Page 330 – Key Publishing

TomcatViP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 4,936 through 4,950 (of 5,621 total)

← 1 2 3 … 329 330 331 … 373 374 375 →

Author

Posts
February 4, 2014 at 1:13 am in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (2) #2255678

TomcatViP
Participant

Once again, wing loading comparison is totally irrelevant.

Specially with wing body smoothed junction.

@Tu22m: Thales (the mathematician) tells me that the size of the object detectable is 7m. So Anything around 7m will be detected for BDA.
Although, given the quality of the video displayed by LM showing the detection and the tracking of a BM at long range (coupled with the Radar), I alrdy made my mind regarding its quality.

Regarding the Raf, the approach chosen is totally different: its’ mostly info (analysed – symbology) that are piped down to the pilot. Not raw data. So the visual quality is not as much important. Hence, since there is probably no restitution of the sensor image, there is no need for a human eyes quality. 2 sensors are enough to have a perception of the deep and get an hemispheric coverage trough fish eyes. Then everything rely to the algorithms processing and analyzing the raw image.

In the future, when massive sensors will be able to saturate the spectrum in which those optical sensors operate, quality (gain) will be primordial. But then, it’s possible that EM sciences will have reached a near vision level trough interferometry and (again) large and massive sensors.

February 2, 2014 at 5:37 pm in reply to: United Europe Air Force #2256347

TomcatViP
Participant

[..]

That’s how we made airbus in the past to give you a nice example.

The problem is lying right there: it is not anymore the time of devoted pioneer. Gone they are, their heritage eaten away.

That way you can talk to the US on equal terms. You can still work nicely together and retain your independence

Don’t you see what I mean ? …

February 2, 2014 at 5:17 pm in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXIV #2256394

TomcatViP
Participant

Viewer advice should be mandatory before watching this.

No vid by the way?

February 2, 2014 at 5:11 pm in reply to: will stealth become irrelevant? #2256397

TomcatViP
Participant

The F35 will get about 24MLOC (million lines of code), probably more in the upcoming software blocks.

In a standard project one can assume 1 bug per 1000LOC, and this is roughly what NASA came up with in the Rover codebase (2MLOC, ~2000bugs). But the larger the project, and the more interlinked the code is, the number of bugs will increase. Just look at MS Windows XP, 45MLOC and bugs didnt get fixed for over a decade. New fixes introduced unexpected problems in other areas etc.

For the F35, if we treat it generically, we can expect ~24’000 bugs at IOC. Flight critical parts of the system included. This is why lines of code is the shi**iest benchmark for quality in software. This is how frequent data corruption is. (But the F35 source code, because of its size and how interlinked everything is, will have more)

One could, in normal conditions expect corrupted files on 27% of all HDDs after 41 months. The F35 will have several. The drives in the F35 will experience A LOT MORE vibrations than the ones in this example. Every corrupted file could potentially mess up critical functions.

Thought it could be nice to know.

fascinating. Thx.

February 2, 2014 at 1:23 am in reply to: News of further Anglo/French cooperation #2256529

TomcatViP
Participant

Outsourced from the article linked by Tango:

SIPRI Top 100 Defense Companies Data – 2012
The ranking is followed by sales in 2012 and 2011
1. Lockheed Martin, US, $36bn, $36.27bn
2. Boeing, US, $27.6bn, $30.56bn
3. BAE Systems, UK, $26.85bn, $29.16bn
4. Raytheon, US, $22.5bn, $22.9bn
5. General Dynamics, US, $20.94bn, $23.33bn
6. Northtrop, US, $19.40bn, $23.34bn
7. EADS, Trans Europe, $15.40bn, $16.40bn
8. United Technologies, US, $13.46bn, $11.64bn
9. Finmeccanica, Italy, $12.53bn, $14.57bn
10. L-3 Communications, US, $10.84bn, $12.52bn
11. BAE Systems Inc, US, $10.37bn, $13.56bn
12. Thales, France, $8.88bn, $9.48bn
13. SAIC, US, $7.82bn, $7.94bn
14. Hungington Ingalls, US, $6.44bn, $6.38bn
15. Almaz-Antel, Russia, $5.51bn, $3.86bn
16. Safran, France, $5.30bn, $5.24bn
17. Honeywell, US, $5.11bn, $5.28bn
18. Rolls Royce, UK, $5.01bn, $4.73bn
19. Sikorsky, US, $4.51bn, $4.97bn (United Technologies)
20. United Aircraft, Russia, $$4.44, bn$4.40bn
21. General Electric, US, $4.1bn, $4.1bn
22. Oshkosh Truck, US, $3.95, bn$4.37bn
23. MBDA, Trans Europe, $3.86bn, $4.17bn (Finmeccanica/ BAE Systems/ EADS)
24. ITT Exelis, US, $3.80bn, $4.15bn
25. Pratt & Whitney, US, $3.72bn, $3.00bn

February 1, 2014 at 8:44 pm in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (2) #2256622

TomcatViP
Participant

Yes I heard about that. Bust wasn’t a degraded mode available for the M (wing level + pull) ?

