dark light

mig-31bm

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 481 through 495 (of 1,759 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • mig-31bm
    Participant

    Traveling fast long distances HAS a clear tactical advantage, it makes you more flexible tactics, decrease enemy’s time of reaction, and mainly it gets you in a better position to start the fight at the place and aspect yo want it.

    that not always true , reaction time is a function of detection range too so going faster doesnot neccessary mean enemy will have less time to react. If you go faster you will have much higher infrared signature and often have to cruise at higher altitude ,thus enemy can detect you from much further distance.

    So traveling long distances fast, is actually very important, and in fact, is a more solid feature than the overrated stealth.

    if speed was more important than steath then new fighters would be more like SR-71 or Mig-31 rather than J-31 ,j-20 , F-22 or F-35

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200538
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    In general cued search mode often mean the beam is narrower for more concentrated power, that will improve detection range but increase scanning time for total FoV.

    And maximum detection range of radar is always at maximum PRF which is good to get reflection but you cant determine distance to target

    in reply to: Antenna choices #2200682
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    Vertical polarization is more common for fighter aircraft application as it can handle vegetation absorption of radar signal better than horizontal polarization.

    This look like it is polarized in horizontal plane
    https://designer.home.xs4all.nl/aircraft/af-16/f16-old-radar.jpg

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2200901
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    So, according to this ‘analysis’, PESA radar with a peak-power of 20kW has a longer range of detection than a PESA radar of Megawatt class?! :stupid:

    As i understand the range for S-400radar is tracking range while the range for Irbis-e is focused detection range, normally for the same radar TWS range is about 1/3 of velocity search (max detection range) so it not that surprising that s-400 radar tracking range seem equal to Irbis-e detection range
    Anyway these are many others factor such as jamming and clutter

    TBH, i wouldn’t take seriously any ‘analysis’ which operates only by public claims and basic arithmetics

    If only people would apply this to others aspects such as fighter agility and supercruise

    This is how real analysis should look like: http://radar.dinos.net/content.htm

    Until they have something like this, there is nothing to discuss here. BTW, can someone share something similar to this doc i posted above, made by the Western radiophysicists? Would be very interesting to read something more factual and scientific than these TV-shop style loads of BS for housewives, about “metal marble” and “golf ball”.

    I actually saw the English version of your link before, it a bit weird that the name of these links is in English but the downloaded file is in Russian, seem unnecessary confusing for people

    mig-31bm
    Participant

    The light weight F-15E is 1980s airframe will be severally G limited. new F-15K is 20tons without Aesa radar.

    No it isn’t
    why are you always trying to spread retarded blatant lie? what the point ?

    mig-31bm
    Participant

    You still need total engine power advantage regardless of TWR for radar and electronic warfare.

    total engine thrust is not related to electric power for Radar and ECM,go learn how a jet engine work before speaking BS!

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2202668
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    Compare the fan sizes and get back to MiG31bm about who doesn’t know what

    It very unlikely that JSR understand how jet engine produce thrust , he talk like a primary school student

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2202730
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    MIG-31BM need constant reminders in every thread about aircraft specification and specific roles they are designed from ground up otherwise it’s all his misinformation.

    sure mate :rolleyes: do you actually believe anyone here stupid enough to believe your words?

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2202819
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    .

    However we know and can accept (as we always did) that a standard 4 gen plane cannot pick up neither of the F-35 and F-22 on their radar. I mean that was the first requirement to begin with!
    .

    F-15 radar is extremely powerful though, it probably the fighter with the most powerful radar at the moment along with Su-35S, it can also carry ATP sniper-xr, which is a powerful IRST unit by itself

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2202823
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    ok, works well when simulated, didnt pan out quite as well during the live testing vs the ole F-16D

    come on, we come over this a thousand time already, the test with F-16D is a flight control test where the F-35 go max elevated AoA to see how the FBW software react, it not a test to see who win in dogfight

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2203492
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    Seen this yet ?

    S-400 beats the F-35 hands down ?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVj8T-skY6g

    I have seen that video a couple of times and i have to say that whoever made the video has very vague idea of electromagnetic physics and aerodynamic. Most likely someone who read War is boring once or twice and tried to put some quote he remembered into a video.

    If you want to know whether F-35 can penetrate S-400, first get the basic knowledge correct atleast
    Everything about ECM

    Everything about radar

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2203674
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    The F-16 with the DSI intake had been tested at mach 2, so the DSI intake is probably not the limiting factor, but the F-35 was designed for a specific max top speed. Not sure it can go faster than that in a safe manner.

    DSI on F-16 seem to have much narrower area compared to F-35 DSI, that probably indicated it was optimize for higher speed than the one on F-35

    mig-31bm
    Participant

    sure. India spent 20 years in improving Su-30MKI. when Su-30SM came out its already improvement from the start.

    http://cdn9.trandaiquang.biz/files/2015/11/su30sm-cua-viet-nam-co-nhieu-lua-chon-ve-khi-tai-hien-dai-nhat-06.jpg

    http://cdn9.trandaiquang.biz/files/2015/11/su30sm-cua-viet-nam-co-nhieu-lua-chon-ve-khi-tai-hien-dai-nhat-05.jpg

    If you cant give a proper argument then just be quiet, who do you think you can convince here with your Russian stroonk BS ?

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2203701
    mig-31bm
    Participant

    Thrust curve of F-135 isn’t even in public at this point, but some members here seem to know F-35 exact acceleration past mach 1.2 :highly_amused:

    mig-31bm
    Participant

    The big weight gain with the F-15 came with the F-15E which had a stronger airframe due to the payloads it would often be carrying. Any weight gain in subsequent variants of the F-15E has been minor. To compare it in range and power to the MiG-29 is absolutely false. Original MiG-29 has abysmal range and is a lot closer to the F/A-18 in terms of engine power.

    The USN couldn’t really have chosen to keep the F-14D, politics left them without the option to continue F-14 production and upgrades.

    Lol dont bothered to respond to JSR, he just a brainless troll, every argument he made always start with : ” performance figure for Russian weapons are for export version, domestic product will be alot better” then he go on and make up numbers, it not for no reason that everyone have been ignoring him in this thread and almost every thread

Viewing 15 posts - 481 through 495 (of 1,759 total)