dark light

Scorpion82

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,846 through 1,860 (of 4,105 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Scorpion82
    Participant

    All F-15E have a triplex digital FBW system. I don’t know whether the mechanical controls were retained as in the A-D. Anyway such a significant redesign would be expensive and just adding new V-tails and eliminating the the horizontal planes will most likely not work, the F-15 wasn’t design that way and this would require an extensive redesign which would be way to expensive.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Part Deux #2374836
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    @Mspehere,
    yes but the drag and weight of the platform plays a role as well.

    in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2374845
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    Because a Journo believes something? Lol

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Part Deux #2374863
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    @Haarvala,
    the block 30 hasn’t a really better TWR, as the block 50 has a more powerful engine which basically compensates for the increased weight. The block 30 is seen as the yardstick wrt manoeuvrability as it has a lower wing loading and it’s analogue FBW is said to be a little bit less restrictive in comparison to the digital system which was introduced with the block 40. As the size and shape of the aircraft hasn’t changed the block 50 offers a better thrust/drag ratio which is actually more relevant for kinetics.

    The emtpy weight for the Su-35 is unlikely to be lower than that of the Su-27, the NTOW gives a hint about that. It is most likely 500-1000 kg heavier as its airframe crames more stuff. The trend ist more weight with newer models, mainly because much more stuff is cramed into the airframe, even if the one or other part is lighter.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Part Deux #2374892
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    TWR is not really relevant with regards to speed. It’s the engine/intake configuration and aerodynamics. The F-14A had a terrible TWR it was yet very fast, faster than many aircraft with a significantly higher TWR.
    The AL-41F1S has been optimised to generate more thrust at dry power and higher mach numbers than the AL-31F. It’s not unreasonable that the Su-35S offers a limited supercruise capability, at least clean and possibly with a small weapons load as well.

    in reply to: F-35 news thread II #2374904
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    I agree with Jason, this document is hardley a reliable source. The thrust numbers don’t correspond with what is generally known and given some other crap in there I don’t see it as an authorative source.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2375936
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    Without knowing it for sure, but the relocated MLG might allow for Taurus carriage on the centre line station. On older Gripens the MLG might be a show stopper for really large stores on the centre line. But as said that’s more a guess than a fact.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2375954
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    The current centreline station is in fact retained. The Gripen NG can either carry a store there or two on the outer fuselage stations. Much like the Tornado which has three main fuselage stations, but rarely uses the centre line station.

    in reply to: Availability rates #2376460
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    @drabslab,
    given aircraft can be down due maintenance 1h per day is a LOT. Amassing 1000 h with three airframes in less than a years isn’t bad, the opposite.

    in reply to: Can the F-35A match this load internally? #2376497
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    It’s also interesting when you read LM’s marketing brochure about the F-16IN which suddenly becomes survivable even against the latest threats…

    in reply to: Can the F-35A match this load internally? #2376565
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    @Jessmo,
    as djcross said 2k lb LJDAM variants would fit into the weapon bays, 2k lb PW variants wouldn’t. The 500 lb GBU-12 is the largest PW family member which fits the F-35’s weapon bay.

    @Sferrin,
    it’s 4 AAMs not two.

    @Mrmalaya,
    Meteor is not scheduled for SDD. A modified version of the Meteor which fits the F-35’s weapon bays is under development. When it is ready remains yet to be seen, but probably not much before 2020.

    in reply to: Euro-fighter F-35 fight heats up! #2376568
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    But to get to my point, I don’t put much merit on the graph you have provided for no other reason than I don’t believe a Viper is in the same realm of acceleration as the Raptor.

    According Jon Beesley it is. He states that in the high subsonic or transonic region the F-35 accelerates about as fast as a clean F-16 blk 50 or the F-22 which is “as good as it gets”. In certain regimes of the envelope the aircraft might be able to match the Raptor. That doesn’t mean it will accelerate as fast all the way from M 0 to M 2 at various altitudes.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion IV #2378601
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    @Obligatory,
    and what exactly do you compare with that sentence, which I could not even found in the article? It lists the achievements, not that the aircraft flew at 36k ft pulling -3 to +9 g while carrying heavy stores.

    in reply to: Euro-fighter F-35 fight heats up! #2379281
    Scorpion82
    Participant

    You clearly implied that the F-22 won’t be detectable beyond visual range and that is a tall and foolish claim.

    Scorpion82
    Participant

    Also, not many laymen know this, but the Mirage F1 was superior to newer F-16s/Mig-29s until the early 1990s, since these were day fighters with no BVR capability! :p

    A generalised “superior” would be a little bit far stretched. Superior in certain areas perhaps. But no big deal at all, and for the record the MiG-29 was night and BVR capable since its inception.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,846 through 1,860 (of 4,105 total)