There is no stealth info to be found on Su-30.

Indeed , it seems to be correct . It is just that I would like to be sure that the Indian MKI did not benefit of any “discrete” feature .
I asked because the Chinese J-11B , which is an updated SU-27 , is known to have :

Redesigned air inlets of engine intakes to reduce the radar cross section, this coupled with the adoption of composite material, and application of radar absorbent material has reduced the radar cross section (RCS) of 15 square meters of Su-27SK to just >3 square meters of J-11B.

A RCS of only 3 square meters for a Flanker is quite a feast , especially coming from the Chinese .

Typhoon has an s-duct. Pretty sure it makes extensive use of RAM as well.

If the Typhoon use RAM , where it is placed on the airframe ?
Is the material used is indeed RAM or radar absorbent paint ?

In the US, each manufacturer has his own formulations for RAM and RAS. Lockheed’s formulas are different than Boeing’s, are different than Northrop’s, are different than Raytheon’s, are different than L-3’s, are different than General Dynamic’s, are different from GE’s, are different from P&W’s.

Yes , I thought so . In fact , I am trying to know if they mostly use epoxy based materials or Cyano Acrylates based materials .

We have to understand that RA materials and RA paint are 2 different things . As an example , the B2 , F-22 , F-35 and Rafale are using RAM on critical areas while the rest is only RA paint (the B2 and the F-22 seems to be the only 2 aircraft also using a special material to diffuse the heat generated during flight) .

http://www.air-attack.com/page/47

Real RAM is thicker than RA paint and is a better EM absorber , but is it more costly and the maintenance cost is also higher . We also know that for the RAM to be effective , it has to cover a good part of the X band (mostly) and this is very difficult to archive .
A good explanation here :

Radar absorbers are loosely classified as “resonant” or “broadband”. Thus “resonant” RAM is effective only for a discreet frequency or a set of discreet frequencies. Broadband RAM is effective over an entire band of frequencies. (snip) … It is difficult to achieve the bandwidths desired of microwave radar absorbers (typically 2-18GHz) using a single-layer absorber so much of the work in this area is in designing multiple layers based upon bandwidth specifications.

This is telling us that bands like the Ku band or millimeter band might not be “annoyed” by RAM , which are the band used by EM missiles 😎
That could mean that a good EM missile wouldn ‘t care about RAM .

IF it is the case , an ECM suite capable to jam the missile bands would be more efficient than simple RAM . :rolleyes: (note that I said IF) .

So , you can understand that I would like to know more …

Cheers .

I have a big grin on my face when people post stuff like that :

It looks impressive but the total external load of the F-35 is going to be poor to say the least . The A version seems to be (from what we know) the only one really capable to fly decently with more than 6tons under the wings . It has still to be demonstrated 😀

The internal load is simply not worth the aircraft and not worth the targets either .
The USA are so “proud” of their advance in passive stealth that they are completely forgetting that they could have gone the “active stealth” way instead , which is cheaper and more future proof as tomorrow ‘s wars will mostly relies on electronics and blinding the adversary means of detection and tracking .

It is why I say that a Rafale F3 (or F4+) will get deeper inside a strongly defended airspace than a F-35 and has more chances to come back alive and safe .
It also have more firepower and flight characteristics still to match by any other multirole fighter .
By 2015 , the Rafale will be able to fire 3 cruise missiles (!) deep inside enemy territory within a 1000nm radius range and defend itself with Meteors and Micas .
I can ‘t see any planned F-35 doing this . :diablo:

Cheers .

I said earlier on (one page ago) :

When I ‘ll see the F-35 doing half of this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv9MW0o32wc
I may change my mind , maybe …

In fact , I ‘ve just noticed that I posted the wrong video 😮
Here is the one I wanted to show :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWeiG52Q88w&feature=related

The cameraman is doing a good job by keeping the aircraft close . While it doesn ‘t show the high speed , it has the advantage (for us) to watch how the jet is flying and how the various moving parts do their job .

Every figure is very neat and precise . It feels like the jet could do much better ~and with ease~ if the pilot could sustain more Gs .
It also shows rather nicely (thanks to the humid weather) how the airflow act on the airframe and what a closed coupled canard design + LERXs do over the wing .

Give the aircraft twin 9T engines and it will literally blow away the competition in manoeuvrability , including the F-22 .
Then , I bet that the AdlA and the MN will get the HMS (HMD) by 2015 .
I wouldn ‘t like to be a pilot in a Russian made fighter . 😮

Cheers .

I agree with everything you said djcross .
Just one thing 😉 :

But do not conclude F-35 will not perform to spec without evidence.

So far , the few evidences available are not going very well towards the requested and hoped Specs .
There are actually some teething problems (no show-stoppers) who needs to be taken care of .
To me , it doesn ‘t look very bright :rolleyes:

Cheers .