dark light

planeman_

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 57 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2416997
    planeman_
    Participant

    Wouldn’t it be cheaper, in the context of a mid-maturity defence industry, to develop a manned aircraft rather than a UCAV?

    The proponents of this type of idea are thinking defencive air defence fighter to disrupt a stronger adversary’s air campaign. We are not talking about what USAF/USN/USMC or RAF need, think more like Taiwan, Singapore, Georgia, Kuwait, UAE, Latvia, Poland, South Korea…

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2419369
    planeman_
    Participant

    http://i43.tinypic.com/2wmnrzd.jpg

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2419407
    planeman_
    Participant

    Quick over-draw of stealthy skin…
    http://i39.tinypic.com/pyhbc.jpg

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2419417
    planeman_
    Participant

    From a configuration perspective the beautiful Draken might lend itself to stealth – inherently S-shaped intakes, large side areas for internal weapons stowage etc.
    http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/2228/mbdraken3.jpg
    With a modern non-afterburning Turbofan, subsonic performance, twin tails etc…

    On a related note, coolest plane ever!
    http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/6006/21003.jpg

    in reply to: Small Air Forces Thread #13 #2420237
    planeman_
    Participant

    I’ve been hoodwinked! Thanks for pointing that out. Venezuela does plan to acquire some K-8s, or already indeed has- right?

    Yes, those K-8 pics are legit. I’m confused what the PS challenge is about. Afghan Mils?

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2420250
    planeman_
    Participant

    Ok, if we’re going that small, with a small RCS, and we’re talking about a high technology capable country, let’s look at going all out with a UCAV operating in a “missileer” function…..

    Interesting ideas, but I can’t help but think you’ve just made the idea a lot more expensive and technologically risky than it needs to be whilst simultaneously eliminating virtually all of the potential market. Sudan could be enforced by any NATO fighter, stealthy UCAVs are completely unnecessary.

    If you place yourself in the position of ROCAF or ROKAF, or IAF (etc) can you not imagine a small LO point defence fighter would be useful? And that when you limit the mission to disruptive point defence against a larger/determined enemy over your own territory, can sufficient LO not be done a lot cheaper than F-35 et al.

    in reply to: 4.99 generation fighter #2420261
    planeman_
    Participant

    PAK-FA is a 5.5 generation fighter

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2420338
    planeman_
    Participant

    Just found this one…
    http://i43.tinypic.com/fc8luf.jpg

    And not quite a fighter….
    http://i43.tinypic.com/xgfgcg.jpg

    http://i39.tinypic.com/rhr220.jpg

    in reply to: Pocket Stealth fighter – asymmetric ace card? #2420341
    planeman_
    Participant

    Wow indeed.
    Great minds think alike, …and sometimes fools think alike too! 😀

    Distiller, interesting ideas. Sounds sensible for USA but some of the technologies you mention could be done without to reduce development risk, maintenance and cost. I’m thinking either an export fighter for likes of BAE Systems, or an indigenous program for likes of Taiwan, Singapore, Israel, Georgia etc. Countries like Syria, Venezuela and Iran are even more plausible I guess.

    For aerodynamics my unqualified gut feeling is a relatively thick delta wing with small unmoving canards to reduce stall issues. No leading edge moving parts.

    Internal bays I think are worth it – semi-recessed missiles probably have a largish RCS because they create right-angle reflections(?).

    Again, not a specific design just illustrative of the concept.
    http://i42.tinypic.com/1g1u6r.jpg

    Years back I was thinking along similar lines. If you don’t have a radar, why not have a nose inlet?
    http://i44.tinypic.com/504mtk.jpg

    http://i43.tinypic.com/ezn4tw.jpg

    Other ‘planeman pocket stealths’ from a few years back
    http://i42.tinypic.com/21kj7g4.jpg
    http://i44.tinypic.com/33212ea.jpg
    http://i42.tinypic.com/eflch5.jpg

    This one is a strike optimised design, a bit too large…. cheap F117 with South African PGMs…
    http://i39.tinypic.com/qqpnhw.jpg

    in reply to: Russian UAC Ilyushin Il-96/Il-98 KC-X Tanker Bid #2421429
    planeman_
    Participant

    Just a bit of fun
    http://i41.tinypic.com/1etbwl.jpg

    in reply to: Russian UAC Ilyushin Il-96/Il-98 KC-X Tanker Bid #2421533
    planeman_
    Participant

    I want UAC to win, being a capitalist and all. About time USA realised what free market actually means, lol.

    in reply to: Using vapour trails to detect stealths? #2424807
    planeman_
    Participant

    Not so much the vapour trail as the wingtip vortices of the aircraft.

    Radar can currently detect wind shears and pressure changes.

    Its all a question of algorithms and processing power. In time, nothing within the atmosphere will be “stealthy”… but that time is probably quite a long way away yet…. maybe.

    Great answer, very helpful.

    in reply to: Su-24 Fencer strike stores #2425287
    planeman_
    Participant

    how much would that reduce the combat radius by?

    in reply to: Small Air Forces Thread #13 #2425811
    planeman_
    Participant

    So the Syrian MiG is in Russia-proper?

    in reply to: Small Air Forces Thread #13 #2426075
    planeman_
    Participant

    Syrian MiG-23. Anyone know the nationality of the L-39 on the right of the pic?
    http://i39.tinypic.com/nb56q.jpg

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 57 total)