[…]
A look into weather Radar technology would quickly show you that exist radar systems out there that pick up cloud formations depending on the size of their rain drops or droplets. Universities regularly conduct experiments on LOS detection affected by rain drop sizes, and these sizes are determined by radar.
[…]

Whooaaa Whoaaa hoooa!

A weather radar won’t detect a single rain drop! Diffraction, numbers of droplet and scattering signal is what makes what they see! It’s not my favorite topic but I am pretty sure you did stumble here. otherwise nice post 😉

Exactly Tempest414, considering the amount of J79 out there and IAI providing a full support package availability of engines is the least of the issues involved with this deal.

The thing I am interested in is Argentina’s relation to their international creditors, whilst I see no issues buying the aircraft themselves I see problems with the international creditors. They will have to be delivered in an Argentine cargo ship, any other way would result in various parties trying to impound them for failure to paying up their debts.

How well would they fit on the ARA Canal Beagle, ARA Cabo de Hornos or the ARA Bahía San Blas?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Bah%C3%ADa_San_Blas_(B-4)

Chile received their F16 flown directly from Nth.

But I am not sure we will see any Israeli’s pilots volunteering to fly a Kfir above the pound. I don’t hve any specific prob with the Kfir .It was a brillant idea to put the 79 in the III airframe. it was badly done that’s it (harshly perhaps). And with the time and aero tweakening (read trick’ning) the cap for sure might hve decreased.

regarding the gas turbine recycled usage in the industry, please you do have to understand that this kind of usage have drown the gas turbine market for years. I don’t see any reliable gas turbine manufacturer providing a strong support to a Gas 79 (and by the way, last time I checked, the gas turbine tech is moving away from axial comp in that segment of power). Thinking that further away is only fooling yourself.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]224541[/ATTACH]

The 79 was certainly the giant step in the turbine industry. Juts by reading a good book about it and anyone would be stuck by its advance. However… Old is old. No shame in that.

I have posted an array comparing the T50 and the Kfir C60 perfs. Even if many results from the sources are questionable and filled with reasoning errors, it still stand that you can compare the two planes.

Ar don’t need a good looking, more sexy T50 (the delta wing). They need a plane that can fulfill their requirement, strike deep at sea, survive in a rough weather, be reliable, do some low alt recce and provide the cap for some crazy Zulu type of intercept in the far south low/high when they are needed.

You don’t do that with a 50 years airframe or an unproved airframe with exotic components (a lot of composite). A F100 re-engined Phantom would be even perfect for them: range, reliability, accessible airframe for improvement/avionic fitting by their own industry, a large array of weapon, system, EW etc…

This is why the F1 is a good offer. The only thing it does not have is the twin engines…

EDIT:
IAI claims a low 1600hr tbo for teh 79. I wonder if this is only in the dry desert of Negev. And then… what it wld be in Sth Patagonia? (no malice there. Just a naive question).

the same equation applies. σ=π R� is the RCS of a sphere or a solid circle presented on a vertical plane to the impinging radiation.

there are adjustments to be made in terms of λ and the relation to the size of the sphere for creeping wave inclusion exclusion, but that is basically it.

Nothing is complicated in sciences. Complexified, cumbersome to apprehend, yes.

Here are some basic formula to compute the RCS of a shape at infinite distance, neglecting the loss of the given reflected energy.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]224514[/ATTACH]

Enjoy!

I did read the fabulous 64 targets lock. As I did read the A2A kills in 1979…

Now do you think we can put some nbr around the fabulous 60’s perfs?

Again, I don’t contest the avionics package… But perfs, reliability and cost of maintenance, yes.

Here is what I found as a first grossly approach (the old web syndrome of comparing wings effectiveness by measuring their surface area) :
[ATTACH=CONFIG]224493[/ATTACH]

The J79 of teh Kfir Blck 60 has also a 1600hr bto time quoting IAI. Think about it.

Again Colombia didn’t have some serious A2A contestant until recently (and with the scenario of a failed state in Venez only). Kfir was a good choice at the time for what was their priority.

Ar is an entirely different country. They do not hve for ex much of their acquisition budget drown by a Guerrilla warfare

What range will the WZ-2000 have? Will it be like the Global Hawk or Predator/Reaper.

Given the Compass Arrow style of wing, the acute angle of the V-tail and the shape of the nose, don’t expect much regarding range. It’s high alt, yes, but not sure if it carries the needed sensors for that. And I wld expect a lot of trim drag.

I agree if we put Kfir blk60 up against F-1 MF2000 they hold the same capability

No. The F1 is more dynamics. It would be faster down the deck, fly further, be a better climber, fly higher, faster…

That’s excactly what I meant: Kfir, duck and run.

The Kfir MIGHT be good for country with no serious A2A threat. But then, I don’t really know why ppl are still pushing the jet frwd here.

A chill of nostalgia or her sexiness perhaps ?

It would be really hard to figure exactly what cld impart the perfs of a modernized C (to E standards) just by reading commercials and marketing publications: increased thrust, lighter components, wing spar/fuselage frame mods, less frames, increased usage of composite, lighter composites, lighters/less bulky avionics, rewiring with light-fiber, conductive skin panels, improve aero,enhanced RAM, lighter paint, female pilots, ego-less male pilots* … Who ever know what is the real Swedish recipe?!

*That would be Sci-Fi