Page 192 – Key Publishing

wrightwing

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,866 through 2,880 (of 3,666 total)

← 1 2 3 … 191 192 193 … 243 244 245 →

Author

Posts
January 17, 2009 at 9:55 pm in reply to: Supercruising #2490040

wrightwing
Participant

The F-35A handles as well or better than a “CLEAN” BLK 50 F-16…………….BIG DIFFERENCE!

Take a BLK 50 F-16 and add stores…………then fly it against another clean BLK 50 F-16…….Sorry, this is not brain science! :rolleyes:

Your argument is with LordAssap, not me.:D

January 17, 2009 at 9:53 pm in reply to: Supercruising #2490043

wrightwing
Participant

None is surprised after 30 years in development in technologies or is someone? :rolleyes:
F-35AA-1 – Dec 15, 2006
F-16AA Dec 8, 1976

Lordassap thinks it’s more along the lines of an A-7/AV-8 in performance.

January 17, 2009 at 8:01 pm in reply to: The PAK-FA Saga Episode VI #2490251

wrightwing
Participant

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/2009/01/16/Russia_bets_on_new_Sukhoi_fighter_to_match_F-35/UPI-93841232131619/

I don’t think Ariel cohen to be a reliable source. He sometimes writes some furiously Russofobic articles in a fascistoid American site called Heritage Organization. You can see it. Furthermore I don’t think to surpass the F-35 to be particularly challenging. Pak-FA will be in the F-18 size class and will have an Irbis size tipe radar When a device of such a a power-aperture will “go AESA”, it will surpass the little thing in the nose of the F-35. Sensor fussion and sthealth will be the new features tested in the Pak-FA prototypes. After all Pogosyan told that the prototypes will initially fly as a 5- generation plane, that’s with the 117S engine, the Irbis radar and avionics of the Su-35. The new stuff will be the use of composite materials, stealth geometry and the sensor fussion suite. That’s enough to be at least as good as the F-35. The “active IRBIS”, the new engine, the conformal radars and an the ever more advanced sensor fussion suite will come later.

Respect to the whishing phrase “However, considering the current economic recession”, it is worth noting that actually USA is in resecion but Russia will grow even in 2009, albeit by just 2-4%. Compared with the steady 7% of the last years is a smaller growth but anyway is still a growth.

A-I’d hardly call the folks at the Heritage Foundation Fascists:rolleyes:
B-Once Russia has all of these technologies built, and working as advertised, then perhaps we can compare apples to apples.

January 17, 2009 at 7:06 pm in reply to: Supercruising #2490416

wrightwing
Participant

Well in this case you WONT insist into making L-M own designed Mach LIMIT of 1.6 F-35 “KPP THRESHOLD”.

End of debate.:diablo:

The range given for the AIM-120 should give you an idea of how vanilla that info is.

Not in A2A NO.:D

So is it more maneuverable at A2G, or is this just a brochure that you don’t accept because it contradicts your preconceived notions? What about the statement “maneuverability characteristics are similar to those of the F-16, with comparable instantaneous and sustained “High G” performance,” don’t you understand? Or the “the F-35A for the US Air Force matches or exceeds F-16 performance levels,” for that matter?

Face it- the F-35A handles as well or better than an F-16, is stealthy, and has 5th Gen avionics/Situational awareness.

January 17, 2009 at 6:27 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2490470

wrightwing
Participant

What YOU persist into IGNORING yourself is the root-definitions of the very words you employ…

CRUISE: = (?) Please?

SUPERSONIC: = (?) Please?

I think you’re confusing optimal cruise speeds here with the ability to fly for prolonged periods at higher than optimal cruise speeds. Even the F-22’s optimal cruise speed isn’t its supercruise speed.

As for supersonic, I think most here are referring to how fast the aircraft is travelling through the air, not the airspeed around the aircraft.

January 16, 2009 at 10:34 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2491624

wrightwing
Participant

aways asking for sources, but never gives em yourself scooter…

The person making the assertion has the responsibility to prove it. It’s not the person questioning the assertion’s responsibility to disprove it.

January 16, 2009 at 10:32 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2491632

wrightwing
Participant

F-22 ~29 minutes
EF Typhoon ~35 minutes
Gripen NG ~41 minutes
🙂

How many miles/Km though? M1.8+ for 29 minutes is further than M1.2 for 35-41 minutes. If the F-22 slows down to M1.2+ it could supercruise longer too.:cool:

January 16, 2009 at 10:22 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2491650

wrightwing
Participant

I think you may be overreacting a little there. The point is that legacy aircraft have never had to face a threat such as the S-300 and its derived systems, which was designed specifically to kill them. There are multiple quotes from American generals saying that the S-300 family represents an effective no-fly zone for legacy aircraft, so yes, they do take it extremely seriously. It is logical to think that massive upgrade programmes such as S-400 that have been specifically intended to allow the system to remain competitive for at least the next two decades are also designed with all data available on defeating LO/VLO threats such as the F-35 and F-22, and I don’t think even the most avid F-22 supporter would consider an S-400 no threat.
Once in a network with all elements, an IADS is specifically designed to prevent aerial access. No jet has ever faced an IADS that is on a level even remotely equal, as Russia is developing its systems to be. It actually never ceases to astonish me that people keep on developing new planes to kill anti-aircraft weapons, but that’s another story.

