Well, the smaller the prototypes, the stealthier they’ll be..:rolleyes:
1:72 scale?
I kid, so the general thinking is this is going to be a light fighter and not a big fighter due to costs?
Probably not. Might be referring to Shafagh/Shafaq LCA a.k.a. russian Vitiazh 2000 a.k.a. Iranian M-ATF
I skimmed the M-ATF article and what lept out at me is its only subsonic, wouldn’t they be aiming for proper fighter performance?
Not here. They’re regarded as emergency communications.
The trouble is though they are all fixed targets known publicly, probably listed on the internet for example. Targeting would soon knock them off one by one or many at a time though it would be an added target set to take care of slowing the overall campaign marginally i would think.
Its likely so much bravado without basis in fact.
-or-
They could claim a twin-tailed F-5 clone with RAM paint is “stealthy” 😮 😉
Yes, I remember the last “stealth fughter” from Iran, it was a real disapointment thats why I was scepticle about this new design.
Perhaps it will be a big stealthy Tomcat but perhaps thats wishfull thinking.
Much more interesting, in my opinion, is the claim of having designed a BVR IR AAM.
Modified Chinese copy?
is a 787 not built in America if the wing comes from Japan????
No, it would be considered to have been assembled in America with the wings built in Japan, not built in America outright though.
Greg you are very dishonest because the quote is about the f1 (which I already knew) and you just lied till the beginning or you dindn’t make your “job” of analysis. You posted “random” articles in Greek to mislead everyone but the issue is I translated it and these are very good for the rafale F2 instead that you want us to believe.
You even managed to mislead scooter.
Oh please, I’ve just read through the posts and theres nothing wrong except you cannot seem to handle the fact that the Rafale was not that amazing afterall and only proved to be medicore in combat, your just going to have to get over that.
Well considering both the F-16 and F-18 would be using LPI modes, it’s not a given that the RWR will go off(at least in time for it to be helpful).
Good point, I never thought about that!
Isn’t it rumored that the F-16 literally has the RCS signature of a flying barn?
I think that applies to most jets of its era or before, with a few exceptions by luck and not design though such as he MIG-21 or another military aircraft though not a jet the AN-2 which I think has a very low RCS being all wood or something, dunno really for sure but its what I have read a few times
Nothing in that suggests they weren’t still in afterburner.
Or carrying weapons either.
I did note they were cruising at 36k feet, is that the Typhoons normal opertaing alt or airspace restrictions? I thought it operated at 40 – 45k normally?
The Russians would never bomb some random village but concentrate on the air bases, which pose a high threat to their shipping.
The recent Georgia conficlt proves that theory is very very wrong, Russia will quite happily bombard villages and towns if it puts pressure on the civilian populace to quit and give up.
Its not me who is not reading proper. See Gregs post.
He says in all three cases French fighters failed to pose a clear advantage not just when F1s were in.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1354354&postcount=227
Non to impressive at all when you consider the 16 is essentially a 30 year old machine. No clear advantage is certainly not saying the Rafale was the better jet by miles either as some here have tryed to claim.
The F-16 Blk 60+ would need a lower RCS(combat loaded vs. SH) to compensate for the radar advantage in the SH.
That very same radar advantage would be a disadvantage if the RWR in the 16 starts going off. Also radar distance advantage whilst nice does not automaticly mean weapons engagement distance and with the Super Hornet being not the most spritely of fighters so i wouldn’t mind the 16 could out accelerate it and get a better BVR shot long before the Hornet is up to a good weapons release speed.
whatever,
it looks like to me that the greek government is looking for good excuses to either :1- get a much lower price on the rafale arguing it is not much better than a F-16
2- buy more cheap F16 if they can’t reach point 1-Because they simply do not have the money to afford the rafale F3 or the typhoon.
Or it looks like:
1- The Rafale wasn’t much better then the F-16 on offer.
2- The Rafale is not worth the extra cash over the F-16.
The Rafale is a generation ahead of other fighter aircraft are in production today
Ok thats really stretching it to far and into the realms of BS if we are honest about it.