Page 72 – Key Publishing

Tu22m

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,066 through 1,080 (of 1,142 total)

← 1 2 3 … 71 72 73 … 75 76 77 →

Author

Posts
December 1, 2012 at 10:53 am in reply to: heavy attack helicopters, still useful? #2278595

Tu22m
Participant

Yeah, the same Vietnam war where the US lost ~60’000 troops and almost 800 of their most modern fighter jets (F4)?

And the Soviets used the helos for COIN mostly (or simply killing civilians according to some).

I don’t think that the same sacrifices will be accepted in the future. The current ~4500 US casualties in Iraq was too much. And the price of the equipment does go up as well. I cant imagine a future conflict where the US thinks that losing one or two thousand jets and hundreds of helos (with crew) would be acceptable unless its world war 3.

December 1, 2012 at 10:31 am in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2278622

Tu22m
Participant

I think ATH could be classified as abnormal. (All time high)

December 1, 2012 at 12:21 am in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2278693

Tu22m
Participant

Considering that the F-35 can cruise at m1.2 then 1.6 should not be an issue with full AB and external stores.

There goes the nonsense claim again.
Nobody, not even the VP, claims it can cruise at m1.2.

The pilots say it can stay supersonic with minimum use of AB, the VP claims it has been able to maintain around m1.2 for a dash of 150 miles. Its not even specified if its nautical miles or not or during what circumstanses this happened and furthermre its not specified if it was with combat load or on half empty tank.

If it can go further without AB or not has not been disclosed, if its with almost full tank or not has not been disclosed etc so please dont claim otherwise unless you actually have a source to share. Please thank you etc.

Are you actually interested in reading sources? Considering that you mentioned Norway as a fair competition I am starting to think you actually want to either troll or that you are helplessly biased. (EADS left the competition because it wasn’t fair and the norwegian calculations are fraudulent to say the least)

Just to be kind I will specify my sources here:
(Norway) The offer and the reality where a little bit different: http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/–JSF-kan-bli-90-milliarder-kroner-dyrere-i-drift-6719120.html
(Norway) Confirming that the F35 is 3 times more expensive than the F16 (and thus not cheaper to operte than the Gripen as the original reports stated) http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/Nye-kampfly-tre-ganger-sa-dyre-i-drift-som-F-16-6975117.html
while not technically a “supercruising” aircraft: http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.aspx

Fun error in the same article from O’Bryan “In combat configuration, the F-35’s range exceeds that of fourth generation fighters by 25 percent.“, I think the Gripen NGs 700nm + 30 min on station is longer than the <615nm for the F35… and thats a 4th gen fighter. And Gripen doesnt even have the best reach of the gen 4 fighters, its just the one I have a lot of information about. So I think we could take some of his saleclaims with a pinch of salt.

As stated above. If you have any claims to disprove what I have said please share it.

November 30, 2012 at 4:24 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2278882

Tu22m
Participant

That, as always with you, is a totally valid point.

However, the datalinks doesnt have a master/slave relationship like that. All other jets that are sharing the same encryptionkeys and are synched will be able to take over control. There is always a contingency plan. For instance the Gripens usually have one jet that does the target designation and then another jet flies closer to the enemy, drops the payload and gets chased while the other jet, thanks to the datalink/sensor fusion still controls the weapon that is fired.

This has been demonstrated on several occasions. If the leader disapears there will be others that know when to take control. If the UCAVS dont get any feedback they will return to base or do someting else that is pre programmed.

On the other hand one might ask how plausible it would be that A: you get close enough to detect the leader without being detected by the UCAVs and B: That you succesfully can engage the leader without being shoot at first.

The Gripen and Rafale are LO platforms with, in this case, VLO drones around them (like the next iteration of nEUROn). And both are very capable in WVR.

Sorry for WOT

November 30, 2012 at 12:43 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2278944

Tu22m
Participant

Nothing is already deployed from the USA and the F-22A/18E-F will be replaced by something unmanned from the late 20s maybe.

