Agree to the Above. Develop the AMCA together ? 😀

That would be awesome.

Nic

Ah thanks swerve all my googling always led to 7500kg max payload.

8500 is much better if you want to use CFTs indeed.

Nic

Along with Captor-E and a few other things in the process of being integrated, I personally consider Conformal Fuel Tanks and to some extent Thrust Vectoring Nozzles if one wants carry such loads important features to have onboard. TVNs for fuel saving measures and not for fancy air show aerobatics. CFTs are a big ‘yes please’ in my book, IMO.

Well CFTs are not a yes please but a definite must if you want to carry big heavy stuff around (like 2 Storm Shadows).

Yes…Actually. If one adds CFTs. 3x 1,000 litre external drop tanks, 2x 1,500 CFTs = 6,000 litres of fuel. And still have 10 stations left over for A/A and A/G weapons.

Actually with 7500 KG MTOW, I don’t think you can carry all that much weapons after you get all that fuel. And still, such a loadout means no Storm Shadow or Taurus.

Ta-ta.

Good point

Nic

Can a Mirage 2000 carry 4x 1,000lb class weapons, 6x A/A missiles, 1x LDP with 2x external drop tanks? No need to answer that because I already know the question.

Can the Typhoon carry 5300L of external fuel? No need to answer that because I already know the answer 😎

The Typhoon’s ‘wet stations’ are more than capable enough of carrying Paveway III which is a 2,000lb class weapon and capable of Storm Shadow which is a bit over 2,500lb and the Tauras which is considerably heavier. Both latter weapons’ weights from the top of my head. The rest of the Typhoon’s hard points – excluding the four conformal missile hard points and outer missile rails – can easily carry weapons in the 1,000lb class, which has been proved.

Problem is the wet stations are the wet stations, which means you can’t carry 2 Storm Shadows while carrying wing fuel tanks at the same time, which limits you to 1000L of external fuel if you don’t carry CFTs.

Heres a Typhoon and a list of realistic options: Remember, ‘multi-role’ is the key here.

Examples.

1) 4x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 4x 1,000lb LGBs, 1x LDP, 2x 1,000 litre drop tanks.

-Mirage 2000: 3 Mica, 4x 1000lb bombs, 1LDP, 2x2000L fuel tanks: less AtoA missiles but twice the fuel
-Rafale: 2x Meteor, 4x Mica, 4×1000(OR 2000)lb bombs, 1LDP, 1x2000L tanks (same fuel as your configuration but in just one tank).

2) 4x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 2x Storm Shadow/Taurus, 4x 1,000lb LGBs, 2x Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFT) 1,500 litres each, 1x LDP.

-Mirage 2000: 1 Storm shadow, 2x2000L tanks, 6 Mica: 1 less missile but more fuel again
-Rafale: 2 Meteor, 4 Mica, 3x Scalp EG, 2x1250L CFT, 1 LDP, 6 AASM 😮

3) 4x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 2x Storm Shadow/Taurus, 2x 1,000lb LGBs, 2x Brimstone (total of six missiles), 1x LDP, 2x 1,500 litre CFTs.

-Rafale: 2x1250L CFT, 2 Meteor, 2 Mica, 2 Laser rocket pods (or brimstone), 3XScalp EG, 6XAASM, 1LDP

4) 4x Meteor, 4x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 2x Storm Shadow/Taurus, 2x 1,000lb LGBs, 1x LDP, 2x 1,500 litre CFTs.

-Rafale: 4 Meteor, 4 Mica, 2 Scalp EG, 2 1250 kg CFT, 1 LDP, 6 AASM.

5) 4x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 4x Brimstone (total of 12 missiles), 3x 1,000 litre external drop tanks, 2x 1,500 litre CFTs. (Excluding internal: 6,000 litres of fuel with this weapons load, not bad at all.)

-Rafale: 4 Meteor, 2 Mica, 2 1250L CFT, 2x2OOOL tanks, 3 or 5x Brimstone depending if the external wing stations can carry it, 2 Laser rocket pods if brimstone don’t fit on the external wing stations.

6) 6x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 2x Storm Shadow/Taurus, 2x 1,500 litre CFTs, 1x 1,000 litre external drop tank.

-Rafale: 4 Meteor, 4 Mica, 2 Scalp EG, 2000L fuel tank, 2x1250L CFT

7) 6x Meteor, 2x ASRAAM/IRS-T, 2x Storm Shadow/Taurus, 1x 1,000 litre external drop tank, 2x 1,500 litre CFTs.

-Rafale: 4 Meteor, 4 Mica, 1x2000L fuel tanks, 2 1250L CFT, 2 Scalp EG

All this while considering the Meteor can’t fit on the external wing pylon of the Rafale, it could probably fit though.

Some layouts considering the use of 2 Meteor carried conformally under the belly as was planned in the original Rafale programme.

Nic

What is the reason for this obvious difference between PAK-FA 051 and 052 (marked in red) ?

They tried to make a male & female versions so that they could breed and make a huge fleet cheap.

Nic

Conveniently Khadafi was shot dead. I mean conveniently for a bunch of french politicians. Good for them that Khadafi didn’t have the opportunity to tell how they financed their political parties for the last presidential campaign.

Nic

Yes, the phrasing isn’t entirely clear, but my impression is that the paper is referring to the penalty in control effectiveness incurred by moving the control surfaces to the position which is best for signature reduction on each layout. For example, with a conventional tail, the aerodynamically favourable solution would be to have them lower than the wing as on the F-15 and Su-27, while a low-RCS design would want to place them in the same plane(F-22/35). So going from long to short moment arm on the canard configuration would be considered a compromise (with more significant consequences than moving a conventional tail up) if this is the correct interpretation.

I don’t know how you can extrapolate all this from this one sentence, where he is talking about the aft tail design only?

Nic