lmao what's fun about this aircraft is the Russians don't have datalinks with their aircraft so the radar operator has to radio everything he sees, and he's probably drunk and napping.
Just adding on. Soviet and later Russian doctrine heavily emphasises by the book textbook flying with practically scripted actions by their GCI because no one likes taking the risk of having pilots think for themselves. They have datalink but they might still be talked onto specific actions to do while they intercept.
>They have datalink but they might still be talked onto specific actions to do while they intercept
The interception and shooting down of KA-007 is a pretty good example of GCI doctrine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007#Soviet_command_hierarchy_of_shoot-down
Moskva, exemplar of superior Russian air defense, being incapable of searching and tracking at the same time while also making operators want to gouge their own eyes out after 30 minutes of operation, comes to mind.
Could? Yes
It is unlikely too though. The A-50 is in motion (and not on the ground) which will severely hamper its ability to actually connect (with a bit of luck you might clip the tail) against any angle of attack except dead head-on. Also, given the context I assume you are asking this in relation to a Ukraine fired agm88 in which its even less likely as they are not able to actually properly integrate it onto their soviet airframes and are using it in a reduced capacity.
Ok, another question.
Could it attack EW/SIGINT systems?
Like pic related.
I guess it definitely should work if jammer works into the same spectrum as radar emission.
>be an aircraft that moves almost as fast as sound
>saw incoming anti radiation on radar
>turn off the radar and perform evasive maneuver
yes, if fired from certain aspects
lmao what's fun about this aircraft is the Russians don't have datalinks with their aircraft so the radar operator has to radio everything he sees, and he's probably drunk and napping.
>the radar operator has to radio everything he sees
no way
Russians have had datalinks since the '70s or '80s anon, they rely very heavily on ground controller guidance and have it heavily automated.
Not really.
They do actually have datalink in their aircraft lol. Although how well it performs and the extent of data it provides is questionable.
Just adding on. Soviet and later Russian doctrine heavily emphasises by the book textbook flying with practically scripted actions by their GCI because no one likes taking the risk of having pilots think for themselves. They have datalink but they might still be talked onto specific actions to do while they intercept.
>They have datalink but they might still be talked onto specific actions to do while they intercept
The interception and shooting down of KA-007 is a pretty good example of GCI doctrine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007#Soviet_command_hierarchy_of_shoot-down
Moskva, exemplar of superior Russian air defense, being incapable of searching and tracking at the same time while also making operators want to gouge their own eyes out after 30 minutes of operation, comes to mind.
VatBlack person datalink in action
what did they mean by this
Lay off the Internet champ
BBC Pucci, vatniks join the 41% who become an hero. That's all I got.
>Mutt's law
Hopefully you'll never hear about the British Broadcasting Corporation
Nigel is forced by the government to pay for BBC
And the US are the stronghold of interracial pornography, so please sod off disgusting mutt
I'd rather be surrounded by mutts than be forced by the government to pay for BBC pedos tbh.
>I'd rather be surrounded by mutts
The absolute state of your average yank
>Forced by the government to pay for BBC pedos.
This transparent derailing.
Go start a thread about it on /misc/, you can all give each other hand jobs while we talk about weapons.
its VVS in vodka runes
BBC is BBC
and POCCNN mean "for Russia"
So it is "BBC for Russia".
The radar equipment inside the radar dome is probably stolen so AGM-88 Harm would be useless
Could? Yes
It is unlikely too though. The A-50 is in motion (and not on the ground) which will severely hamper its ability to actually connect (with a bit of luck you might clip the tail) against any angle of attack except dead head-on. Also, given the context I assume you are asking this in relation to a Ukraine fired agm88 in which its even less likely as they are not able to actually properly integrate it onto their soviet airframes and are using it in a reduced capacity.
Ok, another question.
Could it attack EW/SIGINT systems?
Like pic related.
I guess it definitely should work if jammer works into the same spectrum as radar emission.