I think they wont be replaced by it but rather have a UCAV swarm controlled by a jet via datalink. (Because of stealth, backup and latency issues)

Regarding the rest of the debate that has expanded to snipers now i remember the arguments we had in the army when our snipers got the Barracuda SOTACS. They are worse visually than the standard camouflage (ghilliesuit) but they are superb when it comes to thermals.

The F35 is the same, great in radar evasion, less good in thermal evasion and actual flight performance. All the other parameters actually set up the rest of the comparison (how much intel does either side have, do they have AWACS, who is the defender and so on). Thats the real comparison. The F35 is probably the best offensive weapon if they have AWACS but due to high price and high maintenance it would probably not be preferred as a defensive fighter.

November 27, 2012 at 10:29 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2279582

Tu22m
Participant

With regard to (the rhomboid) intakes, for example, its the pronounced use of edge alignment (in addition to angling) to minimise the likelihood of reflecting radar waves back to the transmitting aircraft/radar.

Pointy nose???????

If this isnt angled intakes I dont know what is.
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/7/0/1754079.jpg

November 27, 2012 at 3:08 am in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2279853

Tu22m
Participant

@wellerocks
At least where i live, (asia) only two of those images could be displayed,
can you attach the images here ?

Remove the last ] and it will work

nice stuff

Just a quick errata

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/robban75/GripenXMLUspecs1.jpg?t=1258333429 the XMLU is an artists conception, this is the oldest source i found: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1591678&postcount=5

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/7874/modifiedgripenjl8.jpg is a potoshop creation, original: http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4585/gripen803by4.jpg from http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1178619483/1178717976/How+to+build+the+enhanced+Gripen+N+DEMO…

But considering Filur, Sharc, Neuron, RCS-reduction works since the 80s and the publically displayed radomes and KF-X projects i think its fair to say that SAAB has the know how.

I’m hoping that VFMA-121 goes to Red Flag by 2014/15.

Shouldnt be impossible.
Is the F35 operational or have they only delivered LRIP jets for pilot training?

November 26, 2012 at 10:40 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2279893

Tu22m
Participant

:confused:

Are you serious?

When it comes to leveling the playing field by just being “stealthy enough”?
Yes. I am serious about that. And history has proven that to be the way things work.

Im not saying they are equal in every aspect, im saying the difference is smaller the closer you can get. The whole principle behind PAK FA revolves arount that and the same goes for the Super Hornet, Gripen, EF2000 and Rafale.

We will see if the current jets actually are “good enough” when they meet in Red Flag, untill then its just speculations.

November 26, 2012 at 10:30 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2279896

Tu22m
Participant

Just FYI you aren’t looking at the engine fan blades on a Super Hornet, you are looking at Radar blockers. Not knowing that shows that you don’t realize that lower RCS was also designed into the SH from day one. Without providing any kinda of facts or source I would be cautious on claiming that the Gripen is more “stealthy” than a SH.

Sorry, forgot about that. You are correct that the SH has blockers. I simply forgot that.

And after reviewing my claim as well as the models I have to admit I was sloppy and too fast. Most numbers that ive come across for the FA18E places it between 0,5m^2 and 1m^2 and most numbers for the Gripen places it at 0,1m^2.

But I have to concur that it is too speculative.

November 26, 2012 at 6:29 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2279933

Tu22m
Participant

Not close to Gripen? In what way? For example; the SH’s inlets were designed to reduce RCS, along with the radar absorbent structure ahead of the compressor blades. As for vertical stabilisers; why would Gripen’s single vertical tail be better than SH’s twin canted tails? Does Gripen have serrated edges on major panels, like landing gear doors? And Gripen still has a good old fashion radar at the front end.

Incorporation of LO was a major design goal for the SH program. Is there any evidence that Sweden had developed and applied comparable, let alone superior, technologies a decade earlier?

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/fa18ef/docs/EF_product.pdf

Gripen has bes incorporating LO design elements from day one. Stealthiness trials began in the 80s for the program and has improved even more in the e version.

Just to name a few places where stealth should be improved to get close to Gripen.

