dark light

wrightwing

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,456 through 1,470 (of 3,666 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2401642
    wrightwing
    Participant

    er, and you know that, how?

    the point put forward by rafale conceptors is the complete sensor fusion to give the pilot a full picture of what’s around him without ever having to wonder what sensor to use etc… it’s all integrated and displayed in front of him… not on the helmet’s visor but on his dashboard… as MSphere pointed, it may be “less sexy” but what information is the F-35 supposed to give to the pilot, once it’s it’s finished, of course, that the rafale one won’t have?

    For one it requires the pilot to look at a display, rather than keeping his view outside the cockpit, which can be especially problematic if the pilot has to take his eyes off of a target. Secondly, there’s no way the pilot can get the same amount of information nearly as fast, especially if he’s pulling Gs. These are but two of many differences.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2401704
    wrightwing
    Participant

    Thanks, you put in nicely, this is how it indeed works. But I would be reluctant to say that Rafale or Typhoon don’t provide the pilot with the same information you just listed out.

    There’s no comparison in the levels of situational awareness, or functionality.

    They just do it in a less fancy and less sexy way (no wonder since there is a 10 year gap).

    That’s a major understatement.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2401708
    wrightwing
    Participant

    one things still amazes me: how people can consider the beginning of “operational service” for the F-35 in 2012 while as of 2010 it has barely scratched the surface of what has to be tested? the flight tests are still in the beginning, ans it seems quite unlikely they can manage to do all the tests (with analysis and defects correcetion, of course) in the next 2 years..

    of course, one can always put untested aircraft into service, and let the operators discover the eventual problems… but that wouldn’t seem very logical (and may be quite dangerous for the pilots and people who may happen to be beneath them at the wrong moment)

    Most of the testing will be ensuring the systems meet the Block requirements(USAF and USN will be waiting for Block III) for integration.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2401898
    wrightwing
    Participant

    I somehow fail to see the need to cue something that is too distant to be seen… :confused:

    Again, I think you’re perhaps underestimating the range, and when combined with the GMTI, IFF, etc… will provide the pilot with a lot of useful information, and quickly.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2402079
    wrightwing
    Participant

    I haven’t seen any ranges given for EODAS. There are images/videos of EOTS, with range figures, but nothing that I’ve seen showing maximum ranges.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2402143
    wrightwing
    Participant

    EVERY modern aircraft has that capability, only the way to do it ain’t as fancy as that. I can imagine that pilots will be really amazed (I’d be, too..) but the tactical usefulness is questionable.

    Every modern aircraft doesn’t project the imagery to the pilot, like the EODAS system. The tactical usefulness is having increased situational awareness(i.e. the system detects something in the 360×360 FOV, and cues the pilot which way to look)

    If we all agree that BVR is the measure of the future combat in the future, then I fail to see the need of being able to look into each sector when I still can’t see any target since they’re all out of range.

    While the EODAS’ range will be shorter than the EOTS, I somehow doubt that the ability to detect something that the pilot might not known to be looking for, isn’t going to be a very useful feature(and at night, there’ll be no comparison in the improvement in situational awareness).

    On the other hand, I could imagine this feature being extremely useful in close combat. But as you F-35 fanboys say, close-combat will be useless in the future.. :confused: Go figure…

    No one says close combat will be useless, not even the EODAS video. They merely point out the advantage that such a system combined with HOBS weapons provides in that realm. If need be, the F-35 can turn and burn too.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2402587
    wrightwing
    Participant

    Big diff between a bunch of fanboys claims and a manufactuers data.

    Even the official Russian tone has gotten more conservative.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2402593
    wrightwing
    Participant

    Yawn. You’re getting boring with the constant dismissal of anyone who brings in some opinion not matching yours. Heck, whether it’s Sweetman, Kopp or now this Wheeler guy, you already know how they all HATE the F-35.. 😎

    Concentrate on the facts, not on the messenger.

    It’s the “facts” that are at issue, as well as the messenger. They regularly exclude any facts that get in the way of their criticism, to paint a picture that’s hardly objective.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2402600
    wrightwing
    Participant

    A space-ship maybe. The “look-trough-mode” covers the unavoidable blind-sectors in an artificial way only. No human-being can scan a bubble constantly and even a multi-crew AWACS is overtaxed by that in a high density enviroment.

    😉

    That is true, but the pilot doesn’t have to be looking, for that bubble coverage to work. If he becomes aware of a target in a sector that he hadn’t been looking, he can turn his head in that direction, and see the image.
    No other aircraft has that capability.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2403029
    wrightwing
    Participant

    Claimed 360 degree in the horizontal to stay correct. 😉

    360 degree coverage in a bubble, to be even more correct.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2403069
    wrightwing
    Participant

    PAK FA?

    Before the prototype came out, the PAK FA crowd were saying that it was equal to, or superior to the Raptor. It’d have better stealth, better agility due to 3D TVC vs. the Raptor’s measily 2D TVC, etc….
    Now the claims are far more conservative with regard to the RCS. It would appear that 2D TVC will be used now. The definitive engines are 10yrs away.
    The advanced weapons are still years away, etc….
    That being said, once the definitive version is flying, I’m sure it’ll be a great aircraft, that’s very capable, but it’s far from a foregone conclusion just how great it will be.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2403316
    wrightwing
    Participant

    HMMMMMMMMMMMM…
    Going THAT route, the likes of the latest incarnation of the Flanker series becames a frightfull adversary (or any other recent combat aircraft, actualy any recent military system).
    Unless we believe, that somehow, LM presents conservative figures while the rest of the world follows a diferent policy…

    Well historically speaking, the Russian claims have been less conservative than Western claims(and that’s not just LM).

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2403438
    wrightwing
    Participant

    gotta love that quote:

    so they are selling a product, and, on their own official website, where everybody can see it, they intentionally stated lesser than real specs to dupe people on internet?

    man…

    kid…

    I don’t know how to call you, seriously…

    do you ever think before posting?

    The folks that are buying the F-35 aren’t relying on the open source brochures. The figures on those brochures are going to err on the extemely conservative side with regards to the true capabilities.

    in reply to: Why 3 different F-35 ? #2403476
    wrightwing
    Participant

    I think one of the things people do wrong is look at parts of the F-35 rather than put the entire package togehter. we have established so far

    4. 1 of the 1st combat aircraft with 360 degree IRST, launch detection.

    The only combat aircraft with 360 degree IRST.

    in reply to: Canards and stealth. . . #2403726
    wrightwing
    Participant

    What it has to do with is responding to TooCool and MadRat. That’s okay with you isn’t it?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,456 through 1,470 (of 3,666 total)