Oh, speaking of outdated, idiotic stereotypes:
Thanks for the link Joe, looks like Russia finally has some products on offer finally. They’d look impressive too, 10 years ago.
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tunderwhelming.jpg Views:t0 Size:t128.8 KB ID:t3855220″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3855220″,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”underwhelming.jpg”}[/ATTACH]
50% DE, 200W at 2GHz with 50V input voltage.
Wolfspeed’s doing 65% DE, 500W at 2.9-3.5GHz with 50V input now and in a tiny 2cmx1cmx3mm package to boot. I couldn’t be a*sed downloading the russian cad files, but I bet you the things you linked are huuuge!
If we step down a little to 1GHz, then how about this monster? 1400W at 50V in, and the thing is just 4cmx1cmx4mm!
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tmonster.png Views:t0 Size:t35.8 KB ID:t3855221″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3855221″,”data-size”:”full”,”title”:”monster.png”}[/ATTACH]
In a nutshell, the company you linked….. is years behind. Don’t think they’ll be catching up to the world any time soon. I still haven’t seen any massed produced GAN X-Band transistors from Russian companies, you?
Bad BAs or the maintainers and instructors can’t articulate software requirements very well.
F-35 flight control is very strange, at high alpha, the trailing edge flap is deflected upward rather than down, unlike others
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3854778}[/ATTACH]
That’s consistent with the upward tapering surfaces at the rear of the aircraft which seem designed to reduce pressure under the rear of the aircraft as it hits high alpha.
Its like the airframe is built so the front of the aircraft remains relatively stationary in a tight turn but tail is built to whip around using its momentum (high mass due to engine, high velocity due to pitch agility, but low drag at high alpha due to centralised single engine and underside shaping).
High energy loss but the idea is to get the first shot off in a fight and maintain initiative.
Bad radar signature (resonance), you won’t have agility, speed and the ability to carry a useful
radar and weapons all at the same time.
If you load it up with today’s avionics, expect it to be a blundering brick which will just be a sitting duck for real fighters.
A modern application for network centric warfare could be a propellor driven radar bus with a huge side facing radar like a tpy-2 along its side. Slow speed and long loiter times in combination with wingman drones. But you’d probably want your radar plane having the ability to escape if the need arises.
A reasonable display of the F-35’s pedal turn in this video at around 1:15
Also decent high alpha turn at 2:10
“Four F-117s Conducted Covert Air Strikes In Syria in 2017” Reputable Dutch “Scramble” Magazine Says [/INDENT]
SDB integration? Doesn’t sound like something you do when retiring an aircraft.
I wonder what other advancements they’ve made.
The key thing about Su-57 (and Russia as a whole) that typical western aviation enthusiasts fail to understand is the fact that in the 90’s Russia lost nearly all its “A group” industry. In Soviet terminology: “production of means of production” .
At the moment the problem not in development of something, not in the money it’s required for the production, but in the lack of means of production, in the inability to produce something technically advanced in wide numbers on the modern production line (because of absence of such a lines in Russia).
Irbis was developed in 00’s, but it’s rooted to a late Soviet technology. All the modern stuff developed in Russia could be produced only in limited numbers because a lack of modern machine tools.
So Russia is able to produce Irbis in reasonable numbers, but not the AESA.
I actually pointed this out specifically in one of the deleted PAK FA threads.
Joe posted multiple pictures of one of the radar component foundries from when a politician did a site visit.
I posted details of all the machines photographed and they were extremely old systems produced by European manufacturers.
With no domestic ability to produce the machines to make components and combined with sanctions for dual use equipment, Russia has no ability to mass produce truely modern EASA radar components.
One advantage of slower moving, intelligent cruise missiles is they can be obscured within swarms of cheap to produce, slow moving decoys with similar ranges to the missiles.
To produce high speed rockets with 500km range to merely act as decoys would be prohibitively expensive.
Serious question. If the Rafale has equal software capability to all other aircraft, how do we account for the difference in code lines between it and the F-35?
Surely it’s missing a number of features.
There’s a fence near the levcon too, looks like some aerodynamic issues to fix with the design. I’m gonna laugh up a nut if this is a production representative layout.
They spotted “a” F-22 raptor, not its wingman 🙂
This could get embarrassing if Israel just knocks them straight down with their F-35s.
The bombing around Latakia wasn’t expected by the Russians so Israel mustn’t have used the deconfliction channels first.
The s-400 crew just a few km away must’ve been told to not fire on anything no matter what.
Are there any other variables being assumed in this calc? MDS, loss budgets, etc? Seems that if you want a calculator in any way accurate you’d need to know a lot of classified stuff about the transmitter and receiver.
Seems the list of variables on your spreadsheet wouldn’t cover what’s needed for single pulse or multiple pulse range calculation. Where’s the rest?