dark light

stealthflanker

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 781 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2134051
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    How about radome ?. I myself tried and got 1.2 x 1.113m (include tilting)-image later if anyone interested- Possible antenna diameter assuming 10 GHz X-band edge treatment is 90 cm in diameter. Possible number of modules that can be fitted is 2827. With half wavelength spacing. and of course im curious about Chinese AESA module capability. 5 watt module would give like 14 Kw of power 10 watt would be 28,2 Kw.

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2134389
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Anyone try to measure from the taxi/runaway yet ?

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2134860
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    For A2A. none so far.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2135938
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    naturally i want some new capability 😀

    Would love to hear conventional land attack version of Kh-32 tho hahaha. 1 Ton warhead.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2136009
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    hmm i wonder if Russia will digitize the Tu-22M3 the same manner as B1.. like putting ability to carry guided bombs. Putting the targeting pod would be one of the fastest option.

    Would also love to see Tu-22M3 firing Kalibr.

    in reply to: The Future of Air Combat #2136190
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Or just saturate it.

    Unless we already have electronically steered laser with enough power handling capacity. The easiest solution would be saturation.

    Air to Air missile could be treated similarly as Solid fueled ballistic missile with hardness like 24 kJ/sqcm and when it’s gliding it could be similar as BM RV with 100Kj/sqcm hardness. 100 KW laser workin with 30 cm mirror and 2.5 micron wavelength could be effective at about 800-1500 m. Engagement time would be 1 seconds.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2136770
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    So the new A-100 will likely be more similar to A-50EI with 3 face AESA. That’s a good development. I wonder if it will also choose L-band, thus simplifying the design a bit by no need to include separate antenna and transmit-receive system for IFF. There could also be E-2D solution of keeping the mechanical rotation But add electronic steering (usual AEW radar only scans electronically in elevation except E-2) Thus when need arise for sector scan, the rotodome can be “stopped” and let the beam scans the sector electronically. The downside is of course there would be no IFF (as the IFF would be installed in the back face of array, similar as typical AEW like E-3)

    in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2136936
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    @KGB and basically everyone.

    Well Clearly we need to define at WHICH frequency those values are from. It’s little of use to argue that X-planes have 0.01 sqm RCS without specifying at which frequency they are measured.

    Rafale and Gripen may have small RCS BUT.. at which frequency (band) that is more important.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2137076
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    At least bit of innovation 😀

    in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137201
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Then how big it is when loaded ? That’s the main question here. If we know the “clean” RCS would be 0.1 sqm (And someone haven’t answered at what frequency) What is the RCS when we start putting say.. MICA there ? Can it still in 0.1 sqm value or if there is increase or decrease..how big it is.

    —–
    I can only do so much tho to try answer it.. one example is a 3D model of mine depicting the KFX- C-107 configuration.

    The clean without weapon frontal aspect RCS in 10 GHz would be -12dB or 0.06 sqm
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256779[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256780[/ATTACH]

    Now let’s add 4 AMRAAM’s, 2 Sidewinders and 300Galloon External fuel tank. Same frequency.
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256781[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256782[/ATTACH]

    As we see there is an increase in armed condition. Where the frontal RCS at 10 GHz would increase by 6 dB to -6 dB or 0.2 Sqm. Side and rear appears to soar quite amount due to External fuel tank and sidewinders, dangling in the wing pylons.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2137409
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Not a new thing. like Su-35S adverts which use Arly and Typhoon as enemy. No need to take it very seriously.

    —-
    Single seat hellduck is interesting.

    in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137417
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    What frequency ?

    in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137432
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    So, what’s the good value for it ? and in what frequency ? because as we could see RCS is different in frequency even in same aspect angle.

    One example from my own concept :

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]256747[/ATTACH]

    So if i ever think of calculating radar range against say Rafale with following configuration :

    -2x External fuel tank
    -4x MICA in wingtip and outer pylon
    -1x ASMP in fuselage station.

    What value of RCS is should use for the radar range equation.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2138572
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Waiting for S-350 still.

    The fact that KM-SAM appears to proceed so well and this one messed still bothers me.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2138743
    stealthflanker
    Participant

    Not a new thing Msphere.. not all writers familiar or actually tracking designations of Russian radars. But yeah Egyptian MiG’s are using family of Zhuk-ME slotted planar array.

    Anyway. Im curious what’s the MoD requirement on MiG radar’s. I think 120-160 km should be adequate, but i guess. They want like 250 upwards. Nonetheless The N019 form factor (0.68m) would give enough space for about 1614 modules. Using Taylor weighting factor though, only 1227 would be fully transmitting (rest could be in different mode or fully passive). With estimated range of 269 km vs 3 sqm RCS.

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 781 total)