It's a broken translation. The original quote means something like: "There will be less launches next year than this year". The direct translation from Russian looks like: "The next year is going to see less launches than this year".
Well, other countries may believe in Santa Claus and WMD in Iraq.
Russians KNOW that they invented all things first:)
Popov's radio was used to save the crew of a ship caught in ice when Marconi was only making his first experiments (BTW, Popov actually thought that Tesla was the first inventor of radio). Nobody claims that rockets were invented in Russia but liquid-fuel rocket engine was.
Television was not invented by Russians, but CRT was (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Zworykin).
Electric lamps (too lazy to search for links) and airplanes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Jatho), alas, were invented by Germans.
Actually, Marconi has not even invented the first coherer radio (though he did commercialize it). Popov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Stepanovic h_Popov) did it first.
I had, let me count, 5 interviews, a lot of DHLed papers and a great lot of wasted time (I had to go to Moscow for each interview and I live pretty far from it).
You can use travel agents to get a visa to Russia, it's not hard. My friend from USA was able to come to visit Russia without problems. Sadly, Russian embassies (and lots of other government facilities) still work like in USSR epoch.
Have you ever tried to get a business visa to the USA? It's the ultimate evidence that USA is run by some fascist-maniacs.
I live in Russia. Yes, it's sometimes bad here. And yes, it's MUCH BETTER now than in 90-s. Hell, we had mafia in our town walking with AK-74 in broad daylight!
There is such computer for hobbyists: http://www.eng.petersplus.ru/sprinter/ - it is a clone of 8-bit Z80 with FPGA. People were able to port Doom on this computer - FPGA was used as rendering accelerator.
You could even reprogram it on the fly - I remember writing accelerated floating-point computations just for fun.
I'm an atheist and I think that every religion is brainwashing by definition. "But you can believe in stones as long as you are not throwing them at me",- to paraphrase Dr. Wafa Sultan.
Anything which doesn't harm to anyone should not be prohibited - that's a matter of principle.
As long as alcohol and tobacco are not banned (they ARE shown to cause great harm to children) I don't think anyone has the right to tell me what is wrong (BTW, I don't drink alcohol at all, I don't smoke and I don't watch child porn).
First of all, I'm Russian, so I might translate some Russian technical terms incorrectly, especially for military equipment. And my military specialization at university was anti-air defense.
1) You don't need anything 'enormous' for ground-based illumination. For example, Gamma-C1E ( http://pvo.guns.ru/rtv/gammas1e.htm ) can be deployed in 5 minutes, is fully self-contained and can provide illumination for aircraft radars.
You are right that ground-based radars are easy to target, that's why they should work no more than 10-15 minutes and then retreat to a prepared position (decoys also can be deployed). There's nothing preventing you to use 10-15 different ground-based stations, they would only cost a fraction of a single JSF. There's also a 'military legend' (as in 'urban legend') that people used microwave ovens during the last Balkan war to create decoys and jam GPS (I don't know if it helped).
You are jumbling terminology of which you have no practical experience of. A phased array is an antenna with 2 or more radiating elements fed in the appropriate phase for desired radiation pattern. What you are confusing this is the way some phased arrays are fed with multiple tranceivers whose phasing relationship can be altered in software. This allows for a dynamic radiation pattern etc. I don't think array with a fixed pattern will be of any use for aircraft:) In practice, you need several trancievers to drive array (mainly for electronic warfare purposes).
Your 'multi-tracking' feature can be implemented by any number of ways. And by 'stereoscopic' radar you probably mean 3D-radar which requires a bit more than just 'a phased array'. The 'many frequencies simultaniously' is a feature of the tranceiver not the antenna. Any number of antenna types can be made broadband for this purpose. We were told that Mig-31 has two separate antenna fields in wings, so it can create a large enough base for 3D-imaging.
And with the life-span-cost of three F-16's one can man and equip a small army which can dig-in and hold an area indefinately against a superior force. Its all relative to what you want to do. Agreed.
As I pointed the F16s wont be replaced by JSFs for some time, indeed perhaps never because of the cost factor. However they are capable of missions, against a variety of enemies, which the three F16s arent nearly as good for. Don't know what superpower you think you mean to have a war in the future Well, for example, a former xUSSR country with insane leader (I can name a few) or some Latin-American country.
but if you mean china-russia then, yes, JSF's or F16 triplets won't help you much. You're screwed. Try to avoid getting into that situation:P Well, that's USA-EU for us in Russia:) And yes, we should do anything to avoid such situation.
