Page 16 – Key Publishing

KGB

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,157 total)

← 1 2 3 … 15 16 17 … 76 77 78 →

Author

Posts
November 5, 2017 at 5:31 am in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137265

KGB
Participant

As I said Mercellogo, this BS has been spread far..
(oh and this should show that Sputnik is not some Russian govt editorialized operation. Just another news website that curates mostly the same news except it subs in the Russian view on the Russian topics.)

India’s Deal for 36 Dassault Rafale Stealth Fighter Jets Reaches Final Phase

https://sputniknews.com/military/201609031044935772-india-dassault-rafale-fighter-jet/

The Rafale fighter jet is believed to be the most dangerous warplane in the skies today combining semi-stealth capabilities with unparalleled thrust maneuvering providing air superiority.

India’s quest to modernize its fighter aircraft fleet with the acquisition of 36 Rafale multirole fighter jets appears set to become a reality as the deal has been transmitted to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) for final approval.

The 36 fighter jets are to be acquired for $8.8 billion and include advanced weapon systems modified for the Rafale including the Meteor beyond visual range (BVR) missile adding substantial lethality to the warplane. Initially, the deal was projected to be for $11.2 billion before New Delhi negotiated the price down threatening to walk if the arrangement was too expensive.

The 1,188 mile per hour Dassault Rafale is slower than a number of fourth generation fighter jets, but fits into the category of 4.5 generation fighter jets – with some analysts considering it a full-force fifth generation jet – due to its semi-stealth capabilities.
(Lol)
The Dassault is not a full-spectrum stealth aircraft, but its design reduces radar cross-section (RCS) (Lol) and it has a minimal infrared signature due to modifications of the tail-fin, fuselage (???), engine placement as well (???) as the use of composite materials and serrated patterns for construction of the wing edges.
???
As a result, the fighter jet possesses many of the same stealth capabilities of the high-cost American F-35 fighter jet (Lol) at less than half the unit cost of the beleaguered Lockheed warplane making it a favored vehicle for reconnaissance and anti-ship strike missions while still possessing air superiority.

November 4, 2017 at 8:10 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137325

KGB
Participant

^That explains the difference. The different value measurement used by Gripen brass.

But its the Gripen and Rafele fans who are wrongly using those numbers when the subject of an RCS number comes up. Its was just easy to see that there was something wrong with the data.

When the Mig 29, F-16 and JF-17 all pretty much agree that they are somewhere in the 2-6 m2 range, its pretty easy to spot the outliers.

Maybe i was wrong to move the decimal point. I never claimed to know. I just knew that the Gripen and Rafele are not going to have a standard deviation better RCS than the group above

November 4, 2017 at 5:51 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137340

KGB
Participant

I just speed read through the JAS 39 Gripen Wikipedia page and there was NOTHING on it about RSC reduction.

Just because a manufacturer says something is .10 m 2 doesn’t mean anything.

Any RCS disclosure that sounds too good to be true, probably is.

November 4, 2017 at 5:28 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137357

KGB
Participant

@wellrocks

Just stay out of posts that I make and never reply to be again. Thanks.

November 4, 2017 at 2:31 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137386

KGB
Participant

I have no idea how the Chinese fanboy crowd came up with 2.5 m2 for the JF-17 but it sure fits well with the rest of the list.

With better intakes and minus the canards, giving the Gripen 3 m2 is charitable but I wouldn’t argue with it. Its close enough for me.

November 4, 2017 at 12:34 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137405

KGB
Participant

@ wellrocks

I just seen on a China forum a claim that the JF 17 is 2.5 m2. Its a low rcs but its a small jet and its actually a clean looking plane.

Why would the Gripen have a lower RCS than this? Look at the small wings plus ythe F-35ish intakes. your claim doesnt fit with other jets in the category. Its just too low of a number

November 4, 2017 at 4:15 am in reply to: Boom Technology. Will they succeed in bringing supersonic airline travel back ? #472435

KGB
Participant

Nobody cared to even drop a comment eh. People are just so skeptical of it.

