NATO reporting name for PAK-FA?

Fapak 😀

Griffon39, Unfortunately I don’t speak Russian. Hopefully someone will be able to translate it.

Here’s a picture of an Iranian F-14A with USSR markings.

Japan prepares to buy F-35

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/japan-prepares-to-buy-f-35-fighters/

Japan’s Defense Ministry is preparing to select the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to replace its aging F-4EJ feet. The plan to about acquire 40 F-35s, estimated to cost about ¥9 billion (US$91 million) each, is likely to be included in new defense policy guidelines to be adopted this month.

I think you have a good idea going there.

Build a low cost manned aircraft based on an enlarged Taranis airframe. To lower costs power it with a civilian engine like the CFM-56 or GeNX without afterburner. The only sensor it would have is the Lockheed Martin Sniper targeting pod. The rest will be datalinked from aircraft such as the R1 Sentinel or AWACs platforms.

The Rafale cockpit has touchscreens instead of buttons. Even the traditional navigation/radio panel below the HUD has been removed. Does this mean that everything, stores management, radar, comms/nav is controlled through touch screens?

Does the Rafale have voice recognition? It appears that the Rafale’s design is midway between the F-22 and JSF with the Typhoon being more traditional like the F-22. The JSF has a touchscreen panel as well.

Its also interesting to see the carbon fibre on the Martin Baker Mk.F16F. Beautiful engineering.

The Rafale’s cockpit looks really cramp compared to the Typhoon and JSF which looks more spacious.

I wanted to ask this for a while, I will ask this here rather than making a new thread for it. With the F 2 having its roots in the F 16, why did they not go for the frame less bubble canopy of the F 16 ?

JASDF requirements that the canopy has increased birdstrike resistance.

Chinook software codes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6085909/MoD-software-blunder-keeps-Chinook-helicopters-grounded.html

MoD software blunder keeps Chinook helicopters grounded
Eight Chinook helicopters have not been able to be used since they were bought in 2001 because the Ministry of Defence (MoD) tried to save money by designing its own software for them.

The MoD agreed to buy the Chinook Mk3s in 1995 for £259million but they have been kept in storage since they were delivered in 2001.

It has always said the helicopters have not been able to be passed as fit for use because officials negotiating the deal to buy them did not ask for the access code for the software used to fly them and Boeing refused to hand the code over once the mistake was noticed.

Anyone have more info about this?

I’ve always been wondering why any country would relinquish control of some equipment, especially the RWR.

I’m no expert, but what’s keeping the US from inserting a trigger that on specific radar impulses will cause the receiving aircraft like a British F-35 to shut down, switch off arms, take a dive, eject the pilot, etc., with those radar impulses being sent by a radar function in the US F-35? Or employ the radar and closed-source RWR to issue any other command?

Since the RWR is closed source the export customers will not know its secrets. Conversely, the US has full knowledge of the RWR. This means that electronic warfare can be used to generate spurious information in wartime. For example, The export F-35 might think that it is being simultaneously engaged by 4 SU-35 when there are 2 F-16s engaging it or engaged by S-300 when there are none.

The F-35 is a networked aircraft. A nation with knowledge of its secrets could even use the same datalinks and the same export F-35’s radars against the enemy(SIGINT).

This is why the UK wants the software codes for Operational Sovereignty.