The S-400 is a threat to F-22/F-35s IF they fly into its detection/engagement range. The point here is that that range is MUCH smaller than vs. legacy fighters, and the F-22/F-35 can engage from outside that range, OR bypass altogether enroute to a target.

The reason why you’d want to destroy anti-aircraft weapons is pretty straight forward. If you can operate with relative impunity, you can control the battlespace.

January 16, 2009 at 10:12 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2491660

wrightwing
Participant

No, it indicate how long time the engine will run on max dry thrust on internal fuel before the internal fuel tank is empty, and as you saw, F-22 can fly max dry thrust 80% of the time that EF Typhoon can.
And a paltry 58% of the time the Gripen NG can fly on max dry thrust.:eek:

As for the debate on supercruise to be or not to be, i’ll live it to others to provide links for now…
at least i provided one 🙂

What are the throttle settings on each aircraft to cruise at the same speed though? That’s the more important take away. The F-22 has enough excess thrust that it doesn’t need to fly on max dry thrust to maintain supercruise.

January 16, 2009 at 10:02 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2491701

wrightwing
Participant

Are you sure about that ?
Wasn’t it the other way around ?
I also don’t think there will ever be a platform + missile combination that can take on a MiG-25 flying at M2.8 before that a/c is retired.

How fast were the Mig 25s that have been shot down flying?

EF Typhoon is on pair with F-22 in terms of time, Gripen NG has a considerable longer supercruise endurance then F-22. (with a weapons load I mite add)

Source please.

January 16, 2009 at 2:04 am in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2492708

wrightwing
Participant

LM claims the F-35 will be as manoeuvrable as the F-16/18, neither of these aircraft can fly any PST maoeuvers close to that of the F-22 with its TVC. If the F-35 is able to do that (and I doubt it) it would mean the F-35 exceeds the manoeuvrability of the F-16/18 by a fair margin.

Well I’d agree that it doesn’t match the Raptor, but was just curious about not matching the F-16/F-18 part.

January 16, 2009 at 12:34 am in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2492749

wrightwing
Participant

That’s something I want to see myself. BTW it doesn’t match the “turns like the F-16/18” claims. While these aircraft, especially the 18 can go post stall and retain controllability to a certain extend, their FCS usually doesn’t permit this for safety reasons. And I highly doubt the F-35 can do any manoeuvers close to the F-22s TVC manoeuvers. That’s my point, not more, not less.

Just out of curiosity what source are you citing for the “doesn’t match the “turns like the F-16/18″ claims?”

January 15, 2009 at 9:24 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2492905

wrightwing
Participant

You misunderstood me, what i’m saying is that 4 external lean mean Mach 4 capable AAM’s on the wings have simply negligible effect on drag on an a/c flying Mach 1, the drag from the a/c is 100+ more…
IIRC, Israel was incapable of nailing Syrian MiG-25 going M2.8, they simply didn’t have any a/c in their inventory with necessary performance, F-35 is even more outclassed for that intercept role.
I think they eventually made it with M2.5 F-15, but that was with with alot of planning effort to get the MiG-25 in a trap surrounded with F-15’s.

An F-16 didn’t have any problem shooting down a Mig-25 with an AIM-120. An F-35 should have an even better chance because the Mig won’t know it’s there until it’s too late.

January 15, 2009 at 9:20 pm in reply to: Is the F35 a waste of time? #2492916

wrightwing
Participant

Sorry, but most of those maneuvers are useless in real Air Combat……….As to loose that much energy is Suicidal!:eek:

The point I was making is that TVC isn’t the only way to achieve high maneuverability. Of course if you add TVC to an already maneuverable design that’s a plus.

January 15, 2009 at 9:11 pm in reply to: Supercruising #2492948

wrightwing
Participant

SORRY, commercial bollock!ng designed to support a programme = not my cuppa.

You take it as godsend i analyse it, different approach.

And BTW this was writen by WHOM exactly?

According to AdA, 400% ratio also applies to Rafale vs Mirage 2000 which is no slouch in BOTH A2A and A2G.

My point is that you take certain information as gospel, but disregard anything that differs from your assertions as “commercial bollocking.”
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 2,866 through 2,880 (of 3,666 total)

← 1 2 3 … 191 192 193 … 243 244 245 →