Recommend you read Heinz Guderian's 'Panzer Leader' - you'll see that there was a bit more going on then implied by your comparison. Of course, I know that there was much more going on in WWII, but it's a good analogy. Panthers were good tanks (late models even had night vision!), superior to T-34 and T-34-85. But T-34-85 was much more simple and could be manufactured in large quantities.
Thanks, for the book I'll read it. I can recommend you some books too if you read Russian:)
It's funny, but passive radar system are used on many homing missiles. But I guess that they are just too bulky for aircrafts.
Passive radar system uses ground-based stations to 'light up' the target and sometimes it's much better than active radar system, because you can't home on attacker using his own radar pulses as a target. Besides, multiple-source passive systems give tremendous advantages against stealth.
Of course, you can destroy ground-based radar stations, but it's not easy to do (they keep on moving, you know). And even if you destroy one then it's not a great military loss.
Phased array is not just a way of feeding antennae (I'm a mathematician with a physicist background) and it's not easy to install it on an aircraft. But phased arrays can do a lot of tricks: work on many frequencies simultaneously, track many sources and you can even use them to create a 'stereoscopic' radar images.
And in the end, it's cheaper and more effective to build three F-16 than one JSF. JSF might be better suited for 'local wars' (read: then the enemy can't do a shit against your aviation) but in a war with a powerful nation it will be like T-34-85 against Panthers in WWII.
3. Current stealth technologies (ALL of them) only protect from certain radio wavelength. For example, F117 can be detected using one-meter-wavelength radars (as it was demonstrated during the last Balkan war). But you need a fairly large antenna to transmit at such wavelengths, so fighter jets need to use either passive radar system or phased arrays. 2. And guess what was the first fighter to have it? 1. So what? It has incremental improvements in engines and armaments. After all, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_launch_vehicle is still used today (though it was designed back in 60-s.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a broken translation. The original quote means something like: "There will be less launches next year than this year". The direct translation from Russian looks like: "The next year is going to see less launches than this year".
The original article is here: http://rian.ru/analytics/20061215/56977055.html
Technically, Baikonur is Russian territory (rented from Kazakhstan).
Yes, that's interesting. Bose certainly deserves recognition.
Well, other countries may believe in Santa Claus and WMD in Iraq.
:)
Russians KNOW that they invented all things first
Popov's radio was used to save the crew of a ship caught in ice when Marconi was only making his first experiments (BTW, Popov actually thought that Tesla was the first inventor of radio). Nobody claims that rockets were invented in Russia but liquid-fuel rocket engine was.
Television was not invented by Russians, but CRT was (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Zworykin).
Electric lamps (too lazy to search for links) and airplanes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Jatho), alas, were invented by Germans.
Americans often claim credit too fast.
Actually, Marconi has not even invented the first coherer radio (though he did commercialize it). Popov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Stepanovic h_Popov) did it first.
No, it doesn't require root access. And it allows to elevate your privileges to 'System'.
I don't know. Most foreign travelers in Russia agree that getting any type of visa to the USA is a long and complex process.
In comparison, it required only two days to get a business visa to Germany (and now it's possible to get the visa in one day).
I had, let me count, 5 interviews, a lot of DHLed papers and a great lot of wasted time (I had to go to Moscow for each interview and I live pretty far from it).
You can use travel agents to get a visa to Russia, it's not hard. My friend from USA was able to come to visit Russia without problems. Sadly, Russian embassies (and lots of other government facilities) still work like in USSR epoch.
Have you ever tried to get a business visa to the USA? It's the ultimate evidence that USA is run by some fascist-maniacs.
I live in Russia. Yes, it's sometimes bad here. And yes, it's MUCH BETTER now than in 90-s. Hell, we had mafia in our town walking with AK-74 in broad daylight!
Oh, are you still in 1992 full of hopes of bright capitalistic future?
Is your first name "Fry"?
Sure, but he's at least a COMPETENT scumbag.
PS: I live in Russia.
Believe me, Putin has actual popular support.
He stopped downward slide into chaos in the end of 90-s. You should have lived here to understand it.
PS: I live in Russia and I didn't vote for Putin. But Putin's popular support is quite evident.
