dark light

Dare2

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 661 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440729
    Dare2
    Participant

    Which F-22 model doesn’t have TVC? That’s like saying a Porsche handles much better than a Corvette with no tires.:rolleyes:

    It’s irrelevant. We’re talking aerodynamics and btw, TVC doesn’t make F-22 more maneuvrable than a Typhoon or a Rafale……

    wrightwing
    Conversely, can you show unequivocal evidence that the F-35 can’t reach M1.2 without afterburners.

    Alreay did:

    L-M says its engines aren’t conceived for this, no supercruise for F-35, even less going through the pic of its drag polar without A-B…

    in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440744
    Dare2
    Participant

    A canard does tend to lower over all size, therefore weight, hence cost, but also tends to have AOA limitations that conventionally tailed configurations don’t suffer from, if they’re designed correctly.

    Actually all there eurocanard have much higher AoA limits than F-22 without TVC Rafale does 100*/40 kt negative speed, Gripen easly reaches 90* AoA, Typhoon and XF-31 70* AoA, what is F-22 woth without TVC? 19* AoA?

    The reason whyh US designers doesn’t do delta canards is becaue they nevermanaged to truelly integrate the canards to a delta wing.

    It’s one of the main reasons the F-22 has a conventional tail and not a canard.

    Try the reverse. :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440759
    Dare2
    Participant

    [QUOTE=Sens;1485471

    During the testing it was find out that the design had two sweet points, it could have settled in at Mach 0,98 or Mach 1,02.

    Sure. Now compare the designs and try to find any part which is designed for M 1.2 cruise on F-35.

    Figure 9 does show some general values for the intested ones. The total pessure limit is the general limit till 15.000 feet, when it is overtaken by the temperature limit above that height.

    Take the structural g load lower, delete the LEXs or most ot if in the best case, you’ll have an idea…

    in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440764
    Dare2
    Participant

    ===This being the case, you sure seem to make a big deal about the supposed limitations of the F-35, without knowing all the facts.

    And what FACT doesn’t i know then?

    I cant help it. Just READ about the conceipt you will se difference between the two.

    M1.5 or better, is the current definition they use. You may choose to disagree with it, but it is what it is.

    NO it is not, is the F-22 Mach, supercruise is without A-B.

    in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440796
    Dare2
    Participant

    [QUOTE=wrightwing;1485442]What’s the wing sweep on an F-18?

    F-18 is designed differently, looking at anotherset of performances at a slightly lower Machs than f-16 but capable of higher AoAs.

    Look at F-5s/20s before judging on sweep alone.

    Here you are talking transonic perfomances optimisation, not LWF lowest performances vs design…

    YF-17 outperformed YF-16 in a few areas but not in the right part of the requiered flight envelop.

    I know perfectly well what it means. I just don’t know what speed that it actually happens to be for the F-35.

    I’m afraid that quote does make that claim.

    No it doesn’t it only implies a value know for beingthat of F-22, in another stament L-M says it as it is.

    The Raptor’s combination of stealth, integrated avionics, maneuverability and supercruise (supersonic flight without afterburner)
    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/p…TFA22RAPT.html

    in reply to: Bad news for the F-35 #2440805
    Dare2
    Participant

    Please learn something about changing direction first or the “power-egg” in general. Just in the horizontal plane it is about inst. and sust. f.e.

    I’d say if you want to know see how it is done on the vertical as well.

    Rafale à Red Flag 08
    envoyé par armee-de-l_air. – Les derniers test hi-tech en vidéo.

    After all it is Rafale programe, see it in action vs F-16, gun only…

    in reply to: South Africa scraps A400M deal. #2440824
    Dare2
    Participant

    Whatever the cost, it’s still cheaper than buying a new type.

    At least France regards it as paying skills preservation and European (when not French only) capabilties.

    Long term vision (as is that of L-M with F-35 developement and block time schedule), this can also get costly when the capabilities aren’t up to date.

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440834
    Dare2
    Participant

    Yes, but this article is related to a standard developement aircraft, around Standard F 2 developement or end of it.

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440835
    Dare2
    Participant

    Still carefuly avoiding to incluse the Mk2/-9 as a modern fighter, i ‘d chose them vs F-16 (any Block) even today, question of taste, let’s see how little agile it really is.

    Démonstrateur Mirage 2000 – Edition 2008
    envoyé par armee-de-l_air. – Les derniers test hi-tech en vidéo.

    it would have been more interesting to read the views of someone who was used to modern, agile fighters

    Jack, i’m not going to argue any longer with you, i say you are knocking down everyone who can make positive comments about the aircraft or is not having a problem about this sort of articles to be published.

    http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss325/aviadare2/craighoyle.jpg
    I just note that you also quoted in a negative way Craig Hoyle (see above) I suppose you beat him to a flight in Typhoon too. 😎

    And once Air Vice-Marshal Geoffrey Cairns (RAF test pilot), is that because one is a reputable Military Editor for F-I and the other was more than pleased with Rafale MMI?
    http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss325/aviadare2/Cairns_585x350_490158a.jpg
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article5768160.ece

    That’s 3 people with perhaps from as much as tons more qualification and experience that yourself, that you gladely riped in to pieces because they have, did, or could deny you the pleasure of the usual Rafale bashing.

    So forgive me for having the arrogance and lack of courtesy to loose interest in your replies.

    These writers have enough credential for people to trust their jugements, they do not need to quote you to make their points. 😉

    in reply to: South Africa scraps A400M deal. #2440848
    Dare2
    Participant

    DATE:09/11/09
    SOURCE:Flight International
    A380’s stellar performance undermined by ongoing technical issues: operators

    http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/11/09/334396/a380s-stellar-performance-undermined-by-ongoing-technical-issues-operators.html

    That’s the latest… :diablo:

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440852
    Dare2
    Participant

    I do not, as you put it: “pretend be anywhere near” Pete Collins’ “qualifications to give an expert opinion”.

