dark light

MadRat

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 4,651 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Are modern aircraft vulnerable again EMP attack? #2203104
    MadRat
    Participant

    Somewhere in the mid 80’s the baseline standards for electronics addressed nuclear EMP vulnerabilities. Everything in production today should be built to those hardened standards

    in reply to: Are modern aircraft vulnerable again EMP attack? #2203161
    MadRat
    Participant

    I would think the laser fuses would be fine

    MadRat
    Participant

    You have just invented a complete alternate history, dude..

    I’ve got several bookcases full of aviation books that refute most of the garbage in this thread. T-10 came first and fell short. They developed a new strategy from which MiG-29 evolved. These two platforms never competed initially, they each filled separate operational niches. Su-27P was so effective at the bomber-destroyer mission they began to phase out MiG-31 units. Su-27 was the Soviet response to look-down shoot-down capabilities in the west. MiG-29 was to have been what gained local air dominance. Su-27 would have led fighter sweeps out in front of fighter-bomber strikes. This was the reality.

    MadRat
    Participant

    Nonsense.. Flanker was designed as a direct counterpart to F-15, an air supremacy fighter.
    Where do you get your bomber destroyer claim from?

    All soviet fighter aircraft were bomber destroyers. Su-27 began as an ambitious program to take on F-15 dominance, but they realized one aircraft couldn’t do it so they aimed towards heavy (Su-27) and light (MiG-29) divisions. But they’ve always retained the bomber destroyer mission of their previous kinfolk. To deny that is to be disingenuous.

    The soviets primary focus were trying to catch up with western look-down shoot-down capabilities. The Su-27 was not necessarily designed specifically to slug it out with F-15, its main purpose was to prevent high speed and low altitude penetrators (Tornado, F-111, B-1, etc.) first and escort of long range attack aircraft (Su-24, Tu-22) second. MiG-29 was designed for agility to gain an upper hand over local airspace.

    The fact is the Su-27 was completely dominant over MiG-29 in actual real world usage. But the design was not originally meant to slug it out with F-15.

    in reply to: The YF-23 Black Widow II #2204108
    MadRat
    Participant

    YF-23 looked quite a bit like the SR-71. If the team had pushed it a little more towards the SR-71 look (longer hump to span all the way to the tail, arrow shape to main wing, more space between engines, etc.) then maybe it wins on looks. YF-22 looked like a tried and true shape – F-15 like – but it didn’t offer much in advantage save slight costs to flesh out development – which made it easy to sell. That diamond wing killed YF-23, because it looked disgusting to traditionalists.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/69/4b/71/694b71947182ef51111d40755c3476d7.jpg

    MadRat
    Participant

    Flanker was an evolutionary step in bomber-destroyer.

    F-15C was an evolutionary step in air supremacy.

    Apples versus oranges.

    MadRat
    Participant

    In practice the Flanker family has shot down some MiGs, dropped free fall bombs, and dozens of guided missiles. In the entire history of the program.

    MadRat
    Participant

    The Mythbusters are correct, which is why glass always looks good under thermal camera, but the surrounding frame looks awful. IR doesn’t pass through very well, but glass can radiate IR. I cannot imagine throwing a glass skin over a tank since tanks already blend in so well once cooled down to match terrain. Tanks reveal themselves best when mobilized, but are quite stealthy when the engine is off and it is concealed by the terrain.

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2204997
    MadRat
    Participant

    Those old designs didn’t use lift from the fuselage, meaning wings were larger and overall you had more wave drag. The modern principles use shaping in multiple dimensions to satisfy the best lift, most strength, and least drag. Short and fat appearance is purely superficial, overall shape is optimized for its flight regime

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2205065
    MadRat
    Participant

    It would make sense to use F125, since they planned to build F-CK-1 follow ons, too

    F124 means new COG

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2205080
    MadRat
    Participant

    Your guess would be wrong, because exhaust velocity dictates your potential and F124 is a solid M 0.84 to M.87 depending on conditions. Interesting to see this picture with twin pipes, Google only offered me a thumbnail of it earlier. Good find. Looks like its F-CK-1LITE.

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2205131
    MadRat
    Participant

    XAT-5 is akin to L-159, using a single F124 non-augmented engine. Looks quite similar to a single engine T-38.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2205447
    MadRat
    Participant

    Gripens To Replace Botswana F-5 Fighter Jets

    Even more interesting was link from same site suggesting the shipment from Saab to Boeing was T-X fuselage section. Looks twin engined.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/support/2016/06/14/boeing-saab-tx-prototype/85873702/

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2205451
    MadRat
    Participant

    It’s interesting to note that the Su-27 was supposed to have had a different radar system (a much more promising antenna design and processors) which apparently would not have fit in the MiG-29’s nose, but the development of it stalled so they reused the MiG-29 N019 antenna design and processors. The radar developed for the Su-27M (initial N011 Bars) was then based on the experience gained on this failed design and some others.

    What radar would that be? I saw something about scaling up MiG-23MLD radar for Su-27 failed, but that was it.

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2205703
    MadRat
    Participant

    Strange that the UK should find it suitable for Typhoon and the F35 though.

    After the two seat Gripen training, but not straight from Hawk

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 4,651 total)