Have you ever tried to ask non-native English speaker about the complexity of English?
English is analytical language and it is very alien to people speaking synthetic (Arabic, Russian, Japanese) or agglutinating languages (Turkish).
I still don't get when I should use articles because my native language (Russian) lacks them comletely.
No problem: ...
:)
http://news.ntv.ru/99758/
http://www.lawlinks.ru/view_news_spb.php?id=29775
There's a small problem: you need to read Russian
There is such computer for hobbyists: http://www.eng.petersplus.ru/sprinter/ - it is a clone of 8-bit Z80 with FPGA. People were able to port Doom on this computer - FPGA was used as rendering accelerator.
You could even reprogram it on the fly - I remember writing accelerated floating-point computations just for fun.
I'm an atheist and I think that every religion is brainwashing by definition. "But you can believe in stones as long as you are not throwing them at me",- to paraphrase Dr. Wafa Sultan.
Anything which doesn't harm to anyone should not be prohibited - that's a matter of principle.
As long as alcohol and tobacco are not banned (they ARE shown to cause great harm to children) I don't think anyone has the right to tell me what is wrong (BTW, I don't drink alcohol at all, I don't smoke and I don't watch child porn).
You got it wrong:
All... hail... our... hypnotoad... overlords.
And I think that every man attending a church is a victim of brainwashing. So what? Do you care to ask "VICTIM"?
You can argue that this is not a child but 40-year-whore transformed into child by magic.
How fitting.
That's a moot point. XNA Studio is not a proper dev kit.
You CAN'T develop real games with such licensing restrictions.
1) You don't need anything 'enormous' for ground-based illumination. For example, Gamma-C1E ( http://pvo.guns.ru/rtv/gammas1e.htm ) can be deployed in 5 minutes, is fully self-contained and can provide illumination for aircraft radars.
2) 'Semi-active' radar systems (that's the correct term, according to Wikipedia) are used even now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-active_radar_ho
You are right that ground-based radars are easy to target, that's why they should work no more than 10-15 minutes and then retreat to a prepared position (decoys also can be deployed). There's nothing preventing you to use 10-15 different ground-based stations, they would only cost a fraction of a single JSF. There's also a 'military legend' (as in 'urban legend') that people used microwave ovens during the last Balkan war to create decoys and jam GPS (I don't know if it helped).
You are jumbling terminology of which you have no practical experience of. A phased array is an antenna with 2 or more radiating elements fed in the appropriate phase for desired radiation pattern. What you are confusing this is the way some phased arrays are fed with multiple tranceivers whose phasing relationship can be altered in software. This allows for a dynamic radiation pattern etc. I don't think array with a fixed pattern will be of any use for aircraft
Nope. It _looks_ like a simple grid of small antennae, but you need a separate unit to control each segment.
It's funny, but passive radar system are used on many homing missiles. But I guess that they are just too bulky for aircrafts.
Passive radar system uses ground-based stations to 'light up' the target and sometimes it's much better than active radar system, because you can't home on attacker using his own radar pulses as a target. Besides, multiple-source passive systems give tremendous advantages against stealth.
Of course, you can destroy ground-based radar stations, but it's not easy to do (they keep on moving, you know). And even if you destroy one then it's not a great military loss.
Phased array is not just a way of feeding antennae (I'm a mathematician with a physicist background) and it's not easy to install it on an aircraft. But phased arrays can do a lot of tricks: work on many frequencies simultaneously, track many sources and you can even use them to create a 'stereoscopic' radar images.
And in the end, it's cheaper and more effective to build three F-16 than one JSF. JSF might be better suited for 'local wars' (read: then the enemy can't do a shit against your aviation) but in a war with a powerful nation it will be like T-34-85 against Panthers in WWII.
3. Current stealth technologies (ALL of them) only protect from certain radio wavelength. For example, F117 can be detected using one-meter-wavelength radars (as it was demonstrated during the last Balkan war). But you need a fairly large antenna to transmit at such wavelengths, so fighter jets need to use either passive radar system or phased arrays.
2. And guess what was the first fighter to have it?
1. So what? It has incremental improvements in engines and armaments. After all, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_launch_vehicle is still used today (though it was designed back in 60-s.
BTW, you can read:
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/007810.php and http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/003045.html if you still have illusions about US aircrafts.