But if the ecm system can “learn” the patterns sent out by the radar, it can predict (within a certain probability) what frequencies will be used in the future. Frequency hopping will degrade an ECM system (possibly greatly depending on the radar and ecm in question), but it is not foolproof.
You need burn thru technics to tackle extreme frequency hopping, especially on modern radar with extensive pulse compression and random scan patterns.
Dont forget that a radar have technics to fool a ECM system in return.
f-22 wins, but its not a great looker..the only nice thing with stealthfigters (at least american) is the clean look.
Yes!
And next generation these will follow europe, china and korea!
Otaku,
Your pictures are excellent – but would you mind reducing the size before posting them, please? 1024×768 (or similar, depending on aspect ratio) would be ideal.
They deserve to be seen in full on the screen! 🙂
Regards
GA
1600*1200 would be ideal for me! 🙂
The KC390 and the A400M are not the same segment of the market.
It’s like if you say that Airbus souldn’t make the A330 because it competes the A320…
On another hand the KC390 will be a direct competitor to the 60’s era C130 and it has the potential to make a slaughter on that market if well designed.That’s why a partnership between Dassault and Embraer to make the KC390 would be rather a interesting move. For Brazil it could hurry up the development and possibly improve it with R&D costs shared; for Dassault it could offer them a significant share in a business complementary to its Biz jet and ACs. All this without competing with the A400M and with a strong potential when we know how many C130 were built since the 60s. A very good maket opportunity found by Embraer.
Here too SAAB is all mouth, lobbying and press releases but has few to offer. The SAAB 2000 design is forgotten for a long time and it’s outdated anyway. Just look at the design of Dassault 7X’s wings too see what a up to date design is.
well, dont need to get all french in this matter, they are made for different purposes and speed. Saab 2000 is still best in its class. bigger faster and longer range, and quiter (a big design goal).
Good post there. You have hit the nail squarely on the head, m. tc canard.
The very fact that the USAF doesn’t allow any other nation to have any opportunity to pick up transmissions of the “lpi” radar confirms that they don’t want the emitting patterns to be filed away in any threat library.
This strongly suggests that the vaulted “virtual undetectability” of the “lpi” is little more than a marketing tool.
Low probablity of intercept, sure for legacy kit, but with the right modern kit…maybe not so.Unless of course they are having a great big laugh at everybodies expense and are actually flying around with the 77 on at all times and nobody is picking it up…;):diablo:
the LPI is probably a extreme frequency hopping and signal compression, and it must be very broadband and fast sampling, to detect.
My mistake for trying to drill some sense into Abhimanyu. I won’t waste any more time on this guy’s posts. Total and utter waste of time and effort.
i understand your feeling, been there done that..;)
For a unstable platform cant be regulated by a analog one, thats for sure :rolleyes:
Using a canard is just a matter of choice depending on the needs of the manufacturer and customer.
It is not who is smarter of without vision, it is simply how you can cure the drawbacks and fix the cons of each control system.
You can fix the bad sides of tailplanes and get really good aircraft like the F-22.There are many ways to do it, besides each configuration has trade offs, Gripen has it in its STR.
.
well, i dont see the gripen STR as a canard draback, its a engine draback.
With double RM12 28deg/s would not have been a problem. i see the ITR is the structural set limit, and STR is mostly a enginepower/stall limit.
some news :
thats some real info, thanks arthuro!
its all depends on sensors, PAK-FA seems to have a big upper hand.
Also a bigger class fighter.
thats the way of politics, the opposition tends to be the opposit..
or the opposition might take the advantage, and point on the downsides(FAB, industry dont want it…)
i think france will get it, everything points to that
yes we know that, but no desision by now, seems to me theres is also political problems with a rafale desision..
shouldnt it been a desision by now?!
Hammer, any info?
—-
Obligatory, you are right, but what I wrote has actually already happened. Gripen-NG / Demo (whatever its called) had to repeat the same trials in India.
Its really called Gripen IN, for INdia. And is a nextgeneration(NG) type, specially made to fit Indias requirements.
The parts that probably is India specific, is parts like in weaponintegration, datalink protocols, balance in engine output/servicecost etc. things that really does differ per costumer