Anaconda Sensors

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
I'm aware of that, but I've seen a good bunch of players write that they find that neglectable...
I was talking about weapon performance, which isn't affected by sensors. If you can select the target, weapons will perform the same, be it E or A sensors.
 
Now, the truly hilarious thing is that these 64-160 tons of hi-tech sensors are totally confused by a bunch of cheap a** chaff XD

And to add insult to injury, it does not do a better job of targeting turrets than the 5 tons sensors of a Cobra. Go figure...

Maybe its tuned to detect lolcats patterns in stars :p
 
You have no idea what you are talking about... You start the sentence with 'fit the radar from an F15 onto a 747' and then expect to be taken seriously? Sensor suite or radar is part of an avionics package..

As mentioned previously, it's all a bit silly since we are talking about pretend space ships. Still, whatever systems installed needs to be integrated into the entire ship, with a massive ship like the Anaconda, I'm not surprised that a system like that weighs so much.

Avionics is a generic term for all electronics to do with flight instruments and systems including radar. We are discussing radar specifically, not avionics. For someone pretending to be a real life pilot you have not rehearsed the part very well.
 
Avionics is a generic term for all electronics to do with flight instruments and systems including radar. We are discussing radar specifically, not avionics. For someone pretending to be a real life pilot you have not rehearsed the part very well.

So you quote my post explaining that it is part of the avionics package, and then try to call me out on it? Please try harder, in fact don't bother, you'll end up straining yourself. Am still laughing at that ridiculous first post of yours..

Edit - the fact that you used the term 'real life pilot' suggests you play FSX in your spare time ;) I'll leave it at that
 
Last edited:
So you quote my post explaining that it is part of the avionics package, and then try to call me out on it? Please try harder, in fact don't bother, you'll end up straining yourself. Am still laughing at that ridiculous first post of yours..

Edit - the fact that you used the term 'real life pilot' suggests you play FSX in your spare time ;) I'll leave it at that

Since you have forgotten that you said the avionics on an airliner weighed five tons and equated that to the game, I pointed out that sensors are not going to be the entire five tons. This confused you as you are a lay person with little experience of aviation or indeed avionics. However as you claim to be a 777 pilot you needed to respond to this attack on your ego. So you jump in with both feet and mash the reply in with all sorts of rubbish and throw it back at me. As I have pointed out that the sensor suite of a fighter would not increase in mass if fitted to a larger airframe, which is a true statement, your response is simple incredulity stemming from ignorance of the subject, yet you persist in just making noises instead of giving a technical response to support your point. If there were a technical response you could give to validate your point we would have heard it by now. As we both know there is no such response you can give, as none exist.
 
The sensors definitely DO NOT affect gimballed or turreted weapons in any way. I don't have a link to the post from the dev but he said that he wished that mis-information would just disappear. If I find the link, I'll edit my post and include it!
Funny that he should say that, because they're solely responsible for that misinformation floating about.
 
Since you have forgotten that you said the avionics on an airliner weighed five tons and equated that to the game, I pointed out that sensors are not going to be the entire five tons. This confused you as you are a lay person with little experience of aviation or indeed avionics. However as you claim to be a 777 pilot you needed to respond to this attack on your ego. So you jump in with both feet and mash the reply in with all sorts of rubbish and throw it back at me. As I have pointed out that the sensor suite of a fighter would not increase in mass if fitted to a larger airframe, which is a true statement, your response is simple incredulity stemming from ignorance of the subject, yet you persist in just making noises instead of giving a technical response to support your point. If there were a technical response you could give to validate your point we would have heard it by now. As we both know there is no such response you can give, as none exist.

Kyle, you are acting like a fool.. But I'll play along.. But first lets get something out of the way... I work for an Aerospace contractor in Bahrain, primarily on performance data related to the A320-214, I am also contracted as a technical advisor to a software developer in Los Angeles ( FMGS/CBT) developer for airlines on the A320-214 up to the Neo.

Not once have I said I am a 777 F/O or Captain, frankly the pay would be nowhere near good enough for me.. So You are talking out of your rear... I challenge you to find one post of mine that says I fly 777's, any member that has asked about my forum name knows the story behind it..My old man was a retired 777 skipper, my family (fondly) called him bus driver when he was on the 330/340 that switched to 777 driver.

My indulgence in Flying is purely from having a healthy pay packet, and summers at Biggin hill

I'll say it one last time, fitting the sensor suite of a fighter jet to any commercial aircraft is a ridiculous statement, it is the Integration of a system that will add additional weight. Anyway you are talking nonsense so I won't humour you any further.

now please, crawl back under that bridge of yours...
 
Last edited:
Kyle, you are acting like a fool.. But I'll play along.. But first lets get something out of the way... I work for an Aerospace contractor in Bahrain, primarily on performance data related to the A320-214, I am also contracted as a technical advisor to a software developer in Los Angeles ( FMGS/CBT) developer for airlines on the A320-214 up to the Neo.

Not once have I said I am a 777 F/O or Captain, frankly the pay would be nowhere near good enough for me.. So You are talking out of your rear... I challenge you to find one post of mine that says I fly 777's, any member that has asked about my forum name knows the story behind it..My old man was a retired 777 skipper, my family (fondly) called him bus driver when he was on the 330/340 that switched to 777 driver.

My indulgence in Flying is purely from having a healthy pay packet, and summers at Biggin hill

I'll say it one last time, fitting the sensor suite of a fighter jet to any commercial aircraft is a ridiculous statement, it is the Integration of a system that will add additional weight. Anyway you are talking nonsense so I won't humour you any further.

now please, crawl back under that bridge of yours...

So 777driver, what on earth gave the impression you are a 777 pilot? You know 777driver, I can't quite put my finger on it, 777driver.

The f15 radar to airliner was an analogy, a hypothetical scenario, as for it being a ridiculous idea, well not really, AWACS for example and various training airframes have fighter radars. Adding such hardware would not add 160 tons unless your ego was being fitted as well. But then you know this as you are just so smart as to be a self declared forum expert on everything, going by your past posts.
 
So 777driver, what on earth gave the impression you are a 777 pilot? You know 777driver, I can't quite put my finger on it, 777driver.

I couldnt agree more...
*checks username*
My job obviously involves riding a Dragon and slaying my enemies.

Poor Kyle. He must think that on the internet he is surrounded by space aliens, ninjas, demons, dragons, and wizards.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom