And the F-22 never even had a change to benifit from full rate production (‘full rate production’ was to have been 48 per year, was lowered to 36 per year but production has never exceeded 24 per year).

I am curious to know just how one can even thinking about comparing developements of F-35 to that of F-22, if F-22 have had seen as many redesigns as F-35 its would have costed at least 35% more.

Theam doing both aircrafts are visibly composed of totaly different pple.

Every system has it max range in optimum conditions (100%). In our case the maximum range is not enhanced, but adverse=limiting factors are reduced and by that the related reduction in range (<100% always) !

One way to see it, but passed this point it aslo assumes that maximum range is not increased with new technologies, as well as forgeting that Maximum range is purely theorical; as Loke pointed out, there is always noise in a signal.

Thats what this multi-color technology allows for, an increased detection range in all-weather conditions including optimium conditions by reducing the amount of noise.

Now go figure the increase in Maximum range obtained with GaAn Boards and Pixel-powered sensors (two newly developed technologies).

The technologies ported to these systems are not fielded yet, just to temind you they are envisaged fopr 2012.

So even if the Dollar keeps falling the American fighter aircraft probably wont get cheaper. Neither will maintenance.

These requierements are hard to meet for everyone else, when an Air Force budget is tight problems occurs over maintainance and spare availability.

This is what we got at home with an aircraft which was supposed to cost less but it meant with proper spare management, with deployement of up to 19 aircraft including the Navy Air Group, engine spares can be an issue.

Basically without spare the remaining squadrons have to cope with a lower availability rate (maintainance time due to lack of spare) and obviously one of the programe goal flies in the air in smoke.

All type have the same problem BTW and with spare the aircrafts meet availability rates of over 90%.

Which is cheaper?

Think of it this way-… The range is physically limited by the wavelength.

This is where i dare to desagree, the MTO conditions are the limiting factor here, not the Maximum range.

If your system could give you a range of possible detection vs a fighter-sized target of let’s say 130 km WIHOUT atmosphere, we would be talking about maximum DEFINITION vs maximum Detection range with atmoshpere.

Improving the definition effectively increases the performances obtainable at the longest range.

This is what negating the ground cluter interference would do with a radar, with clutter the detection real range is reduced whatever the maximum range, eliminate it, your detection range increases..

You can’t increase the range beyond this physical limitation.

This physical limitations are precisely what reduced range, if you take them out of the equation the maximum range for detection is increased, what you got is depending on MTO conditions NOT maximum range of the system without them.

where the ideal wavelength is already working.

Where?

Since the mid-wave sensors are MTO limited, reducing the MTO limitation would only bring the performances of the system closer to its maximum WITHOUT the MTO limitation.

You are simply looking at the effects of the algorythms substraction the opposite way than it is.

It is not about increasing Maximum Range as it is defined by the definition anyway (pixel related), but REDUCE the limitation caused by the weather and increase Detection Range.

BTW add powered pixel technology to this and you also can detect movement without actually even producing an image, a technology now ported to the IR, 45 bit pex pixel is already being fielded.

To prove that with dual band IR you see farther than with single band whatever that band is.

Not hard to do, since the mid-bandwidth is precisely limited in range by atmoshperic conditions at all time, it is only logical that its performances improves with the addition and fusion of the low-bandwidth.

The only hint so far is the band substraction algorithm, and it’s too bad it took several pages of argument to come up with that.

Not my fault if pple fail to read other’s posts and no this is not the only clue:

This bispectral approach promises sensors that reveal different aspects of the same object, allowing the user to see things clearly that a single band may show only in weaker resolution.

This is yet another one, bad atmospheric conditions reduces the mid-wave sensors resolution (and range in all weather), even simple atmospher in day/night visual conditions does.

This is why a system such as EOTS is Visual Meteorologic Conditions Limited.

The FLIR/IRSTs using mid-wave canot be used in adverse MTO conditions, therefore using a second bandwidth increased OSF all-weather capabilties over them and Damocles is using the low-bandwidth to obtain all-weather capabilties.

This next stage was developed post OSF which technologies are dated from the 90s, the improvement comes from fusioning these bandwidth and using the characteristics of one to increased the performances of the other.

Eliminating backgrounds is also yet another benefit of this technology, the problem is not the technologies developed by DGA and Thales, it is that pple doesn’t know about them.

Your barking always detracts from the points that you are trying to make. It’s a pity.

Sorry, you (among others) started by having a go at me (whoever you might think i am) where do i know you folks from and where did i “bark” to pple?

For one i am posting links validating what i say and trying to explain patiently to those who are denying for various reasons, i am not making up things like F-35 KPP tresherholds or F-22 1.600 mp/h, i can bring evidences of what i am saying.

See your car about that in fog conditions, when your are not restriced to ordinary headlights to cope with that situation. You are still affected in range, but not in a similar way. Under normal conditions nothing will change for you.

This is where i desagree, as Thales points out DEFINITION increases regardless of the bandwidth by fuzing the two and eleminating backgrounds.

Athmospheric conditions are never 100% optimum even in sunny days, the air itself as a gas limits IR range by its own nature and have its backrgound effect (well known from photographers).

So as Thales points out, “band substraction algorithms provide the capability to eliminate the background (AIR, LAND, SEA) and SUN reflect while revealing the threat hot spot”, this have to increase detection range as well.

wrightwing
That’s not what Dare2 is claiming though. He’s saying that under all conditions, the range will be better, and there’s nothing in his links stating that.

NO?

Read the full amount of informations and stop denying what is writen, it is clear that eliminating the background is not going to be done by the mid-bandwidth (which isn’t the best suited to bad weather conditions).

Therefore the low-bandwidth will increase the detection capabilties of the mid-bandwidth (which is the longest ranged too) by eliminating the background in A2A therefore increase range in all weather conditions.

Simple enough and reason for multicolor sensors to be developed today.

I have reads all the highlighted text but I don’t understand how that would help to increase the range of the mid wavelenght sensor, since it’s the one supposedly able to see in humid conditions.

Not what Thales says, in fact the opposite.

DATE:05/05/99
SOURCE:Flight International
Tests begin on Rafale optronics

The FSO will provide all-weather air-to-air and air-to-ground surveillance and targeting and, says Thomson-CSF Optronique, is the first such system in the West to work on the 3-5 micron band as well as the usual 8-12 micron wavelength, the former providing “considerably improved detection in humid conditions“.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles…optronics.html

DATE:09/06/99
SOURCE:Flight International
Seeker gets on track

The Rafale’s electro-optic sensors, the aircraft’s ‘eyes’ will provide a valuable supplement to the radar and together will give the crew a detailed all-weather view…

The infrared scanner works in the 3-5mn and 8-12mn bands, providing a 3-5mn capability for the first time in the west, says Thomson Optronique commercial director Jean-Claude Vergnères. This wavelength provides “considerably better detection capability in humid conditions”, he adds.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles…-on-track.html

If you fuse two images

This is what Thales was saying at the time of their research on Catherine XP and one can also substract whatever part of one or the other image in order to get rid of the backgrounds.

one of which doesn’t see anything

Where is it said so?

I don’t see how it can increase the overall range.

Simple but i understand that you don’t, if IR limits are the atmospheric conditions then eliminating the atmospheric background is like cleaning your spectacles, you SEE better.

I’m no technician but that doesn’t seem logical to me.

Well i am not sure if your non-technician logic can fit into Thales research topics.