dark light

Rahul M

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 308 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474321
    Rahul M
    Participant

    the graph says that the EJ has much higher thrust than the m-88 at SL and reserves judgement on the aerodynamic design of the respective aircrafts.
    (I don’t know at what height EF achieved supercruise in s’pore)

    I’m unsure why you think this graph is wrong since you haven’t shown me anything yet that says so.
    Of course it could be, but throwing random questions isn’t very convincing.
    I’m yet to be convinced of your graph reading abilities.
    http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/6933/69859199dr9.jpg

    in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474362
    Rahul M
    Participant

    I can read graphs and I know that this is crape.:rolleyes:
    Beyond 0.3 Mach occurrence compressibility.;)

    and I can guesstimate your ability to read graphs from your general educational level and your previous query about supercruise.

    in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474367
    Rahul M
    Participant

    Maybe I get cynic, but such claims do explain a lot about the sorrow state of the Tejas and the Kaveri, when taken seriously. To all the other Indian poster, that is not my serious judgement of Indian capabilities and related to the claim above only. 😉
    There are some selfclaimed aeronautical engineers around here.

    you are free to disbelieve me. I don’t care.
    AFAIK he is not connected to any Indian RnD org.
    cheers !

    in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474379
    Rahul M
    Participant

    He wrote therefore a catholic physics programm or for Hindus a hindu physics programm!
    He must works with non linear gasdynamic equations!
    Or how can you explains to that the Typhoon archieved supercruise in Signapore on a hot day and the Rafale failed to do this ?!

    he has already clarified that the charts are for engine to engine comparisons only in terms of their full powers.
    1:1 doesn’t mean both have same power but both have their max possible power !
    learn to read graphs please.

    and read this too :

    But that’s just half the story. In terms of actual thrust levels, the second chart shows some interesting details. Beyond 6000m (~20000 ft), the EJ-200 produces lesser thrust than the M88-2. Whether it makes a difference in the performance of the aircraft themselves is dependent on the airframe design, but it seems that at higher altitudes, a M88-2 armed Rafale is producing more power than an EJ-200 armed Eurofighter Typhoon.

    anyway, I posted that link FWIW. I’ve no intention to indulge in a conflict to bring you people down from your high horses.
    if you have any more questions/comments, ask the man, not me.

    in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474387
    Rahul M
    Participant

    The graphics at that forum are nonsense to stay polite.
    Both engines do use the same medium=air and the content oxygen and the air-pressure is the same for both, when both engines have a similar design.

    http://www.snecma.com/IMG/pdf/M88-2_Anglais.pdf
    http://www.eurojet.de/default.php?p=4&cid=6

    The true question left is, what amount of installed thrust is in need really? Both cases will have negative effects.

    FWIW, the person who did that is an accomplished aero engn.
    at least one US missile maker uses his sw ! but anyway, stick to your beliefs.

    in reply to: EJ200 thrust vs. altitude #2474450
    Rahul M
    Participant

    http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&p=532129#p532129

    a BRF member wrote a code to compare the m-88 to the EJ.

    in reply to: Super-Hornet in the IAF as MRCA #2474474
    Rahul M
    Participant

    I know nothing …

    thanks, I got the drift !

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion #2477393
    Rahul M
    Participant

    Jaguar IM where supposed to get 2032 ,not the whole fleet ,old jaguar will get Darin III upgrades if i am not wrong

    I thought the 2032 on IM’s have been completed ? :confused:

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion #2477470
    Rahul M
    Participant

    The HAL is carrying out another development programme for the Jaguar fleet which includes additional features like an advanced radar system.

    “Another development programme is going on for the strike aircraft to add some additional features like advanced radar systems which IAF wants,” Vaishampayan said.

    which radar ? 2032 ?
    and which version, doesn’t sound like the IMs.

    in reply to: The best aircraft to chase UFO #2478277
    Rahul M
    Participant

    @ Giving away an “all time Trophy” … seems you havent checked out the other gems @ keypub … heres one for example !!

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=70613 😀

    thanks for that link nirav ! I’m still gasping for breath ! 😀

    in reply to: Cool paint schemes thread #2483280
    Rahul M
    Participant

    torpedo, good one !! 😀

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion #2483608
    Rahul M
    Participant

    Hey who told you fools that this was a chatroom?

    sorry boss, I don’t always login and hence didn’t know about the PM.
    hence the onboard notification, in case the other side is afflicted by that symptom too ! :p

    If one of those PMs includes the phrase “what are you wearing” I swear I’ll ban you all 😀

    more about what to wear in case you are 20,000 feet up on a mountain with soldiers firing at you and you want to blend in !

    anyway, back to the topic :
    nick, any idea which would be the next mki sqdn after the pursoots ?
    also, how many mki’s does IAF currently have in its inventory ?

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion #2483613
    Rahul M
    Participant

    yep boss, plz check reply.

    in reply to: Cool paint schemes thread #2483639
    Rahul M
    Participant

    beat this !! 😀

    IAF mirage-2000 from #1 sqdn, “tigers”.
    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/picture.php?albumid=36&pictureid=115

    in reply to: Best/Worst looking military jet. #2486391
    Rahul M
    Participant

    Mentioned already by Sean, and honestly the only one I can think of to be actually ugly, here’s the wonderful Yak-38U. Of course, it’s ungainliness only gives it that extra character, but my my is it hideous… it makes stuff like twin-seat Harriers, Tornados and even the K-8 look acceptable.

    you don’t like 2seat harriers ?? 😮

    anyway, I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again,
    the yak-38 is undoubtedly the ugliest a/c to fly on the face of the earth !
    http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/wuerg/vomit-smiley-026.gif

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 308 total)