Everyone has had the so called bad economics of the Concorde drummed into them so hard that they cant even take this project seriously.

I think this is a sleeper project.Its going to catch fire.

November 3, 2017 at 11:29 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137508

KGB
Participant

@Amiga

The military aviation underworld has established a loose and flawed set of parameters for RCS. One end of the spectrum of this set of parameters is a mish mash of hopeless confusion.

Somewhat agreed upon is the su 27’s and F-15’s are known to be in the 8 to 10 m2 range. Mig 29 and F-16’s are somewhere in the 4-6 range.

Then it gets totally off the rails with these .3 and .5 numbers for the Gripen and Rafele. But if you move the decimal point over, the Gripen and Rafele turns into a sensible and respectable RCS for what it is. Something everyone should be able to live with.

Then there’s Sukhoi who says that the Pak Fa is about .05 and they also say that the Raptor is .03. Which I think is true.

But then there’s the rumor about the alleged .00004 RCS of the Raptor which people extrapolate from the fact that someone in the US said that its the RCS of a marble when forced to say something.

The alleged marble RCS of the Raptor screws the whole scale up and it gets Gripen and Rafele fans to believe that maybe the RCS of those are indeed .5 and .3. Which is why the ,5 and.3 rumor doesn’t die down. Then the .5 and .3 pisses off the Pak Fa fans because its alleging that the RCS of 4th gens are almost as good as the Pak Fa.

So if we could put this one to rest, that would help clean up the scale.

November 3, 2017 at 8:03 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137515

KGB
Participant

Everyone knows the rumored RCS numbers that go around. They pass through here too.

But hey, we wouldn’t want to put to rest the nonsense about the Rafele and Gripen having the same (or lower !) RCS than the su 57 now would we..

Those rumors are just too convenient for the Raptor stronks to not have around.

BTW you are speaking for yourself. Aren’t you a “Raptor RCS is a marble” guy…

November 3, 2017 at 6:36 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137543

KGB
Participant

This thread is based on hearsay RCS numbers. We accept all the BS. All the numbers that float around in the military aviation fanboy underworld.

I’ve seen sub .03 and .05 floating around for said aircraft for awhile now. Seen it here, Nat Interest comment section. Defense Aviation comments section.

November 3, 2017 at 2:34 pm in reply to: Clean Rafale & Gripen RCS is 5 m2 and 3 m2. Not .05 & .03 #2137612

KGB
Participant

Just make your case halloweene. Provide the source of the alleged .05 and .03 and explain why the number makes sense.

November 2, 2017 at 12:48 pm in reply to: No buying the B-70 was far from the only screw up the Air Force made #2137847

KGB
Participant

The fact that the industry determined the stealth qualities mostly by the poll model says something. It says that the shape of the aircraft is the biggest determining factor in the stealth of an aircraft.

Yet a certain segment of the enthusiast community things that the cosmetic details like how well hidden the engine is, or how the wings are clipped, or the canopy frame, are the biggest determining factor. Seems to me that their not. The computer generated shape of the aircraft is the biggest determining factor.

November 2, 2017 at 4:06 am in reply to: No buying the B-70 was far from the only screw up the Air Force made #2137987

KGB
Participant

Why is it that people feel the need to qualify the fact that the YF-23 had better stealth than the F-22.. Why the protest to that…

October 27, 2017 at 8:27 pm in reply to: The Concorde legacy and its effect on all aviation #2138676

KGB
Participant

@ Tony

Good points. BA was actually planning to add more perks to the Concorde program and steamline a few things. Air France killed it. They should have both commited to NY-London. Period. The jets were built already. That cost was covered. So the jets existed anyway, why not make money with them ?

The US was trying to build a mach 3 , 300 seat machine with swing wings and the rest of it. They bit off way more than they could chew. So they turned over the chess board by banning the Concorde over land.

October 26, 2017 at 8:13 pm in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2138849

KGB
Participant

another safe ejection in the east.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,157 total)

← 1 2 3 … 15 16 17 … 76 77 78 →