RD-33 may be smoky and have a low TBO but SFC in mil thrust (0.77-0.78) is better than most variants of the F404… (0.8 or above).
This is because it has a higher bypass ratio.
The F100 is more fuel efficient still, with a much higher bypass ratio than either.
Well, none of Eire’s armed forces are really much use for defending against an invasion or anything. I think Britain’s given up trying to invade them, and noone else wants to bother, so they really don’t need much.
They do quite a bit of UN work, however.
CL-1980 – A-/F-12 derivative for USN submitted in 1973 as an alternative to Grumman F-14. None built.
Thats all I could find on the net?
I don’t think anyone can argue against the F-16 in value-for-money as the US practically give them away if it is in their strategic interest.
If you are a budding Saddam wanting to build an airforce without US support then the FC-1 is probably the best value. It will look great in airshows, and drop dumb bombs and rockets on “counter-revolutionaries” just as well as an F-16.
The conference video also showed the use of hand-held sprays to apply RAM to R-27 air-to-air missiles.
This kind of spray-on RAM could be used to fill gaps around access panels etc for further reduced RCS.
I guess if the US ever invades France they’ll have to blow up the Nostradamus radar first 😉
Originally posted by Meteorit
Do you have any more information about this radar? Designation? Fixed or mobile system? etc. How far did they get in development, or was it just general research?
It is mentioned in http://www.multispectral.com/pdf/Barrett.pdf for example, but with no specifics. It quotes a personal communication from A Kardo-Sysoev (Russian UWB guru) as source.
The radar in question (Nostradamus) is an OTH-B type radar. It is thought that such radars, operating at large wavelengths, would effectively counter stealth because both shaping and RAM become ineffective. Now, traditionally OTH-B radars are also HUUUGEEE, fixed, gobble power like no tomorrow, have no heightfinding capability and poor resolution. You’d know roughly where the target was, but all you could do with that would be vector a fighter to try and find it visually as the fighter’s radar would still be largely useless.
It looks like the French are using new processing techniques to effectively overcome these limitations.
Russia was working on anti-stealth radars before 1991, but anyone that imagines it would have been cheaper to replace all their radars, upgrade their interceptors and SAMS etc as compared to the cost of making the B-2 is, frankly, mistaken.
Oh, and long wavelength radars may “detect” stealth aircraft at longer distances, but they are very imprecise, which is why everyone moved to shorter wavelengths. Also your fighter would need an antenna the size of a large house, which would be impractical 😉
Bistatic radar is not some universal panacea. It can allow detection of radar signals deflected by shaping, but the signal will still be attenuated by RAM/RAS. There are difficulties in creating the bistatic radar network, and it is not going to be that simple. How many countries have deployed bistatic radar systems? Oh, about none….
Regarding IRST and RWR I was talking about detecting IR and radar emissions from the ENGINE and RADAR, obviously….
The problem is how to detect the stealth aircraft at a useful distance.
There are two ways of detecting things.
One is to passively receive signals that the aircraft is emitting anyway. Examples include RWR, IRST, optical, magnetic anomaly detection, or acoustic sensors.
The other is to emit a signal that you bounce off the target. Examples include radar or laser ranging/LIDAR.
There are various possible methods of detecting stealth aircraft. UWB radars show some promise in this area, and the USSR invested a lot on this technology. An anti-stealth UWB pulsed phased antenna array was under development, ultimately cancelled on the collapse of the USSR.
China can now be said to have reached the point of indigenous development with the FC-1 and other current projects.
Mikoyan’s supposed involvement amounted to little beyond some input on the RD-33 engine. The FC-1 is a completely Chinese design.
Now, perhaps the J-10 was also a totally indigenous design, but until we know the real history there will be suspicions that it has some input from the Lavi. Even if was unofficial- maybe someone stole the plans and sold them without government knowledge- this would make it not a 100% indigenous design.
No, I haven’t done a proper 3 view, but I might one day 😉
There is this picture of a test model:
And finally:
This is MY version of the 1.42, if I had been the chief designer.
Three phased array antennas in the nose and wing roots.
Planform aligned to minimum number of angles.
Dotted lines indicate air intakes under the fuselage….
I wish I could find a ruler 😉
Or maybe some funky lift jets?