dark light

matt

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 3,292 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Japanese F-2 AESA radar, fixed yet? #2333962
    matt
    Participant

    This is the first picture I’ve seen of this radar. Thanks, MSphere. 🙂

    Does anyone know where to find more info on this radar? For example range/modes? Also as I recall, there was a RAND report on the F-2 which basically stated that the reason the USA pushed so hard to base the F-2 on the F-16 was so they could involve US companies and gain access to Japanese technology such as composite wingboxes and the F-2 AESA. Swerve, I think you posted it here once.

    But those spars originally anyways were rumoured to have cracks in them and aparently the Japanese went back to Ali spars. Not sure what the F-22 or the JSF is using for its spars.

    in reply to: The future of the European fighter industry. #2334314
    matt
    Participant

    Bit of track but whilst you mention LCS, you do know that one of the ships is a product of early DERA research??

    in reply to: Pakistan Air Force III #2334716
    matt
    Participant

    Don’t need extravagant ucavs to cause iaf problems, turn some of the older f-7s into drones that can be remotely piloted they don’t need to win in a fight they can do just as much damage if used correctly distracting the iaf allowing them to fly in and hit what targets they want.

    in reply to: Chinese J-XX/14/20 p.2 #2334782
    matt
    Participant

    Apparently Russians have been taped by plaaf to buy some Su-35s. Russia will sell fully built aircraft only.

    in reply to: BVR : RF missiles vs ECM #1799354
    matt
    Participant

    I wouldn’t expect a modern imaging IR seeker to take any notice of flares.

    But you could throw something up into the air that blinds the IR sensor or fool the IR sensor maybe some form of inflatable foil baloon or something :S lol…

    Could you not make a missile with a radar seeker but with IR cams to augment the radar image.

    in reply to: BVR : RF missiles vs ECM #1799380
    matt
    Participant

    Excellent read, if I understand things these transmit systems are limited by the same things that limit ndt equipment. Prf, processor, storage etc. Also makes sense why certain people would want to ensure radar signatures are kept secret. Also if I understand connotations of this for aesa radars is that you could wire five or ten percent of modules to do opposite of the other 90+ to make your radar more jam proof.

    in reply to: what aircraft can be considered over engineered? #2335353
    matt
    Participant

    Or the F/B-22! How can a plane replace both the A-10 and the F-16 without being over engineered for one or the other role or be deficient in one or the other.

    in reply to: Chinese J-XX/14/20 p.2 #2335778
    matt
    Participant

    It doesn’t look oversized compared with the J-10s. Might even be a bit shorter than a Flanker.

    Best thing to do would be to get the top down view of the aircraft understand what shadow it forms and work out the basics from that. Like the good old days when the West used to try and predict aircraft performance based on satelite images.

    Wing shape and sweep should give an idea of max Mach number possible, surface area of the wings should give some idea of wing loading obviously using a kg/square meter. The wing aspect ration should give some idea also.

    Cant really tell much about the aircraft in the angles the photos are presented.

    in reply to: MMRCA News And Discussion 6 #2335842
    matt
    Participant

    The Indian MoD strongly disagree and they are not the only ones.

    While we are at it: yes the American F414 is also more advanced than anything in Europe (IMO) and the LM Sniper pod is better than the Damocles.
    … and more: all this comes less expansive!

    Yes… but they don’t transfer technology.

    (and fortunatelly we have other good points too like discret BVR IIR, ECM, Meteor and AASM for instance)

    AESA will not be a game changer, not for another few years and India will definately not get the kind of capability the USAF has been testing or trialing on its F-22’s. Directed microwaves will be usefull and will be able to bring some advantage but I can not see the USA giving that to the IAF. Nor can I imagine that the IAF will get the source codes from the US radars to do some slight mods.

    Having said that I have to admit I do not know how much the F/A-18 EF and the F-16 radar will be modified for the IAF and if they will get some form of Kill switch in it (paranoid yup but not without reason.).

    Lastly I will still maintain that given Indias current situation and access to high tech through the FGFA program or the purchase of ELTA or SALEX radars, the base aero performance has to be key. This is where my personal belief is that the F-16 and to a greater extent the F/A-18EF do not meet the mark.

    Better to buy a well performing aerodynamically efficient aircraft and later upgrade to AESA radars.

    I would also like to know how you can confidently say that the F-414 is more advanced than on any of the other jet engines?

    in reply to: MMRCA News And Discussion 6 #2336040
    matt
    Participant

    See and that’s the point! For Sweden that might be enough, but IAF and the MMRCA wants an AESA radar around 2014/15 and that should be important don’t you think?

    Gtg, happy new year btw! 🙂

    Emphasis should be on engine and flight performance not the radar. You can change a radar easier than you can the aerofoil section or basic flight performance or fuel fraction.
    An aesa won’t be as massive a game changer as intimated by the focus on aesa.

    in reply to: LCS slowly falling apart!? #2015542
    matt
    Participant

    US navy has put in an order of roughly 3.6 billion on each of the two LCS contracters. Each ship is going to be about 440million.

    in reply to: Technical versus Cheap? #2336509
    matt
    Participant

    Life is a life is a life no matter what the qualification. Someone with a degree is worth no more than another man without one just as a fighter pilots life is not worth any more than a tank commander or drive or infantry person.

    It is a very good idea to simplify things sometimes as it allows for that technology to solve quicker with greater agility.

    in reply to: MMRCA News And Discussion 6 #2336511
    matt
    Participant

    Loke, it will not happen just because you want India to develop something as you wish it. Mk2 itself will catch up with gripen NG. I haven’ heard of any Mk3 yet.

    btw, how exactly is the gripen at the same level as rafale when it comes to LO or avionics ?

    Let the LCA meets its original design goals before comparing the aircraft to the gripen NG. India does not need tech transfer now so there is no more of a mmrca need but to keep squadron strength up. Buy the cheapest and have it over with.

    in reply to: The future of the European fighter industry. #2336975
    matt
    Participant

    Agreed, we had enough threads talking of efa vs Rafael.

    What about the future?

    Fuel efficiency is going to be key I beleve for future aircraft or alternate fuels. No good having super super fighter if you don’t have any fuel for it.

    in reply to: MMRCA News And Discussion 6 #2337061
    matt
    Participant

    Why is it the age of an aircraft design rates a mention? the original Herc has been around since the 1950s, but with modern tech is still the most bought tactical airlifter. The F-16 is a superb design, and will be superior to alot of regional threats.

    One is a transport and the other is a fighter. One has to carry cargo and the other has to cope with ever evolving threats.

    If the F-16 aero design was superlative and upgrading did not detract from that then it is worth considering. Simple fact is with the block 60 this is not the case.

    The C130-j is another matter, however would like to remind you that there were reservations about the j when it first came into service.

    If India were offered the f-16xl it would be another matter.

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 3,292 total)