    I didn’t imply you were; what i clearly implied though, was that you are not qualified to make the comments you did about Peter Collins ability to give a professional opinion even so he haven’t been flying the Typhoon.

    But I do say that there are others (though I am not one of them) who could have given an even more useful and informed opinion.

    Well they didn’t fly this test did they?

    But it is about relevant experience, and the point here is that it would have been more interesting to read the views of someone who was used to modern, agile fighters,

    Because a Mirage 2000 which you mentioned as one of the types he flew doesn’t qualifies as modern, agile fighter but a F-16MLU does? :rolleyes:
    http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss325/aviadare2/compare.jpg

    with modern, glass cockpits than someone who retired from frontline fast jet flying in the late 1980s, and from military flying more than 15 years ago.

    From where we are standing the 2000 Mk2/9 posseses features even the Eurofighter Typhoon doesn’t; such as 5th generation IT Core System architecture and Interferometric ECMs, which as opposed to what you wrote in this forum once, are inherited from Rafale and not the other way around.

    A pilot whose frontline experience was of Harrier GR3 and Sea Harrier FRS1. (Neither of which are exactly comparable to a modern fighter in Rafale’s class).

    He still flew a type which qualifies as modern fighter and even the Gripen which is not in Rafale class does and as a qualified flight-test pilot, his job it to analyse and report accurately.

    Without much effort, Flight could have found an ex-RAF pilot with experience of the F-16MLU and Typhoon, and such a pilot would have been able to make much more interesting comparisons.

    F-16MLU doesn’t have the Mirage 2000 Mk2/9 systems, only some types are fitted with AESA which the Typhoon doesn’t posses either btw.

    someone who has not flown another advanced Gen 4 fighter is a less convincing and less powerful statement that I’d have expected.

    This is about knocking down someone who’s experience is far superior than yours pretending he doesn’t have the experience which is also innacurate.

    If you’re road-testing one of today’s Formula 1 cars, of course it’s better to have a 1980s rally driver (Collins) than an ordinary driver of private cars, but it would be better still to find someone who has actually driven formula one cars.

    It’s not about road racing, it’s about flight-testing and as a qualified flight-test pilot he can have a proper idea of what he is writing, even so he never flew the typhoon he certainly might know tons more about its real capabilties than you do.

    Now, since you are a Typhoon “specialist” and you now know that T2 Typhoons are heavier, could we have their new empty weight please?

    I’m sure you know where to ask. 😀

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440858
    Dare2
    Participant

    Sorry del.

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440864
    Dare2
    Participant

    14F lis CA et renvois a pascal, il nous les broute a justifier les accusation de xenophobie et nationalisme qui nous frappent a tours de bras.

    Aux Francais.

    Y’a des nazes sur terre…

    Vu les commentaires en cours sur certain forums, je me demande si ca vaut le coup qu’un pilote d’essai et de combat dote d’une experience assez rare pour etre soulignee, quelque soit sa nationalite, ne donne son opinion si des qu’elle est positive est suspectee d’avoir un lien quelconque avec des intentions non avouees.

    C’est tout simplement degeulasse.

    Si on continue a cracher dans la soupe, on va non seulement passer pour des cons mais aussi perdre le peu de support qu’on peut trouver au Royaume Uni, il y a des gens dans ce pays qui savent reconnaitre les qualitees de cet avion et sont assez passiones pour faire abstraction du fait qu’il ait ete dessine et concu en France.

    Peter Collins s’est vraiment eclate a voler sur le Rafale.
    http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss325/aviadare2/12.gif
    Ouais, il a vraiment l’air de s’etre emmerde…

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440867
    Dare2
    Participant

    And what do you make up of that french text? That it is an indication that the Rafale is “better” than the Typhoon?

    LEARN FRENCH.

    This doesn’t reffer to YOU, your post or whatever you ever wrote and is solely adressed to French readers.

    And i will ASK YOU AGAIN; you are most welcome to stop twisting words on other’s mouth.

    It is so obvious you can’t restrain yourself, in fact, this is the SECOND time you do this in a few posts.

    I have other things to do than bother about your opinions and you are FAR from being on top of my prioroties, don’t flater yourself.

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2440871
    Dare2
    Participant

    It’s well obvious that you go into the defensive.

    What is OBVIOUS is that you’re on with your well known “I didn’t write it” trick.

    As i said accuracy is something else than grammar and i ask YOU again; you are most welcome to stop twisting words on other’s mouth.

    Aux Francais.

    Y’a des nazes sur terre…

    Vu les commentaires en cours sur certain forums, je me demande si ca vaut le coup qu’un pilote d’essai et de combat dote d’une experience assez rare pour etre soulignee, quelque soit sa nationalite, ne donne son opinion si des qu’elle est positive est suspectee d’avoir un lien quelconque avec des intentions non avouees.

    C’est tout simplement degeulasse.

    Si on continue a cracher dans la soupe, on va non seulement passer pour des cons mais aussi perdre le peu de support qu’on peut trouver au Royaume Uni, il y a des gens dans ce pays qui savent reconnaitre les qualitees de cet avion et sont assez passiones pour faire abstraction du fait qu’il ait ete dessine et concu en France.

    Peter Collins s’est vraiment eclate a voler sur le Rafale.
    http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss325/aviadare2/12.gif
    Ouais, il a vraiment l’air de s’etre emmerde…

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 661 total)