It proves that against a lone 1300ton corvette equipped with a small hull mount MF active/passive array that an SSK, even an obsolete one, in the shallows can be a threat. I dont really know how much of a revelation that might be?.

I dont know what relevance you think that might have for a trans-oceanic navy who would have active low-frequency towed arrays and ASW choppers with advanced dipping sonar to counter just such a threat?.

I think is important, because these kind of operations so close with the borders are not done by some happy sailors doing their travel alone, remember it was an ASW ship, and in general there is ..or should be some kind of information sharing and reconnaissance linked with any ship’s operation.

If it had a MF sonar it should have detected the ‘noisy communist’ -haha- submarine.

The problem is that sonar is not that great sensor as is published or promoted in popular novels.

Not even the LF sonar…which it works to detect at longer range, but if a submarine mostly emit at MF frequencies, then how great is this tool?

An Ssk can sink a carrier stronghold, it just don’t have the speed to persecute it.

This is not surprising at all, the surprising thing is that (if was a submarine strike), the torpedo actually hit the target..this IS the important detail.

Such nice clean strike for a submariner with only 1 torpedo, without any warning, is something that even the US Navy SSN force would be jealous about

If was a submarine

will equal F-22 RCS in all angles

You mean the 0.3 m2 that russians give for the F-22? then i guess yes…

I don’t get how a obese and conventional airframe/program as the Raptor got such incredible credibility

Must be, because all that marketing around it.

Thanks God i never liked simulators or video war games…

BTW, for the AI guy…. anything can be structurally superior than the Raptor…since it got 5 tons of patching…so much for superior western engineering

I’m not saying one is better than other, I’m actually figuring out some key features that the T50 does have and will be actually structural challenges, any good engineer with structural knowledge and experience could find them out easily, and know what I’m talking about…. but seems is clear most people in this board are just kids, worthless discussion actually.

***

Anyways, back to the topic, seems the painted aircraft was real and not a fake picture, now this is important since the nose does have the ‘radiation’ sign, also it seems the radom is very small, at least compared with the Su-27

The Holy S-duct was never a ‘rule for stealth’, the Nighthawk went out w/o the Holy S-duct.

Then came planes with higher performance, higher inlet flow, bigger engines, then the engineers found that Ram was not a great material for grid or blockers for all that flow, due FOD ingestion

Then the Holy S-duct came to save these troublesome 80’s days

Then the materials did advance and once again different houses are fitting blockers for their planes.

If this pakfa thing won’t make any use of the Holy S-duct, that would be great, simpler is better..things get complicated when you actually…can’t…and probably the russians can.

Remember they did test the S-37 an old 80’s design…the 144..another old design..oh God…they both had the Holy S-duct!….funny russians.

As I understand it, it was Harry Hillaker (google him if you don’t know him) who said it, and he said (in the context of a technical forum where French and British engineers were putting forward the merits of close-coupled versus separated canard deltas) the best place for a canard was “on somecne else’s airplane”.

The guy who designed one of the most successful fighter aircraft of all time, what would he know… in case you don’t know, he studied canards for that design and didn’t use them.

This kind of comments filled whit cold war bravado are meaningless for me, go tell this kind of garbage and the KISS *principle*…to another one

The US designers never liked the canard delta configuration for their requirements

Thats all, no need to bash

most successful fighter aircraft of all time

:rolleyes:

Hint

Mig-21…

Anyways.. was talking about the stealth context *Not a single solid evidence for the canard/stealth issue*

Th canard-stealth issue is just another myth taken to fill up pages on crappy books

Neither do you though. However the folks that are designing the equipment probably know a thing or two. 😮

Oh yes,i do

Your knowledge (as for many…and specially for that djcross guy and his fairy land) on the topic is based only on marketing slogans , not scientific-technical papers,while i’m not an expert i have read a couple of them

You don’t even try to understand how all that stuff really works..because all your fantasies would banish pretty quickly

So this kind of discussion ends in a technobabble salad about LPI, AESA, stealth, RCS, LOAL…IRST, etc, etc,etc…not very different from cheap and absurd scifi series

So some idiots pull out their marketing slogans and put them into movie scenaries ..moscow bombed…the s-300 vs the F35…finding out…something with radar imagery? really ….what is the range for it? how much energy you need to spend for it? is really practical?…no is not

Not a single phrase about the theory of information, the limitations of your holy LPI ‘mode’ and ESM magic over it.

Passively you wont hit anything

That’s the harsh reality

IMO this is the shuttle’s replacement.

An affordable and cheap shuttle, the old shuttle had bigger dimensions for Nasa’s requirements ,like the space stations programs, the hubble and other ordnances..and of course the manned program.

All these things are not needed for the X-37 since is obvious that both space programs (for civilians and the military) are now a bit more separated between the Orion (?) program and the x-37

So this is the replacement of the shuttle for the USAF? did not they had enough with all the shuttle’s headaches?

I still don’t understand it..why a spaceplane, they really want to capture russian/chinese satellites?

They all fall into the “moderate observable” category.

Check that both ‘moderate’ LO do have canard or tailplane ,exactly as i have said

The canard has the same effect as the tailplane.