Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[gambit]

Read the ASBM thread. I'll eat my foot if you did not insist repeatedly that warheads drop vertically onto their targets. Everyone on this forum remembers. They know you're not telling the truth.

You've got some nerve telling a whopper of a lie like that.

From the target's perspective, yes, it is quite a vertical descent. We are not talking about a few hundred meters travel span. We are talking about several THOUSANDS of km with a suborbital parabolic arc, sometimes assisted by the Earth's rotation.

 

[siegecrossbow]

You lied HERE that I 'mistreated everyone'. Explain to people here as to how I 'mistreated everyone' there when despite a join date of 2009 I have only 80-something posts and only ONE long discussion.

That is because you started acting like a complete a-hole recently when tphuang politely asked you to stop acting like one. There are guys who have been members from the very beginning (2005 2006ish) who got banned due to rule breaking. Your glorious records are still up on sinodefence. Here is a link for everyone interested in seeing the glorious antics:

http://www.sino .com/air-force/new-j-10-thread-iii-129-4290.html

remove the space to see the link.

 

[S10]

You lied HERE that I 'mistreated everyone'. Explain to people here as to how I 'mistreated everyone' there when despite a join date of 2009 I have only 80-something posts and only ONE long discussion.

LUL WUT?

Posts: 5,918

 

[gambit]

In your dreams. Putting words in people's mouth and employing strawmen tactics can only carry you so far. I am only glad that Engineer saw through the antics:

Yeah...This 'Engineer' claimed that the F-22's rudder system is 'less advanced' than the J-20's all-moving stabs despite historical evidences that goes back decades to WW I. I presented that argument link to my friends at Nellis and Hill, the latter the F-16 depot maintenance facility, and they all have a good laugh.

---------- Post added at 09:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 PM ----------

LUL WUT?

Posts: 5,918

Not here but somewhere else.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Oh yeah Gambit regarding your comments about "Chinese physics" and the tendency to dismiss an entire group of people based on a few individuals on the internet. What you are saying is the equivalent of me using "American behaviour" to describe an otherwise mentally sound adult who acts like a little kid with no manners. However you won't see guys like me making dumb comments like this because most Americans I know, in real life, don't act in such a manner and are nice decent people who treat others with respect.

 

[gambit]

That is because you started acting like a complete a-hole recently when tphuang politely asked you to stop acting like one. There are guys who have been members from the very beginning (2005 2006ish) who got banned due to rule breaking. Your glorious records are still up on sinodefence. Here is a link for everyone interested in seeing the glorious antics:

http://www.sino .com/air-force/new-j-10-thread-iii-129-4290.html

remove the space to see the link.

Answer the question: Where is that 'everyone' that you lied HERE that I supposedly 'mistreated' since 2009 over your playground?

 

[houshanghai]

in this thread,I am sure nobody will listen to a American vietnamese poor expert prating on about his experience and seniority of American army

 

[Martian2]

From the target's perspective, yes, it is quite a vertical descent. We are not talking about a few hundred meters travel span. We are talking about several THOUSANDS of km with a suborbital parabolic arc, sometimes assisted by the Earth's rotation.

You're still going to argue that vertical doesn't mean vertical?!

Let me refresh your memory.

1. You said warheads fall vertically onto their targets.

2. I said "no." Warheads have horizontal and vertical velocity. They can fall onto their targets at an angle.

3. You called me a know-nothing fanboy.

4. I posted the Peacekeeper MIRV picture to prove my point.

5. You said it was an optical illusion.

6. I posted the vertical rocket marker contrails for a nuclear test to prove my point again (e.g. vertical contrails actually look vertical; the angled Peacekeeper trajectories are truly angled).

7. You claimed I was still wrong.

8. I told everyone to place 8 pens vertically on their desks and look at it from all angles. I said it was impossible to replicate the angles in the Peacekeeper MIRV picture.

9. You still said I was wrong.

10. I posted a RAND study showing angular incoming trajectories for missiles and warheads. I posted a second source that showed the same thing.

