dark light

dynamo

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 250 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Iranian Space and Missile discussion thread #1804452
    dynamo
    Participant

    Aviation Week gives some details of the “S 300” cannisters — it seems that they are made from oildrums welded together :p:p:p. In the proud tradition of “stealth plane”, “stealth boat”… stealth brains… http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3aa372acc3-9c93-418f-b183-b084ed33837d&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest They are # 1 clowns…
    ________
    Digital volcano

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387112
    dynamo
    Participant

    So weapon system cost of the F35 is lower that it’s flyaway cost? Intersting 😀

    You mixed-up the numbers.

    Also, these figures are for the present customers: USAF/USN/USMC + 8 foreign partnes. However, since the F 35 will spell the end of W European A/C industry, a prudent estimation of ~ 4000 F 35 means that the price will go down.

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387159
    dynamo
    Participant

    Are you comparing total program cost of the Rafale with an estimated flyaway cost of the F35? Am I seriously supposed to reply to this kind of arguments? :confused:

    Nic

    Nope, weapon system cost, not flyaway…

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387174
    dynamo
    Participant

    The more you are going to add weapons externally the shorter the range. If you add 6 tons of weapons to your beloved F35 the range will be cut dramatically from the 700NM maximum on internal fuel. Its exactly the same thing as removing external tanks from the Rafale to add weapons instead.

    Nic

    Then, if in stealth mode, the F 35 has more chances to penetrate modern IADS and in a COIN scenario, both the Rafle anf F 35 can carry the same load, what AFs around the world will prefer: the 150 mil $ rafale or the 90 mil. $ F 35?

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387184
    dynamo
    Participant

    Just so it is understood that LM doesn’t bet it all on “stealth” to penetrate air defence, they are betting subsonic acceleration is going to save F-35 when “stealth” doesn’t.

    “Stealth doesn’t make you invisible, but smaller”

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387188
    dynamo
    Participant

    Putting words in peoples mouths is extremely unpolite, and I would add that it proves that you are unable to adress my points. Otherwise you wouldn’t need to invent points to reply to.

    What I said was:

    With appropriate flight profiles and stand off armament I’m quite confident that the Rafale can take on seriously defended foes.

    Nic

    And I questioned this, unless we are talking about COIN. I wans’t rude.

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387203
    dynamo
    Participant

    Stop trolling

    It’s not trolling. Now, if you say that a Rafale has more chances than F 35 to penetrate a IADS-defended space, excuse me , but you are trolling.

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387206
    dynamo
    Participant

    It could carry a billion tons for all I care, what counts is the combat radius at a similar payload.

    F-35A:600 NM/1,100 km (AIM-120*2 + 2,000 Ib JDAM*2) as per toan’s figures is definately nothing spectacular for a plane that flies “clean” and that carries that much fuel!

    Nic

    This figure is for stealth mode (weapon inside weapon bay). We were talking about an Ass-crapistan scenario. Again, the F 35 can carry ~ 8 ton of weapons and 8.3 ton of fuel. The 9 ton of the rafale should be divided between weapon/ext. fuel.

    in reply to: Singapore accepts first F-15SGs. . . #2387234
    dynamo
    Participant

    A nice pic of the SG
    ________
    Romanian Cooking

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387252
    dynamo
    Participant

    BS to say the least. With appropriate flight profiles and stand off armament I’m quite confident that the Rafale can take on seriously defended foes.

    Yes, if the defender will shot at you with an AK 47, an 100 years old Lee Enfield or throw a rock…

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387256
    dynamo
    Participant

    Wrong, the Rafale can carry 9,5 tons of payload. I’m not a nobel prize in maths, but it seems to me that it’s superior to 8,7 tons.

    No, because even a Rafale fanboy won’t claim that aside the 9 t , the Rafale will be able to carry 8.3 ton of fuel :diablo: Because an F 35 will …

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387262
    dynamo
    Participant

    Maybe, not yet achieved. But Mach 1.67 is production standard 240-3.:rolleyes:

    That’s AA1 . Now the AF1 is flying.

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387281
    dynamo
    Participant

    er, do you mean that your performance benchmark is a fighter model that flew back in 1980?

    A CLEAN FIGHER !!! It’s hard to understand, it seems…

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387284
    dynamo
    Participant

    solid sol-air defense? you mean like one that was simulated in the UAE exercises where rafale did just fine?

    Did fine? Like detecting the radars? :p And was there any S 300 in UAE? Because I’m not aware of…

    And nationalism/fanboysm aside, which one dio you think would be better of in a strong SAM environment? An F 35 or a Rafale ?

    in reply to: Yet another F-35 thread #2387296
    dynamo
    Participant

    Its not because the loads are carried internally that they have no hit on performance. They still weight quite a bit. And for a comparable payload the rafale would need only two middle wing hardpoints, while carrying the same AtoA load on the wing tips only with minimal drag penalty, and twice the load if you want to use the fuselage poins, which also have minimal drag penalty.

    A F35 can’t even carry internally the loadout that the Rafale carry in Afghanistan!

    Nic

    But that’s the point !

    A Rafale can carry whatever payload makes you happy only in a Afgansitan-like war! Try this over a solid sol-air defense.

    And in F 35 case, to the 2,7 ton (internally/stealthy) you should add ~ 6 tons, in an COIN configuration. Wich is still > rafale.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 250 total)