WertyAlthough I am European caucasian (EU) and completed my studies in two European countries I do aknowledge chinese people progress.
Although it is hard for me to distinguish a chinese from a hongi or a korean guy I respect them as scientists.
Just a simple test….
I opened the site of elsevier publications and picked a journal in random. There was an article from chinese people. You can find them everywhere! Reading the writers names you could find few names that remind you purely western surnames.
I admit I m not happy with that but I think we can’t just bypass it.
The list below is the index of “International Journal of Engineering Science” Vol42, issue 2. Enjoy:
1. Circular crested waves in anisotropic thermoelastic plates bordered with inviscid liquid, Pages 99-121
J. N. Sharma, Vijayata Pathania and S. K. Gupta
2.On the explicit analytic solutions of an Oldroyd 6-constant fluid, Pages 123-135
T. Hayat, M. Khan and M. Ayub
3.Rayleigh–Lamb waves in magneto-thermoelastic homogeneous isotropic plate, Pages 137-155
J. N. Sharma and Mohinder Pal
4.Boundary integral equation formulation for the generalized micro-polar thermoviscoelasticity, Pages 157-186
Ahmed S. El-Karamany
5.Dynamic stress intensity factors around two parallel cracks in a functionally graded layer bonded to dissimilar half-planes subjected to anti-plane incident harmonic stress waves, Pages 187-202
Li Ma, Lin-Zhi Wu and Zhen-Gong Zhou
6.The effect of a bump on wave propagation in a fluid-filled elastic tube, Pages 203-215
Hilmi Demiray
7.Unsteady MHD convective heat and mass transfer past a semi-infinite vertical permeable moving plate with heat absorption, Pages 217-230
Ali J. Chamkha
WertyThe source is the same as above
WertyThe source is as in the post above.
WertyIt seems that there are plenty things to discuss in the subject. Our discussion moved forward to what happened in Serbia although none stated clearly what was the “machine” that had been used to down an F-117.
I have nothing to comment to that incident however just ot give some material to deal with I ll attach some pictures from a book about stealth.
The book is called “Stealth Aircraft” by Bill Sweetman from Motorbooks International, USA, 1986.
It’s impressive that all those technics that we discuss are writen in a book that is about 20 years old!!! Don’t you think that during the last 20 years somke things got a bit forward?
If anyone have access to any publications from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers could search to see if there is any proposed technique and inform us all.
WertyOriginally posted by wd1
one method that helps ease detection of LO/stealth aircraft is by bi- or multi-static radar… essentially a radar where the emitter and receiver are a distance apart.since stealth tech (esp shaping) tries to deflect radar waves in many directions at once and thus prevent significant returns of the radar waves back to the receiver ( usually assumed to be very near the emitter as in most radars), placing the receiver(s) in different places far apart may help by picking up radar returns deflected in other directions. of course you need plenty of signal processing for this and still not get a good target trace, but it helps.
read somewhere that it’s possible to detect stealth using mobile phone networks. perhaps the large number of emitters/receivers work like i said above. can anyone shed some light on this?
Theoritacally this might be the best way but I don’t know if it is implemented. I laso heard that airborne radars with “look down” configuration can detect a “moving vacuum” which by proper software can track it as a target. From time to time different technics are heard, but are they used in any kind of device?
WertyRe: Re: Stealth design detection
Stealth is by far not only about shape, it is more about materials used, production accuracy (gaps reflection), RAM coatings, supression of IR, noise level and emmision of electro-magtetic signals, and, last but not least, camouflage pattern.
Well I didn’t want to say that from the beginning but since we all agree about the material let me put another question.
* Will export JSF have the same RCS as USAF ones. I doubt. I believe that changing the material in few specific parts of the aircraft the RCS of export JSFs will be increased.
WertyIt is exactly as you said: “…from the mankind perspective.”