February 1, 2014 at 8:41 pm in reply to: News of further Anglo/French cooperation #2256624

TomcatViP
Participant

[…]
If the UK still wont talk about what is going on with Taranis, I think the chances of this model being representative of their current thinking is quite slim.

I am not sure that Taranis is a success regarding the configuration chosen.

This one looks better. My own personal view of course.

February 1, 2014 at 7:32 pm in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (2) #2256667

TomcatViP
Participant

The Gripen A/C has no automatic last ditch maneuver program, however, if the ground collision warning notices that you need to pull more than 9G then it will allow you to pull +11G in Gripen A and 12G in Gripen C. (This is confirmed in Havkoms reports where it is stated that during a few of the crashes the FCS recommended the pilot pulling 11G or 12G to avoid crashing but that the pilots instead opted to eject)

This could be automated, just like landing is currently or AoA recovery. SAAB have a roadmap to automate everything from basic navigation, takeoff/landing, FCS recovery etc to BFM etc. In theory the pilot could stay on the ground drinking coffee. But a few years ahead they are still required in the cockpit.

Thx for the hint.
But writing (voicing) a recommendation about the fact that you shld pull 12 instead of 9G when you are in a critical situation pulling all that you can to avoid a close call makes no sens at all. The decision to pull precede the act and there is no time to draw it on a paper, recalculate your trajectory agree with the FCS decision that you should not eject.

Full auto system or nothing (mechanical just like an old Su27). Sometime when you can’t re-invent the wheel, it does not help to draw a triangle and call it a smooth circle.

Everybody as seen the vid of the Rafale near-missing a GC at sea. it’s a violent maneuver with only split seconds tempo. No time for a dialogue and a cup of tea with B**** Betty

February 1, 2014 at 5:16 am in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2257003

TomcatViP
Participant

Navalization of the engine takes time and ressources that are not really needed with only a single carrier.

Regarding the J31: enlarged and bigger wings ?! Pls, don’t tell us this is a PS because this one rocks (pic says January 30th 2014)!

February 1, 2014 at 5:06 am in reply to: News of further Anglo/French cooperation #2257006

TomcatViP
Participant

Shamelessly stolen from Milphotos.

Much better (even both officials are impressively marking an acute sens of defense objectives – again).

The greater aspect ratio wing, less sweep, more flatter extrados (and boosted boundary layer perhaps), negative diedra reflecting a concern for roll rate and a confidence regarding split flaps usage.

What it lacks IMOHO: more pointy tips reflecting an increased plasma usage, more speed (but I guess that the turbofan (high bypass) is a choice dictated by a need for an increased range. But Mach 0.6…. It’s a huge time regarding ToT.

February 1, 2014 at 3:25 am in reply to: will stealth become irrelevant? #2257011

TomcatViP
Participant

There is one thing that we can say about the popular diatribe against Stealth: it’s not really stealthy ! On the countrary, the pro… I can’t hear them that much… Oh discreet you said…

February 1, 2014 at 2:45 am in reply to: Dassault Rafale, News & Discussion (XV) #2257024

TomcatViP
Participant

new radome or is itt only a new hinge for the extra weight?

February 1, 2014 at 12:11 am in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (2) #2257170

TomcatViP
Participant

Wrong. A pilot is too slow in that case. He is just the final obstacle in weapons-release and has some freedom about positioning.

If not so, every sane person will seperate flight-software from sensor software. Whatever a pilot will initiate with the stick, the software set the limits of the controls or what is possible in the present cube of space.
You get a predicted flightpath shown and have just the option to ignore it.
All that makes the F-35 different from a Rafale or Gripen for example, which do just enhance the SA.

Do you have a quote for that to give us a hint of how true it is ?

Because it’s a drastic change in Aerial Warfare.

January 31, 2014 at 4:03 am in reply to: Impressive Weapons Load 2 (again) #2258094

TomcatViP
Participant

Hard to beat that one in term of load and firepower:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]225069[/ATTACH]

70 000+lb – Potentialy 6x 300+ Kilotones :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MMIII_C5_airdrop(Oct_1974).jpg

January 31, 2014 at 3:56 am in reply to: Modern Military Aviation (During the 1970s & 1980s) #2258105

TomcatViP
Participant

I think it was over the sea of Japan.

Another rather hot pic of the cold war:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]225067[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]225068[/ATTACH]
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 4,936 through 4,950 (of 5,621 total)

← 1 2 3 … 329 330 331 … 373 374 375 →