1 Straight air inlet that reveals the engines fanblades is a huge source for RCS. Gripen, Eurofighter, F35, F22 hide the engine for that reason.
2 Reflective surfaces. Gripen is very well optimized in having few reflective areas and very few angles to send the reflections, the F35 is even better.

I wonder that too since there is no such animal as an “export grade” F-35.:rolleyes:

Given that it comes nowhere close to the RCS optimized shaping of the F-35, the Fibermat infused RAM composite panels, or the completely buried engine… it’s paint-on RAM must be super-uber 9th gen RAM to make up the difference. 😉

Guve it a few years and better coatings will be out. The F35 will still have the best shaping in that aspect and thats nothing the others can do much about.

However, and this is my main point for some time, the others only have to be stealthy enough to get within some 45 km or to guarantee them to detect the emissions from the enemy in time. Thats actually all it takes to level the playing field. And that is the level of stealth that the FA18-stealth might achieve and the level many others (like Rafale and Gripen) are at today.

November 26, 2012 at 8:50 am in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2280071

Tu22m
Participant

Silent Hornet; an F/A-18 model whose frontal RCS rating matches that of export-grade F-35s.

I wonder how that would be accomplished…
To get to the F35 lever they need totally new air inlets, a totally new radome, new belly section to fit a weapons bay, new wings and tail… heck, they need a new plane.

The Super Hornet doesnt even come close to the Gripen, and yet the same design is supposed to get to F35 levels without major modifications? I think Being are exaggerating just a little bit.

The Silent Hornet might get stealthy enough though, so it wont be detected by radar before its close enough for the passive systems to take over (at least when it comes to detection and warning).

November 25, 2012 at 11:59 pm in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2280184

Tu22m
Participant

The engines are reliable enough as they are. How often do western fighters have engine related crashes? Gripen has had roughly zero, later block 16 has had a few… as in very few.

It will be interesting to see how the selection goes considering the danish membership in the JSF program.

What real contenders are there?
I think we can exclude the russian jets, EF2000 (costs mostly and performance), F15SE and Rafale. (The Rafale is great jet, but its not the new Mirage III)

So we will be left with F16, Gripen E, FA18E, F35. I think we need to see their demands to crown a winner.

November 21, 2012 at 1:55 pm in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2281146

Tu22m
Participant

Depends on whether or not your aircraft uses the radar to automatically align you correctly fot the gun kill. Those systems do exist.

November 21, 2012 at 12:24 am in reply to: stealth against IR threat #2281218

Tu22m
Participant

It just work in ideal atmospheric conditions high up. Even than the fighter is in need of support about the SA and the IFF problem still have to be solved.

In controlled airspace the positions are known, when just the identity or number is questionable sometimes. The fighter radar and/or other sensors are not used for searching purposes in general. The main task of that is to track a known target to allow an AAM shot when ordered. To activate a radar is the moment an opponent will learn he is under real thread now. The firing range is depending on the capability of the seeker head of the AAM and the IFF problem solved before. Just in exercises or at test-ranges the limiting IFF is no longer a factor. 😎

Absolutely, and the tracking ranges in the radar systems are based on clutter free and non EW areas.

But at altitude (normal flights) the weather usually is very good. And then you can depend on IR.

The are no silver bullets, there are pros and cons with every system.

November 21, 2012 at 12:05 am in reply to: F35 debate thread- enter at your own risk. #2281223

Tu22m
Participant

Controllability at 50 is right there in the presser

In other words, they are designed to be controllable up to 50 AoA.

There i a distinction between surviving those AoAs and sustaining them. For instance many modern fighterns without thrust vectoring can reach AoA of 90 degrees and get back safely to the flight envelope. The Su35 can even reach 180 degrees and still be controllable both horizontally and vertically. Needless to say it still cant be maintained so its not a number they are boasting about.

Whats interesting is sustained G, turn radius and instantaneous turn radius.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 1,066 through 1,080 (of 1,142 total)

← 1 2 3 … 71 72 73 … 75 76 77 →