I can’t believe that there would be anyone around to wish anything but success to those efforts…
Although the differnces that exist in earth it is very promising to see the most powerful countries co-operate in space. Anyway all new efforts are welcome from all countries either they made them alone or with co-operation.
I will be as happy with a possible success of the landers as I would have been with a possible success of Beagle.
WertyWell glitter
since you come from France you can understand better. Well I asume that what I saw was around 2000 or bit older, so you might now if what I saw is new or old.
However it would be hard to believe that there should be any changes to jigs, tools, moulds that had been used till that time.
Please correct me if I m wrong.
WertyWell, I had a discussion with some collegues of mine working on both projects, EF and Rafale one year ago and we end up with the conclusion that Rafale is more expensive than EF.
However, I don’t believe that there would be a huge difference between their price, at least not enough to prevent someone buying one from the other.
Surprisingly, when I saw some video types from the manufacturing procedure I was impressed to see that the production line of Rafale looked more let’s say “traditional” rather than the one of EF. The EF team has done great job in developing manufacturing procedures.
As for JSF I think LM will follow the recipe of F-16 production. It’s already tested and succesfull but doesn’t provide further knowledge to engineering.
WertyIt couldn’t be the same person. That would be something like crossdressing…
WertyI haven’t realise why we all keep argueing about Rafale and Ef as it is just a British – french issue. It never was. Eurofighter is about 40 % British and I can’t understand why german, italian and spaniards who are fooling around this forum haven’t said anything.
As a matter of fact if it is true that the FrancoGerman axis is so strong as we read at the papers then I can’t understand why french people don’t support EF!
To be honest there are some nonsense in this Eurofighter page that the french pilotght kindly posted but that doesn’t mean that EF is inferior.
To me within the next few years those two planes will be evaluated in future conflicts and… we ll see.
WertyAircraft design
Dear Srbin
those designs show that you are a true enthusiast about aircraft and probably – I don’t know – you have some kind of technical education.
Taking the opportunity of the subject and with no intention to offend you I would like to say few things about aircraft designs.
It could be due to my profession or my studies but I think that in this forum there is a lot of romance about aircraft designs, or which is “beauty” and which is not.
Unfortunately in the design room and at the meetings table things are completely different.
What you mind not have noticed is that each plane is a compromise between engineers that each one wants to promote his/her aspect.
What’s more is that what we see in pictures of aircrafts is only the shape and sheet metal work. If aircrafts were only these things we could have one design every month. However, we have one every decade…
Regards
WertyI will focus on the subject from the industry’s point of view. First
just to make clear from the real beginning that what industries
produce are some machines (airplanes) with specific performance and
technical characteristics ie speed, weapon load,
range etc. They don’t make a machine that will destroy a
bridge!!!
This might be obvious to you but believe me you have to think of it all
the time. For example this will also contribute to the
dicussion about the capabilities of AH in a thread I saw recently.
Now what happens in reality. First of all during peace no-one knows
which machine is better because machines are not
tested. airmen assume which is better with their criteria, not comparing
to real enemies. Then it comes the war and the best
and the worst, of cource, appear clearly. The next step is to make an
order for as many machines as possible to the defence
industry. Those machines with lower delivery time will gain more and
more orders, indepentently if they are light of heavy. It
really doesn’t matter at all. At least that was the case untill Vietnam
and to some extent is what is happening with Israel’s
orders.
Now today things have changed. First there are not any alternatives to
choose. Since there is no competition, the major air
industries in US and EU are two and two. So what to choose and what to
change in case of conflict?
In my opinion this situation can not go one for a long time. As soon as
UAVs and UCAVs get more and more involved we will
have more variety and we will see planes to be favoured against others.
But trully it doesn’t have to do with the weight.
I’m not sure but I guess that planes like B-2 (and possibly F-22) will need a lot of
calibration and tests as they roll out from the production line,
which will delay their delivery. It will be a joke to believe that even
if US need urgently any bomber would order more B-2.
Your comments, please
Sign In
