dark light

Jō Asakura

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 1,223 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2174334
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    What is there not to follow? He claimed that the nacelles were different from each other based on ****ty pictures and then extrapolated to levels that can only be described as “Jō Asakura”…

    Oh brother!

    Even if I got the odd thing wrong, that’s what you love to recall…but memories are short on what I actually got right, huh?

    I’ll take an occasional touch of speculation, deduction and lateral thinking any day of the week over waiting eons to get something second or third hand and then passing it off as my own.

    Admittedly, sometimes I do tread on people’s toes. For example the Hotdog-Burrito-Bacon didn’t like the fact that on his beloved J-20 thread I revealed more in a single post than his mindless comical blabberings had achieved in over 4 years.

    I’ll take his (and your) feelings into account next time I post. Soreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! ………(I won’t really).

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2174420
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Couldn’t they lease ‘Litening 3s’ from Kazakhstan?

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2174439
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Sorry to rain on your kindergarten antics…..but did you notice the new starboard PMC cowling has significantly more protective covering topside (and its canvass still appears larger than the port)?

    Of course you didn’t, coz you need to be spoonfed.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2174523
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    PMC ma cowlings, baby!!

    http://russianplanes.net/images/to176000/175145.jpg
    http://russianplanes.net/id175145

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2174628
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Do you see the 3 main plume clouds kicked up by debris to the right of your label box (bottom pic)? The exact same plumes are visible in the top pic (seconds earlier):
    http://i.imgur.com/1jziJyX.png
    Are you saying that 3 separate air-strikes would result in debris falling in the same location and pattern?

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2174675
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Of course shadows don’t lie, in both pics the tree shadows are pointing at that dirt road it is the location & orientation of the drones that is different (i.e separate). Also, look at the cross hairs on the stills – one has 4 dots at each root and the other does not: two separate drones.

    I’ll post up the split screen footage in a few hours.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2174684
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    The BBC ‘Newsnight’ programme has just shown the supposed strike(s) in split screen running simultaneously and it’s clear that the supposed “rocket strike” is actually impacting bomb debris/ shrapnel from the bomb strike further *south* and out of frame shot. The smoke plumes, vegetation and terrain also match.

    https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3001/9814836.6f/0_13fc66_2aff8154_L.jpg

    So, what appears to be 3 separate strikes is actually one and the same event (pictured) filmed from at least 2 separate drones and (confusingly) edited in the wrong order.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2174987
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    …a very relaxed CEP

    T-ViP, you get the ‘Phrase of the Month’ award! :D;)

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2175755
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Given that compression & bypass ratios will be similar, it is the 24cm(!!) difference in inlet diameter that affords the F-135 the greater thrust.

    For this reason alone the F-135 cannot be fitted to any aircraft other than the F-35, and is still highly likely to outperform the Type-30 because the latter can’t deviate too much from the ~932mm of the 117’s inlet.

    A comparison with the F119-PW-100 would be more relevant.

    in reply to: Su-35 versus F-35 in command sim #2176692
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    OoohShiny, I have provided you with ample sources – even your own sources defeat your argument. The cruise missile is NOT a stealth optimised target: it has a low RCS because of its small physical dimensions, that is why it’s X & L band plot are not divergent.

    You CANNOT extrapolate this observation to purpose built stealth aircraft designed to have low RCS from 8-12GHz.

    It’s high time you give that undergraduate ‘study’ the respect it is due – namely digital toilet paper, instead of going out of your way to rewrite the ‘Laws of Physics’. I’d be particularly worried that no computational EM mesh/simulation was presented and all but frontal aspect was appallingly bad- but anyways, back in the real World:

    The stealth technique has an insignificant influence in the metre waveband…The results showed that the RCS of stealth targets at the metre wave band is higher than at the S-band by 15-30dB.

    https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NBzVBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=radar+beam+width+stealth&source=bl&ots=ygC1UcB3e1&sig=pAOPwHv537OCSlJxcSzVa0QhyVE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAWoVChMIlprWhJKByAIVClUaCh3psQYa#v=onepage&q=radar%20beam%20width%20stealth&f=false

    Oh, and here’s a little snippet for your friend who thinks he can re-invent the laws of aerodynamics too:

    http://www.pacificaviationmuseum.org/pearl-harbor-blog/lockheed-f-104-starfighter

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2177072
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Excerpt taken from an official company document from earlier this year:

    Впервые в России разработана технология изготовления цианат- эфирных связующих, обеспечивающих работоспособность композиционных материалов до 200°С. Разработанные связующие и композиты обеспечивают конечным материалам комплекс ценных свойств: теплостойкость, высокие прочностные характеристики, ударостойкость и низкое водопоглощение. Модификация циановых эфиров термопластами позволило значительно повысить их вязкость разрушения с сохранением исходных свойств. Разработанные пластики могут быть длительно использованы при температурах до 170°С…

    Материалы на основе разработанных связующих (препреги) использованы в ПАО «Компания «Сухой» для изготовления стекло- и сферопластиков перспективных радиопрозрачных обтекателей; углепластики используются при разработке основных силовых конструкций перспективного многоцелевого истребителя – [COLOR=”#FF0000″]индийского варианта Т-50,[/COLOR]а также при отработке возможности расширения области применения ПКМ в существующих изделиях, с учетом более высокой теплостойкости новых материалов.

    For the first time in Russia the technology of manufacturing cyanate-ester binders has been developed, enabling the performance of composite materials up to 200°C. Designed binders and composite materials provide a final set of valuable properties: heat resistance, high strength characteristics, impact resistance and low water absorption. Cyanate esters’ modification of thermoplastics greatly improve their fracture toughness while maintaining the original properties. The developed plastics can be used for long periods of time at temperatures up to 170°C…

    Materials on the basis of these developed binders (prepregs) are used by JSC Company”Sukhoi” for the manufacture of glass and micro-sphere plastics for the future radome; carbon composites are used in the development of the main high strength structures of the future multipurpose fighter – [COLOR=”#FF0000″]the Indian version of the T-50, as well as when developing the possibility of expanding the scope of PMC composites in existing products, taking into account the higher heat resistance of the new materials.[/COLOR]

    Either the wording “Indian variant” is basically a discrete way of saying ‘Stage 2 prototypes’…or the differences between the Russian and Indian types is more fundamental than just ‘source code’.

    in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2178823
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    What happens when comedy can no longer hide a Hotdog’s low IQ? – He turns into Bacon.

    in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2178878
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    On the F-35 the intake lip doesn’t extend vertically to the bottom of the forward fuselage as on the J-20 (where it extends to give a totally flat bottom). On both aircraft the ‘bump’ functions as a compression surface creating a pressure distribution preventing the majority of the boundary layer air from entering the inlet (up to M2).

    However, on the F-35 this gap, more complex intake cowling lip design and forward fuselage contour has a flow control function: inducing a low-pressure gradient that pushes the residual BL ‘overboard’ and it clears the intake.

    As the J-20 lacks these design features, it requires a residual BL bleed vent. The second vent is to deal with transonic SBLI (terminal shock) and prevent inlet stall.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2179100
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Meet another type of S-duck, 100% LOS (ironically ℅ DRDO):

    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q_VBJJWSmPk/T-9GcOQkpFI/AAAAAAAAQoI/tkT_lj5_q9U/s1600/AMCA_INTAKE.jpg

    Unfortunately unsuitable for >M1, but here’s one that is:

    http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=226708&d=1395935907

    in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2179203
    Jō Asakura
    Participant

    Maybe you guys are right…I just thought the upper contour of the DSI joins the fuselage chine in a steeper angle and sooner than the preceding series.

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 1,223 total)