Page 27 – Key Publishing

SOC

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 391 through 405 (of 10,347 total)

← 1 2 3 … 26 27 28 … 688 689 690 →

Author

Posts
February 1, 2009 at 5:34 am in reply to: Russia Air Force's Flanker Doubt #2466101

SOC
Participant

True, the first flying prototype is supposed to use the 117S engines from the Su-35. No big deal there though, a lot of planes have done this in the past. Even the OXCART (A-12) first flew with J75 engines as the J58 wasn’t ready. More recently the Rafale A flew with F404s, and for a previous Russian example the T10 prototypes (the original, flawed FLANKER prototypes) flew with the AL-21 and not the AL-31.

February 1, 2009 at 5:08 am in reply to: Russia Air Force's Flanker Doubt #2466106

SOC
Participant

I don’t see why they can’t share the same radar system or some avionics components.

February 1, 2009 at 4:38 am in reply to: M-21 separation speed #2466112

SOC
Participant

Did some digging and there is no reference to a 40,000 pound J58 variant. There were three J-58 production models, with the K series having the greatest thrust at 34,000 pounds.

February 1, 2009 at 4:35 am in reply to: JASDF A2A Missiles #1820984

SOC
Participant

That might make sense given the reworking of the AAM-4 as the AAM-4 Kai.

February 1, 2009 at 4:35 am in reply to: Russia Air Force's Flanker Doubt #2466114

SOC
Participant

Yeah but the big domestic selling point for the Su-35 is that it’ll be cheaper than the PAK-FA, which is why they’re reportedly going for a split fleet. There will be a degree of systems commonality between the two if I remember right, and one would assume that they’d use the same weapons, albeit with the PAK-FA using variants optimized for internal carriage.

February 1, 2009 at 3:28 am in reply to: JASDF A2A Missiles #1821000

SOC
Participant

AAM-4 has been superceded by AAM-4 Kai, and the Kai variant is the one that will enter full service, right?

And when did Japan get AMRAAMs? I must’ve missed that one.

February 1, 2009 at 3:25 am in reply to: Russia Air Force's Flanker Doubt #2466163

SOC
Participant

I thought the Su-35/Su-27BM was meant to serve as the “filler” for the RusAF, complementing the PAK-FA?

Also, if the Su-35 is going to be produced in numbers, will Russia be halting the Su-27SM upgrade in the near future? I know at least one unit, co-located at KnAAPO, has been upgraded, any news if any more units have upgraded yet?

February 1, 2009 at 3:23 am in reply to: Fighter Radars and RCSs #2466166

SOC
Participant

B-1B RCS is usually reported as around 1m2 thanks to the RCS reductions made compared to the B-1A (which is reported to have had an RCS of 10m2).

January 31, 2009 at 3:45 pm in reply to: P-800 Yakhont vs P-900 (supersonic) Klub #1821028

SOC
Participant

KS-172 has nothing to do with ramjets…

January 31, 2009 at 1:33 pm in reply to: M-21 separation speed #2466590

SOC
Participant

Check out Peter Merlin’s new Blackbird book, it’s basically a technological history, ignoring the actual operational and test history for the most part. Very interesting reading, andrefreshing to see someone take a completely new stab at writing about the plane. It’s an AIAA publication, so it’s a little on the pricey side, but you also get a CD with videos, photos, declassified documents, historical stuff, and the flight manuals from the A-12, YF-12, and SR-71. There were a few different J58 models, with progressively increased power output, but nowhere is a 40,000 pound version mentioned. I’ll dig around a little more and see what I can find, if its been published on the Blackbird I have a copy of it.

January 31, 2009 at 2:31 am in reply to: M-21 separation speed #2466924

SOC
Participant

Yeah but look at this:

“These early aircraft could carry a centerline pod containing a 1-megaton nuclear bomb or the D-21 recon drone armed with cameras, infrared sensors, and other equipment.”

Totally false. There was an A-12 concept with a centerline pod but it was for a SLAR system, and it was never tested. Casts doubt on the other data there as I’ve never seen that figure for the M-21. Maybe they’re including the thrust from the D-21 since it was also used?

January 31, 2009 at 2:26 am in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1821089

SOC
Participant

TVM works like this:

Radar paints the target. Missile seeker receives return, passes position data to radar. Radar then computes guidance commands, passes them back to missile, missile blows up target.

SAGG is more complex:

Radar paints target. Radar and missile BOTH receive radar returns, and calculate target position data. Missile passes its target data to radar. Radar then compares the two sets of data, computes the most accurate location of the target based on the different perspectives, and passes guidance commands back to missile. Missile then kills target.

SAGG adds more data to the equation, making for a more accurate system. The radar is arguably more advanced and definitely more capable as it is processing more data from different input sources to generate a guidance command.

January 31, 2009 at 2:17 am in reply to: P-800 Yakhont vs P-900 (supersonic) Klub #1821094

SOC
Participant

Dude, once again, no current or future ramjet design is using a rounded inlet design for this reason.

Say what?

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/rattlrs.html

They do have the whole legacy thing going for them though 😀

January 31, 2009 at 1:37 am in reply to: P-800 Yakhont vs P-900 (supersonic) Klub #1821140

SOC
Participant

OK crobato, regardless of the back-and-forth that had to have made you laugh 😀

January 31, 2009 at 1:34 am in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-3 #1821143

SOC
Participant

SAGG, Seeker Aided Ground Guidance. TVM is SAGG’s retarded brother. They’re similar, but SAGG is the better option.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 391 through 405 (of 10,347 total)

← 1 2 3 … 26 27 28 … 688 689 690 →