dark light

crobato

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,911 through 2,925 (of 3,939 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Well, don't know what this is, but awesome sight anyhow… #2056933
    crobato
    Participant

    China’s northern and western frontiers could easily fit the description above.

    in reply to: Brahmos #2056939
    crobato
    Participant

    main difference being that if u fire 3 uran against 3 targets, there is no telling what the urans will target. There is good probability that all 3 urans will end up targeting and hiting a low priority targeting. Yakhont was supposed to be able search high value targets and lock onto seperate targets.

    There is no reason why Uran can’t find high priority targets while the Yakhont can.

    Find high priority targets by radar? Easy. The easiest, and still probably the best system is to go after the BIGGEST target in radar. Any dumb crap AI in an old missile can do this, even the Styx. You don’t even have to go digital on this. Just home in on the biggest radar return.

    in reply to: Brahmos #2056941
    crobato
    Participant

    Who said the Brahmos is manoevering?. Does the weapon have sufficient AI to detect that its under attack and initiate evasive manoevers if so thats very impressive?. Its also something I’ve not heard anyone else claim for the weapon!. Sea Dart has intercepted non-maneouvering 40k ft targets at ranges in the 40km region.

    I don’t believe the Brahmos has this but doing this is not hard at all. The radar you are recieving when you are being locked at by a missile or a gun is going to be different from when you are being scanned. All you need to do is detect such a change and once the RWR detects that change in frequency and modulation, the missile jinks.

    Basically a locking frequency used by CIWS or missile guidance would be higher than a tracking frequency, which in turn would be higher than a volume search frequency. If your RWR is good, you can even determine what mode the radar scanning you is on, since each mode is going to have their own frequency signature.

    in reply to: Future of USAF F-15s #2642034
    crobato
    Participant

    The production line hasn’t closed. Boeing is still turning out F-15s for South Korea.

    There are a number of improvements that might be incorporated into an F-15C upgrade. The F100-229 engine used on the F-15E for example.

    Better for them to go with the GE F110-229 engine. The S. Koreans wanted the PW engines out of their F-15Ks for a very specific reason.

    crobato
    Participant

    That’s the old style PLAAF helmet. The current ones look more “ordinary”, got four holes across the top and may have fittings to allow you to attach helmet sighting systems. You can see them across the previous page with the two pilots inside a dark striped JH-7A.

    One time I saw someone selling a PLAAF helmet in E-Bay.

    in reply to: Well, don't know what this is, but awesome sight anyhow… #2056950
    crobato
    Participant

    DF-41 ICBM. Xinhua is state controlled news. If that’s really from Xinhua, it’s coming out from the lion’s mouth.

    in reply to: Radars!?! #2642330
    crobato
    Participant

    Restricted as in from where? Made In Taiwan? Made in Singapore? Made in South Korea? Made in China?

    in reply to: Radars!?! #2642380
    crobato
    Participant

    What are you talking about? The Russians have pretty much access to the same COTS (stupid acronym for Commercial Off The Shelf) technologies like anyone else. The micron sizes for any current COTS is generations ahead of the most advanced military electronics technologies because Moore’s cycle occurs so much faster than military certification cycles.

    It can be said though that there maybe a Russian regulation that allows only domestically made components are allowed for RuAF consumption, permitting only the use of COTS for export products (which can make the export version actually superior over the domestic variant.) For example, a DSP inside a certain active radar missile seeker may be forced to use only Russian made and branded DSPs, but the same version of the seeker for export may be using COTS DSPs from Texas Instruments.

    I can see how that would affect the performance of Russian domestic radars and fire control systems, which have been besieged by the lack of processing power. But it has not stopped export variants of such equipment from performing.

    The Luftwaffe pilots of the 73rd Fighter Squadron of the 73rd Fighter Wing have stated that what the specification sheet passed out at airshows where clients are looking to purchase aircraft differs greatly from the actual performance.

    That’s nonsense. The Luftwaffe planes are degraded from the beginning. Even their engines are detuned. The planes in the airshows are export specs, which often include the ability to use the R-77 ARH and TV guided weapons. Furthermore, they’re upgraded versions using more advanced versions of the N019M or the Zhuk series N010 slotted array radars, which is roughly comparable to the APG-68.

    It’s like judging the entire F-16 family just because you have a Block 10 F-16A as an example.

    crobato
    Participant

    It’s 10,000kg thrust per engine, not total of two engines, by the way.

    Also the JH-7 is not powered by any turbojet (Wopen). It’s been powered by turbofans (Spey) and the WS-9 followon is also a turbofan.

    It’s definitely not like a Japanese F-1,as the JH-7 has more range and is a bigger jet. But the payload is mediocre for a plane of its size (5,000-6,000kg). Still that would be more than sufficient to carry four antiship missiles.

    To increase the payload, the JH-7A uses composites to lighten the airframe and a more powerful WS-9 engine. To improve flight performance, the pitch only FBW is replaced by a full digital FBW working on all three axis with terrain avoidance.

    Currently, there are three groups of JH-7s in all. One regiment of ‘original’ JH-7, one regiment of ‘block 2’ JH-7 with the slotted array JL-10A radar and glass cockpit, and one regiment of JH-7A with the improved airframe and avionics.

    Xian AC is trying to find a niche for the JH-7A against the Su-30s, J-11s and J-10s. Suffice to say it’s going to be an uphill battle.

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2642425
    crobato
    Participant

    So is that really a DF-41 launch?

    crobato
    Participant

    It is not 10,000lb thrust. It is 10,000kg thrust. WS-9 replacement is 12,000kg as per Jane’s.

    Also the combat radius is about 1300-2000km. That’s not so bad.

    JH-7 is equipped with dumb bombs, rockets and the YJ-81 anti ship missile, with PL-5 for self defense.

    The version with the better radar (Block 2) has the same range of weapons as the JH-7A: Kh-31P ARMs, YJ-83 antiship missile (up to 255km range), LGBs with Blue Sky pod, PL-12 BVRAAMs, PL-8 and PL-5 IR missiles.

    crobato
    Participant

    The only thing all these planes have in common are attack roles and Rolls Royce engines.

    in reply to: Radars!?! #2642777
    crobato
    Participant

    The Russians have also learned to use RAM, though not in their Cold War products. Planes like the MiG-21 Bison have RAM. Also Russian planes also not just operate in conjunction with GCI (plane – GCI datalinks) but also with other Russian planes (plane – plane datalinks). We’re not just talking of AWACS here which they can also operate with. We’re talking of Su-30s talking with 16 others of their own kind in one net (two way datalink), and each Su-30 supplying info to as many as four Su-27s/MiG-29s as subordinates (one way datalink). Ground sources include radars from S-300 systems.

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2643327
    crobato
    Participant

    It is Aspide…

    Which probably makes the missile an LY-60 or FD-60, or whatever the Chinese decided to call their Aspide derivant.

    in reply to: China emerges as a maritime power #2071532
    crobato
    Participant

    Si MMICs: Google around. SiCi MMICs are being research now by all major countries as a replacement for GaAs type MMICs. That is why I think PLAN shouldn’t waste the money for an active array system and using a existing passive system on the 052C. Use a good enough system, spend money on research on something even better.

    I don’t think Si could reach at least 8ghz needed for X-band tracking radar. At least not for a while.

    You got better luck with developing another promising transistor material.

    With Si02 at least you can be satisfied with low frequency search radar at least.

Viewing 15 posts - 2,911 through 2,925 (of 3,939 total)