the defensive elements designated to counter their ambitions.

这一段介绍了对抗的双方，还包括皇家空军的狂风和鹰。也没有说明结果。

唯一的评论是The RAF pilots were candid in their admission of the Su-30 MKI's observed superior manouevring in the air, just as they had studied, prepared and anticipated. The IAF pilots on their part were also visibly impressed by the Typhoon's agility in the air.

双方飞行员都对对方飞机的飞行性能予以很高的评价。苏-30MKI的observed superior manouevring（一般写作manoeuvring） in the air；而台风是agility。高超的操纵性VS敏捷性。

至少bluecatt引用的文章通篇都是没有结果，除了上面的互相吹捧。怎么某些人那么兴奋？ ;P   

可能他们英文太好了，看到了我看不到的东西。 ;P

原帖由 PRINCEBUSTER 于 2007-7-9 13:57 发表
蓝猫兄弟，逻辑有问题吧，近距离机动如果差不多的话，狗斗反而不灵？？？:') :') :')

Did I make some mistake? :(  Not really understand what are you try to ask me.

Anyway what I mean is that Su-30MKI should has better chance in close range against Typhoon, since at that range its inferior radar problem is not as bad as at BVR fight.  More over it is a pure GUN (less than 1000 meter range and 60 degree front cone kill zone) fight, since no AAM is allowed so maneuverability is more important.  Let me know if I’m wrong.

I though Su-30MKI is very good at sudden maneuverability, which should give it an edge in GUN fight.  At least that is what Russia always clamed, although such movement is totally useless in real life combat.

But from the news suggests nether side about make a kill, so I believe that Typhoon is too agile (fast and light) for Su-30MKI to nails it down.  On the other hand Typhoon also has hard time to out maneuver Su-30MKI to get a GUN kill.  This result does not surprise me at all, since in modern aviation battle it is almost impossible to kill a jet fighter only useing GUN?

另外告诉我一下：manouevring到底是啥呀？我只知道manoeuvring操纵。:D

Did I make some mistake?   Not really understand what are you try to ask me



——————————————————————You are not so professional in utilizing the grammar. Aren't you a native speaker? Why couldn't you show us your smooth expression in English?

原帖由 strongp2 于 2007-7-9 14:44 发表
另外告诉我一下：manouevring到底是啥呀？我只知道manoeuvring操纵。:D

Don't ask me.  It is India news, I only copy and paste it.  Likely just a typo.

I though Su-30MKI is very good at sudden maneuverability

Don't worry. You should say,"I thought Su-30MKI was very good at sudden maneuverability"

原帖由 Bluecatt 于 2007-7-9 14:46 发表



Don't ask me.  It is India news, I only copy and paste it.  Likely just a typo.

I must inquire you since you are the deliverer of that news. ;P

It is India news


__________

It is an Indian news.  news is a countable noun, OK? ;P

:Q :Q :Q

You poor performance in employing the English language aroused my doubt about your identity.