11. You disappeared from the thread without apologizing to me or admitting you were wrong.

Does the sequence of events ring a bell? Or are you going to continue with your big lie?

 

[gambit]

in this thread,I am sure nobody will listen to a American vietnamese poor expert prating on about his experience and seniority of American army

Then even less seriously will they take a Chinese conscript who does not understand what is a 'critical review' about a subject he has no experience in.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Poor Gambit still couldn't explain why he, of all people, was banned on sinodefence. People who consistently critique China like bladerunner, Mr.T, and JeffHead are respected members on the forum because they follow the rules, act nicely despite different political views, and offer valuable insights in their posts. On the other hand pro-Chinese bashers like migdriver and countless propaganda spewing IDs are banned because they breach forum rules and treat others like dirt.

 

[gambit]

You're still going to argue that vertical doesn't mean vertical?!

Let me refresh your memory.

1. You said warheads fall vertically onto their targets.

2. I said "no." Warheads have horizontal and vertical velocity. They can fall onto their targets at an angle.

3. You called me a know-nothing fanboy.

4. I posted the Peacekeeper MIRV picture to prove my point.

5. You said it was an optical illusion.

6. I posted the vertical rocket marker contrails for a nuclear test to prove my point again (e.g. vertical contrails actually look vertical; the angled Peacekeeper trajectories are truly angled).

7. You claimed I was still wrong.

8. I told everyone to place 8 pens vertically on their desks and look at it from all angles. I said it was impossible to replicate the angles in the Peacekeeper MIRV picture.

9. You still said I was wrong.

10. I posted a RAND study showing angular incoming trajectories for missiles and warheads. I posted a second source that showed the same thing.

11. You disappeared from the thread without apologizing to me or admitting you were wrong.

Does the sequence of events ring a bell? Or are you going to continue with your big lie?

From a great perspective. Short range ASBM radars look relatively 'up'. It is the long range large arrays that will look at the horizon for when the warhead appears while still in orbit. It is from the ground perspective that I was trying to explain to you.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Banlist on sinodefence in case anyone still doubts what I said. We do things as fairly there as possible. Doesn't matter if you are the President of the United States or the Marshall of PLAAF if you break the rules we'll warn you and then off to the banlist you go.

http://www.sino .com/announcements/banned-members-list-54.html

remove the space to see the link.

 

[Martian2]

From a great perspective. Short range ASBM radars look relatively 'up'. It is the long range large arrays that will look at the horizon for when the warhead appears while still in orbit. It is from the ground perspective that I was trying to explain to you.

Arghhh!!! I give up.

When you grow up, feel free to post your apology or acknowledge that you were wrong. I spent hours to prove that you were wrong and you annoyed the hell out of me. Now, you claim I lost the debate? Sheesh!

 

[gambit]

Poor Gambit still couldn't explain why he, of all people, was banned on sinodefence. People who consistently critique China like bladerunner, Mr.T, and JeffHead are respected members on the forum because they follow the rules, act nicely despite different political views, and offer valuable insights in their posts. On the other hand pro-Chinese bashers like migdriver and countless propaganda spewing IDs are banned because they breach forum rules and treat others like dirt.

I can see you are still dodging the lie you posted here. You said that I 'mistreated everyone' at your playground. Evidences are that despite a join date of 2009, I have only 80-something post count with only ONE long discussion, from which I got banned. So explain to everyone here how is it that I 'mistreated everyone' when I have only ONE long discussion. It should be simple enough, no?

 

[gambit]

Arghhh!!! I give up.

When you grow up, feel free to post your apology or acknowledge that you were wrong. I spent hours to prove that you were wrong and you annoyed the hell out of me. Now, you claim I lost the argument. Sheesh!

No...You spent hours in trying to prove a point in an issue where I pointed out that with different perspective, certain system must behave in certain ways. You know that what I said is true regarding the different detection systems for different purposes.