Who cares where he’s from!?! He is a smart, well-grounded guy and adept politician. I would trade him for Obama in an instant.

Sarkozy indeed is the kind of guy for which quite a few journos could muzzle themselves not to hurt corporate interests. You might like Berlusconi even better: he is a very “adept politician”, too.

Whatever the claimed/supposed quality of the management of the JSF programme or the aircraft itself, gagging a professional with a strong independent stance and 30 years of experience into aviation says something, to say the least. When your name is Aviation Week and you already have JSF supporters among your staff to give counter arguments you don’t disown someone like Sweetman that easily.

Unless Sweetman went senile, of course. But I’m not skilled enough to make such a judgement. If you are, then good for you.

The Rafale does have sleek lines, but I’m not too fond of the 2-seater (weird canopy shape).

Though not particularly beautiful, the F-22 and Su-47 have very impressive looks. In the same category, the PAK-FA is overrated IMO (I put it down to the novelty effect).

The best synthesis between pure beauty and impressiveness might be found in the Flanker series.

No need to be rude.
This thread starts to smell like strategy page. And it’s not good.

Given the amount of Bravo Sierra one can easily find on the internet (YouTube, blogs, forums…), we can only pray for being kept away from any contamination. This would prevent us from jingoistic babbling — whatever the side — and increase the signal-to-noise ratio when it comes to our common point of interest (well, it should be): Aviation.

according to Capitaine Romain, we know that Rafale can shoot a missile on an emitting target, even with the RBE-2 not emitting. We simply don’t know how and at what range.

Maybe everyone knows that or I’m completely mistaken, but…

For the “how” part, it must be something in the same vein as what is found in modern radiotelescopes like the Very Large Array, i.e. interferometers: by putting small radar warning receivers (RWRs) at every tip of the airframe it’s rather easy to compute the altitude and azimuth of the emitter with a much higher precision than a localised RWR (i.e. a box in the avionics bay). From the strength of the signal you can grossly compute the distance of the emitter. From the radar signature you can *more or less* identify the nature of the threat (allies could even put a “secret key” in radar emission patterns to prevent friendly fire).

As long as you know the position and nature (friend/foe) of the threat, you can fire an IR BVR missile in its general direction and tell it to lock everything in a given sector.

Traveling waves on the skin of an aircraft are induced by a radar signal. They scatter off the skin whenever they encounter a change in boundary conditions (i.e. a new material, discontinuous edge, etc…). By making many small edges, traveling waves are scattered from many points at low levels rather than 1 point at a higher level. I’m pretty sure this is the way it works.

Here is a good article:
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/absorbingradar2.cfm

Seems like a very interesting read for tonight. Thanks!

no, the Brits really do hate the French. Swerve often tells me his dislike of certain members here like Arthuro. It also explains why keypublishing tends not to publish covers with French aircraft. Deep down the Brits are resentful that the French helped the Yanks become independent 😉

see 18 minutes into this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeHCdBxrDFo

As long as you Brits keep eating jelly instead of savouring snails, I’m afraid we won’t be able to understand each other. 🙁

😀

(The video is denied for me: “Cette vidéo inclut du contenu de Sony Pictures Movies & Shows, qui a décidé de le bloquer dans votre pays.”)