dark light

MadRat

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 4,651 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Iran: J-10 or MiG-29? #2202234
    MadRat
    Participant

    Engineering gap, perhaps. Technology gap? It matters which J-10 version you mean. Prior to fall of the Shah they had assembled far more than F-5’s. And over the years they’ve imported quite a bit of modern multiaxis milling equipment, electronics masking equipment, foundry capacity, and so on. The military doesn’t look at them as hacks. Perhaps you don’t take them seriously enough to think with Russian backing they are fully capable of engineering a J-10 class fighter.

    MadRat
    Participant

    India buying defence equipment from China?

    They might have to legally allow them to compete, meaning Chinese receive disclosures to allow them to be competitive which incidentally allows the Chinese insight into IAF capabilities…

    in reply to: F-106X #2202375
    MadRat
    Participant

    I know people would love to see what an F119 would do in a Delta Dagger body, but realistically your aircraft wasn’t even built for the speeds attained by the F-15. Removing the vertical tail and canards from F-106X doesn’t address the thermal issues.

    And why wouldn’t something as small as the F-106X be sufficiently overpowered by an F100-229? The most fuel thirsty leg of the F-106 mission was the climb, which the F100 would have been a huge improvement over J75.

    MadRat
    Participant

    Super Etendard was a prime example of adapting off the shelf to solve modern problems. The F.1 was no different. The French failed to support their military sales potential by trying to push too much on potential customers. Mirage 2000 was unaffordable to quite a large fraction of customers. When approached by Serbia for Novi Avon, it was quite apparent that Dassault already had a single M88 option in mind. The F.1 was a proven design with reputation for being deadly. And anyone that thinks reputation isn’t important to military sales is fooling themself.

    in reply to: Iran: J-10 or MiG-29? #2202517
    MadRat
    Participant

    not sure if twin tailed f-5s count as a j-10 class fighter..

    or maybe it does.

    J-10 is not exactly a fifth generation fighter. Iran had the ability to build cars and planes, as well as quite a few heavy industry products. Don’t underestimate them. They are quite different than most any Middle Eastern country.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2202576
    MadRat
    Participant

    That Jag would look even better with overwing ASRAAM

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2202578
    MadRat
    Participant

    Hongdu is falling behind Chengdu and Shenyang. They are strategic assets, but China is anything but a strict union. Regional centers are all playing against one another jockeying for influence no different than MiG, Sukhoi, Yakovlev, Tupovlev, etc

    in reply to: Iran: J-10 or MiG-29? #2202581
    MadRat
    Participant

    Iran is fully capable of engineering their own J-10 class fighter.

    MadRat
    Participant

    Wouldn’t it be pandemonium if China opted to float a J-10A bid?

    in reply to: The 'JUST A NICE PIC…' thread #2202930
    MadRat
    Participant

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/47/ea/60/47ea60b44bab1e8a84fe75d78c2c94bf.jpg
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]248762[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2203277
    MadRat
    Participant

    Welcome to 2003. J-20 is 21 meters long….

    in reply to: F-106X #2203284
    MadRat
    Participant

    I think you go less wing area, not more. I cannot imagine wing tanks if you’re trying to truly gain range at higher speeds associated with an interceptor. Either go more internal or take the lessons of CFT design. Likewise, no underwing weapons. Either streamlined with the fuselage or internal. And if a gun is desired, make it as compact, lightweight, and with as high of muzzle velocity as you can afford.

    MadRat
    Participant

    M88 doesn’t have much more thrust, though it’s smaller & lighter. Slightly more thrust, some saved weight, & better fuel economy. M53 (proposed for an upgraded Mirage F.1, as Too_cool said) offered a lot more thrust for about the same weight, in a slightly smaller package & saving some, but not as much, fuel. Much more potential performance increase than the M88, though it needed bigger intakes & other structural changes, & more fuel to allow use of the extra thrust without running dry. Didn’t sell.

    M53 was already in the Mirage 2000, so an F1-M53 would have competed against an existing production line. An F.1 reboot powered by M88 is in a 33% lighter weight class. Fuel economy between M53 and M88 is actually quite different, with M88 a mizer in comparison. And the F.1 reboot would be slimmer than the original due to the huge volume (diameter and length) difference between M88 and 9K50.

    The point of an F.1 reboot isn’t more M2K sales, it’s about cheapening the operations of all Dassault customers for both Rafale and F.1M88 with common logistics.

    in reply to: Seeking An Evocative Phrase #2204170
    MadRat
    Participant

    If you did entertain French, how about “Les Chevaliers du Ciel”?

    in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2204538
    MadRat
    Participant

    Wait, all this squabbling is whether J-20 is 68 feet or whether once upon a time people imagined it was 73 feet long? What a stupid discussion

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 4,651 total)