dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,756 through 1,770 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196719
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I think he was expressing a quote from a pilot who said (I will paraphrase):

    Every pilot I know when asked “What would you prefer: Speed, Maneuverability, or Situational Awareness” would pick Situational Awareness every time.”

    They are not saying that Speed & Maneuverability are not useful, needed, appreciated, etc.. just that they are no longer the dominating factor to wining the battle.

    in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196725
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I did not say that they WILL be the best EVER, just that they are at the top of the heap for the time being.

    Every fighter, ever designed, for all time & infinitum will eventually be surpassed.

    in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196829
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Only if you believe that “F-22/F-35/PAK-FA & J-20” are not VLO and/or have poor SA.

    in reply to: test pilot: "F-35 can't dogfight" #2196976
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]239579[/ATTACH]

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Davis IOC interview

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Video

    SpudmanWP
    Participant
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I know about the aerial L-Band on fighters being IIF and not a “detector”.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    There was something that I found very interesting about the RCS measurements in that project.

    Regardless of the angle, the average RCS difference between 1GHz and 10GHz was maybe 5-10db.

    This is significant because we have long been told that L-Band radar (1 GHz) can “easily” detect low RCS objects, especially if their shape was “tuned” to counter X-Band radar (10 GHz).

    Can we finally put that myth to bed now?

    http://i.imgur.com/OpyNpCq.png

    in reply to: test pilot: "F-35 can't dogfight" #2197781
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    A third of a BILLION is a HUGE sum to pay to a foreign company, especially from Russia in the early ’90s.

    If all you have is a wiki article to go on… good luck with that.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Simple solution, reclassify nuclear CMs as Drones that carry nuclear bombs.. done.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    @mig-31bm

    There are three glaring problems with that graphic that I see (yes, I know it’s not yours).

    1. It assumes that the F-35’s are bunched together while the Red Air are spread apart.

    2. It assumes that the Red Air know from which direction the F-35s are inbound.

    3. It assumes that the Red Air can freely communicate (unidirectional datalinks) without giving their own position away.

    in reply to: test pilot: "F-35 can't dogfight" #2197941
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Really??? depending on a wiki article?

    Here is what Code One had to say about it:

    A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak.

    Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Navy wanted a supersonic STOVL fighter to operate from its ski jump equipped carriers. At what point the Yakovlev Design Bureau became aware of the multi-swivel nozzle design is not known, but the Soyuz engine company created its own variant of it. The Yak-41 version of the nozzle, from published pictures, appears to be a three-bearing swivel duct with a significant offset “kink.” The Yak-141 also used two RKBM RD-41 lift engines – an almost identical arrangement to the Convair Model 200 design. The aircraft was also re-labeled as a Yak-141 to imply a production version, but no order for follow-on series came from the Russian Navy.

    The Yak-141 was flown at the Paris Airshow in 1991. The flight displays of the Yak were suspended when the heat from the lift engines started to dislodge asphalt from the tarmac. At the 1992 Farnborough show, the Yak was limited to conventional takeoffs and landings with hovers performed 500 feet above the runway to avoid a repeat performance of asphalt damage. But the Yak-141 does deserve credit for being the first jet fighter to fly with a three-bearing swivel nozzle – twenty-five years after it was first designed in the United States.

    During the early days of the JAST effort, Lockheed (accompanied by US government officials from the JAST program office) visited the Yakovlev Design Bureau along with several other suppliers of aviation equipment (notably also the Zvezda K-36 ejection seat) to examine the Yakovlev technologies and designs.

    Yakovlev was looking for money to keep its VTOL program alive, not having received any orders for a production version of the Yak-141. Lockheed provided a small amount of funding in return for obtaining performance data and limited design data on the Yak-141. US government personnel were allowed to examine the aircraft. However, the 3BSN design was already in place on the X-35 before these visits.

    The 3BSD was invented in America in the 1960s, proposed by Convair to the US Navy in the 1970s, first flown by the Russians in the late 1980s, re-engineered from the 1960 Pratt & Whitney design for the X-35 in the 1990s, and put into production for the F-35 in the 2000s. Sometimes a good idea has to wait for the right application and set of circumstances to come along. One moral of this story is not to throw out good work done in the past. It just might be needed later on.

    Kevin Renshaw served as the ASTOVL Chief Engineer for General Dynamics and was later the deputy to Lockheed ASTOVL Chief Engineer Rick Rezabek in 1994 when the 3BSD concept was incorporated into the X-35B design. Renshaw continues to work in the Advanced System Development branch of Skunk Works where he is currently working on flight demonstration of the DARPA ARES VTOL UAV program.

    http://www.codeonemagazine.com/c130_article.html?item_id=137

    in reply to: test pilot: "F-35 can't dogfight" #2198101
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    NO IT WAS NOT…..

    Stop sniffing the glue 😉

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    http://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/dunford-mulls-f-35b-ioc-decision-4-bs-take-out-9-attackers/

    WASHINGTON: During the Marine’s recent operational readiness test of the F-35B, four of the Marine aircraft went up against nine enemy aircraft.

    “It went very poorly for the bad guys,” Lt. Gen. Jon Davis, deputy commandant for aviation, told me this afternoon. Davis provided few details, saying they were classified, He did say that the F-35s faced a threat that “we have never put an F-16 or a Harrier against.” The F-35Bs, he said, did a “great job.”

    I asked Davis about the recent news that the F-35A did not fare that well in dogfight conditions against an F-16. “I love the F-16. It was a great airplane. Still is pretty good, but i would not want to be in a fight against an F-35.”

    :applause:Bobbymike for the link

Viewing 15 posts - 1,756 through 1,770 (of 4,849 total)