dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • SpudmanWP
    Participant

    when a fighter turn, it tends to turn in positive g rather than negative, towards a target,
    and is typically rated +9 -3 g.
    here, it is preferable if the sensor is on top

    If it’s a WVR fight then EODAS is already tracking the target.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Yes there is. It is derived from an obsolete (although very good) pod. Btw, genuine question. How do these work by night in thery should be “even better”, but…

    Funny how demonstrated ranges of EOTS (ie the pics that show Vegas at 35+ nm, etc) exceed the paper ranges from OLS placards (since there is no supporting pics).

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    What the equivalent in the F-35?

    ASQ-239 which includes active jamming and towed decoys.

    http://www.baesystems.com/en-us/download-en-us/20160718215911/1434583878736.pdf

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2137776
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The B-1 upgrade is a “global strike variant”. It’s in the name 🙂

    “The new radar called Scalable Agile Beam Radar – Global Strike (SABR-GS)”

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2137820
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Gimbaled or not, the radar can remain the same.

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2137846
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Just buy the same one that you put in the B-1 to benefit from economy of scale.

    http://defense-update.com/20150506_sabr_gs_radar_for_b1b.html

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]250092[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2138147
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    F-35Cs bought today will be delivered in Block 3F config.

    There is no justification not to ramp up F-35C production while at the same time claiming that more Shs are needed due to a “shortage”.

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2138892
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Don’t know what Riccioni was planning but his pal Sprey at one time wanted a supercruising – Mach 1.3 – Mach 1.6 – fighter that would be smaller than the F-5.

    Sprey also proposes construction of a “supercruiser fighter”, smaller than the F-5, with a cruising speed of Mach 1.3 to 1.6 instead of the Mach 0.8 to 0.9 of current tactical fighters. It would be designed to maximize surprise he says, “the decisive factor in 80 percent of air kills”. ~ Christian Science Monitor, May 8, 1981

    Funny how he is now against surprise when it’s in the form of a multi-role VLO fighter. :stupid:

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139309
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    i don’t think so, but i can be wrong.

    There are three basic manually opened panels in F-35:

    (I linked to the pics since they are hi-res.

    1. Semi-Permanent that are only opened very rarely and require a reapplication of the RAM when opened. When looking at a green-primered F-35, these show as having closely spaced fasteners that are completely hidden, along with the seam, with RAM.

    2. Rarely-Opened – This panel if for maintenance access but not daily things like fueling. These have fasteners that are spaced further apart than the ones in #1 but differ in that the seam is never covered with RAM so it can be accessed without needed to reapply the RAM seal. This would look like the panel to the upper left of the fueler’s head. These types of panels are easily identified as they have a thick layer of RAM along the edge of the seam, but not covering it. They also need the paint reapplied after removal, but no seam seal is needed. See THIS PIC as a good example of an opened panel that needs a new coat of paint but no seam RAM seal.

    3. Regularly-Opened – These have spring-loaded (push & rotate) latches and feature the same lack of RAM replacement & thick RAM edge as #2. This would be the fuel door above the fueler’s head.

    If you look at THIS PIC, you will see two things. Since it has not gone through AFF (Aircraft Final Finishes), none of the thousands of fasteners are hidden. Second, the removable panels themselves have already been finished/painted (the fuel door and the one next to it are the two under the fight wing root).

    Here is an interesting pic I found showing how instructions are projected onto the F-35 during construction to aide the builders to do things in the right location and in the right order. HERE IS THE PIC.

    There is also a similar system that projects cut lines to show the maintainers where to cut the RAM when opening the “semi-permanent” panels.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139319
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I dont think it fit AA station though

    2 per A2G station, not A2A. If they can fit 2 x AMRAAM with their fixed fins in the A2G station, then 2 x AARGM-Er with folding fins should be no problem.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139422
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Look on the upper left panel on the photo i posted (closed panel). Btw, hard to find close up photos of F-35 skin.

    Those are still latches as there is a visible seam where the access cover can open without the need to remove & reapply the RAM.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139425
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Or you could use the SM6 minus the MK72. The F-15C , E’s and the arsenal plane should be perfect platforms for that role and could provide support from the rear.

    While it could, I figured that since they are already making the AARGM-ER and internal missile for the F-35, it would be relatively inexpensive to add the function if not already included.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139442
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I wounder if it could do double-duty as a long-range anti-AWACS/ISR/IFR missile?

    It’s looks from the pic that it get’s most of it’s range due to its aggressive parabolic arch launch profile.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2139481
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Courtesy Stephen Trimble

    Let’s hope that with folding fins they can fit 2 per F-35 bay without needing mods.

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2139582
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    yes, specially as it brings 50% more AAM than F-35 on that profile.

    Still?? Really??

    Those “extra 2” AIMs are WVR which are virtually useless in a 5th gen fight while in a 4th gen plane.

    Spouting “50% extra” while ignoring “how” they will be used or how “effective” they are is the height of disingenuous.

    How about “The F-35 has TWICE the BVR missile load of the Gripen E while in the Air Policing role”?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 4,849 total)