Page 39 – Key Publishing

Y-20 Bacon

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 1,779 total)

← 1 2 3 … 38 39 40 … 117 118 119 →

Author

Posts
September 30, 2016 at 4:30 pm in reply to: How should India fill the rest of the gap: more Rafales, Su-30s, Tejas, or a new type #2129376

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Its a done deal. The Pak Fa.

And SU 30sm’s. They have 5th gen avionics already

question isnt buying pak-fa.
question is buying MORE of what they originally ordered.

September 29, 2016 at 6:33 am in reply to: If you had to choose between Rafale or F-35 #2130911

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Except it is operational?

how funny.

a few years ago when it was the f-15 vs Rafale in Singapore, people here were the reverse

Rafale: but but, so much potential in the future, it’ll be fully integrated in a few years, costs will come down!
Everyone else: But the F-15 is operational.

what is clear is the F-35 will eventually become fully operational within 5-10 years and the price is expected to come down.
No different from Rafale in Singapore.
you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Except its me, I have it and eat it and after that I have your women and men.

September 29, 2016 at 12:50 am in reply to: If you had to choose between Rafale or F-35 #2130975

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

EF has more thrust, there will undoubtedly be the cases when it outperform rafale in some loads / profiles,
the EF AESA radar will out-perform rafale radar in every way and there’s no telling if rafale ever catches up.
still, its too little too late, much as i admire EF raw performance, EF is the past, SDB isnt even integrated yet and god knows if it ever will,
someone’s been dragging his feet for too long,
another year and both F-35 & gripen E can be bought at a lower cost, lower operational cost,
and equipped with more stuff, compatible with way more munitions

interesting how the Gripen ended up being the best of the eurocanards in the end, not the typhoon.

btw you sure about the lower operational cost of f-35?
Msphere would like you to believe, everything about the f-35 is more expensive

September 28, 2016 at 11:01 am in reply to: If you had to choose between Rafale or F-35 #2131849

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Never read such nonsense. Nobody has claimed an accuracy of 0.1deg for an RWR. Spectra claimed 0.5deg.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=662

DASS claims 1deg.

http://eurofighter.airpower.at/sensorik-dass.htm

That aside radars claim accuracy of tenths of millradians, i.e. tenth of 0.05deg, or 0.005deg. Some as low as 0.05 milliradians for SHORAD systems. Garrya has already demonstrated why it isn’t a simple matter of beamwidth. In a nutshell, as the radar is scanning, very rapidly in case of AESA, it will receive a reflection at several beam positions, as well as obtaining an accurate velocity, it can therefore calculate that the object lies in the centre of this range. RWR has no such ability.

Also, do you understand what a parabola is?

No you don’t need something like SBX-1 at all.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-HQ-7-Crotale.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Engagement-Fire-Control.html

You’ve been wrong on nearly everything so far, so I’d be careful about who you’re saying is confused. We’ve already linked several theses describing the benefits of increased modules and increased Rx SNR. Any measuring device has inaccuracy and not just due to SNR. There is inaccuracy in the way phase is measured because there is no such think as a phase-o-meter. You have to examine the amplitude at the two points and compare it to peak, if the difference is lambda or lambda/2 (for zeroes) then you have a null. By having more wavelength separations over a wider antenna, you apply the same absolute magnitude of inaccuracy to a larger number and the percentage inaccuracy reduces. You also get rid of nulls.

See above. There is no argument since empirical evidence on radar vs RWR accuracy proves you wrong. And yes SNR is important.

http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/new/papers/militaryHandbook/sig-sort.pdf

and so the latest Rafale deal in India had a break down. just the fly away cost of the aircraft, sans training and other stuff

Rafale comes in $10 million USD more than the F-35A.

September 19, 2016 at 7:21 am in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2138989

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

how does the YF 23 get better stealth than the Raptor with more engine showing than the Pak Fa ?

YF-23 was rated better for ALL AROUND stealth. this doesn’t mean just the front, it means all over.

it was rated better than the YF-22 not F-22.

YF-23 has a Y-duct. to see the engine blades, you have to stand at an angle, not head on

see angle, left of the fueselage

it also curves upward

pak-fa is similar in that you can only see the blades from a certain angle, but not directly in front.

September 19, 2016 at 7:16 am in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139025

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

OFF topic armata in syria

http://i.imgur.com/sGbS0d1.jpg

pranked a bunch of Chinese “blog” / news agencies 🙂

lol good job.

you should show the j-31 in Russian colors, chinese media will pick it up and say “russia orderd from us” lol

September 19, 2016 at 7:15 am in reply to: If the USAF and USN had to choose one type, which would they choose? #2139027

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

I fully agree (as it’s self-evident and I’m not a complete buffoon all of the time) that there is a weight gain (penalty) to carrier ops; what with the beefier undercarriage, smaller stock of drop tanks and need for a stronger airframe (especially the keel) but I would not agree with all of those comparisons

What about another way? If the USAF could only have one fastjet and the USN only one fastjet. What choice then?

F4 or A4 or F8?
F15 or F16?
F14 or F18?

certainly:

F-4 and F-14. the F-14 variant, bombcat, was no slouch in air to ground.
between the F-15 and 16, that is harder, but I’m leaning towards the 15.

September 18, 2016 at 4:56 pm in reply to: If the USAF and USN had to choose one type, which would they choose? #2139302

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

A major redesign that would have resulted in a badly compromised aircraft…

Carrier capability isn’t something you can just add on to an existing design.

same difference.
Air force planes tend to be better than their usn counterparts

f-35A > f-35C
F-16 > F-18
F-101 > F-8
etc

September 18, 2016 at 4:55 pm in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2139305

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

now that russia and china are lovers again..
the j-31, designed for export, could be a good mig-29 replacement for the russians

via crow 11

September 18, 2016 at 4:54 pm in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139337

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

http://i.imgur.com/j8f5amb.jpg

thanks here you go , i attempted …

very nice. good job!

September 18, 2016 at 11:01 am in reply to: If the USAF and USN had to choose one type, which would they choose? #2139547

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

If they had to pick one type it would have to be the navy type in every case. Otherwise no carrier capability.

EOT

no.

they were planning to make all the land based aircraft carrier capable

https://tacairnet.com/2015/04/15/f-15n-sea-eagle/

September 18, 2016 at 2:48 am in reply to: Military Aviation News #2139704

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

The first four Su-35 fighter jets from a 24 aircraft to be delivered before the end of the year.

China Acquires Vicious 1,553MPH Su-35 Multirole Fighter Jets From Russia

how long before China reverse engineers it

September 18, 2016 at 2:46 am in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2139708

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Now all it would take is 2 tu-160’s armed with 2 FOAB’s each, drop them tomorrow on known opposition forces HQ’s and then apologies

what is the radius of those any one know?

i like your photoshops! you ever thought about j-20 in Russian air force colors? or j-31?

September 17, 2016 at 7:33 am in reply to: Greatest strength greatest weakness #2140215

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

I like Swedish designs..
within Europe, their designs seem to be the most practical and efficient. Also not plagued with cost issues like French planes.
They more or less take US parts and customize them into an airframe better suited for European theater of war

September 16, 2016 at 12:33 pm in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2140859

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

There is no public success with major composite use in Chinese aviation industry. they can only use some small composite as bandage but it cannot change fundamentally aircraft capability.

do you think Indian Pak-fa can stand up to chinese j-20?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 1,779 total)

← 1 2 3 … 38 39 40 … 117 118 119 →