Page 15 – Key Publishing

KGB

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 1,157 total)

← 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 … 76 77 78 →

Author

Posts
November 13, 2017 at 5:22 pm in reply to: Israel F-35 damaged. Bird collision or Syrian S-200 ? #2134852

KGB
Participant

ST-71

Might I point out that if one does a bit of research on where southfront.org is from and looks at some of the other articles that appear there, one might conclude that it might not be the most objective or reliable source when it makes an unconfirmed report??

Whatever the truth is, many are believing it. Which is a win in itself. Just like MH-17 was a win for the US. These are propaganda wars.

November 13, 2017 at 3:30 am in reply to: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program #2134970

KGB
Participant

JSR

Also Germany not commited to 2% GDP. which is bare minimum to afford 5G fighter.

The 2% number is just some arbitrary nonsense dreamed up by the Atlantic council and put into the Nato rules. This is all politics. Germany and Europe could afford a fighter. They just don’t want to spend 2% unless the US forces them. And since Germany is effectively an occupied country, they will. And if they do, they would rather spend it on themselves rather than subsidize the F-35 program further than they already are.

Also Dubai airshow US companies getting much bigger orders. Arabs are determined to punish EU for its Iran dealing. and on top of that US will impose its own fines. I dont see any way for EU to move forward.

Whats the US going to do ? Deny them the F-35 ? This is exactly why Europe has to go its own way and when push comes to shove, they will.

November 12, 2017 at 3:24 am in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2135240

KGB
Participant

@Solarwarden

Can you quickly explain this supposed point you are trying to make ? I honestly have no idea. Are you implying that Sukhoi forgot to put in a weapons bay ?

You do realize that this Pak Fa weapons bay fetish or yours has made you a forum laughing stock and has resulted in countless ignores. The reason. Because people have no idea what you are talking about.

and you almost outdid yourself with this gem:

you know I’m making a good point on why it’s taking so long. I get that it upsets you that i bring up this specific topic

November 11, 2017 at 5:54 am in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2135506

KGB
Participant

Its not entirely true that RCS from forums and comments are eyeball numbers. They are the average of the information that’s out there.

November 11, 2017 at 5:47 am in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2135510

KGB
Participant

The Swedes claim that the Gripen has some LO features that make it have a lower RCS than any other 4th gen jet in that size range. Nobody is denying this. Not only are the Swedes saying this, they are also putting an RCS number on it.

The problem here is, that the method/increments that the Swedes are using to come up with this number, is not the same number that the enthusiast community is using to roughly gauge RCS. (which is just the average of all the information out there.) The Swede RCS number is not an apples to apples comparison.

But what we have is obscurantists , taking the number that the Swedes are putting out there and then conveniently claiming that the Gripen has almost as good of stealth as the Pak Fa. Which is complete and total nonsense. Apples to apples, it cannot and will not be close.

All someone has to do it LOOK at the Gripen to see that it still is a 4th gen non stealth design. So it will not have the same RCS performance as a clean sheet stealth design.

I could just imagine the uproar if the tables were turned. If Sweden was working its tail off, building a state of the art clean sheet stealth 5th gen jet and along came Russia with the Mig 35, claiming that it had almost as good of stealth as the 5th gen Saab.

I cant even say that the JF-17 (a canardless Gripen with smaller wings & F-35 style intakes) has better RCS than the Gripen without an uproar ensuing.

November 11, 2017 at 5:08 am in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2135514

KGB
Participant

@solarwarden
Will you please cry about the Pak Fa somewhere else. And anyone who’s upstanding the J-20 over the Pak Fa should pull the engines out of it 1st. And maybe to a google search about its origins.

Unlike other 5th gen projects, one is top secret

November 11, 2017 at 4:33 am in reply to: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program #2135522

KGB
Participant

HAL is the one who’s been dealing with Russia. And they have nothing bad to say.. That should say something about the authenticity of those stories.

Anyway the American world order is insisting that Germany spends more on defense. Even though Germany has a good business relationship with Russia.

But the Germans will cave like they always do. But they’d rather waste their money on their own fighter rather than waste it on one from a forign power.

November 11, 2017 at 3:33 am in reply to: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program #2135535

KGB
Participant

Anyway, a few officers said they’d like to have the F-35, but it is up to the politicians to decide, so… we’ll see

Looks like the same brown envelopes that are being passed around inside the Indian AF are being passed around in the Lufwaffe.

November 10, 2017 at 1:06 am in reply to: Airbus: European Future Fighter Program #2135930

KGB
Participant

Certain people see design similarities to the SU57 (which explains the lack of canards)

It looks like a levcon on the leading edge. Like the su 57.

November 8, 2017 at 6:45 pm in reply to: Not building the B-70 when we could have was really dumb #2136330

KGB
Participant

Such things as the su 15 A were being designed at the same time as the Vigilante Logical1

November 7, 2017 at 1:20 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2136682

KGB
Participant

Blue apple

Yeah totally. Straight through

November 7, 2017 at 2:55 am in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2136880

KGB
Participant

@eagle

Yeah. A Frog Foot 2 would be a lot better. Just find a place to hang some high bypass pods like the A10.

November 6, 2017 at 2:17 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2136971

KGB
Participant

@Sintra @eagle1

We get that. The French are proud of the alleged low frontal RCS. (although there’s no technical information about why. Nothing on wiki)But that number is not what counts as the generally accepted RCS of the Rafale.

If the F-16 is 2 or 3 m2, you are saying that the Rafale is .1 by the same score ? Highly doubtful

November 6, 2017 at 12:52 am in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137125

KGB
Participant

@stealthflanker

If we know the “clean” RCS would be 0.1 sqm

That’s a discussion that can be had but what we are trying to determine is what’s the generally accepted RCS of the Rafale. In the same terms as the generally accepted RCS of all the others. if a Mig 29 is 4 and a F-16 is 3 and a JF-17 is 2.5, the Rafale is not 0.1

November 6, 2017 at 12:14 am in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137128

KGB
Participant

@Toolcool

They’ve spent a lot of time and money to reduce it because..?

Apparently they’ve spent a lot of time talking up the RCS of their product mostly. And sending out obscure and misleading RCS figures.

What have they actually done to reduce the RCS… There’s nothing on Wiki
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 1,157 total)

← 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 … 76 77 78 →