jackjack :
can you do a french google for me please, i have found nothing in english
That wouldn ‘t help you . The latest Thalรจs infos (in english) :
http://www.thalesonline.fr/Portfolio/Defence/Aerospace_Product_AESARBE2Radar/?pid=6902
Cheers .
Nice design , interesting …
Cheers .
As far as I know jackjack , no .
Cheers .
As far as I know , only the APG-81 (F-35) and the F-22 APG-77v1 (v2 version is not fielded yet) are capable of active jamming .
The APG-77v1 (when used as an active jammer) is only capable of boosting 1000watts for a single minute or it burns . The v2 version is supposed to increase the output power .
Anyway , we have to remember that only the X band is concerned .
The AESA RBE2 is said to have about the same capability but I don ‘t know if the Rafale will use it .
Cheers .
What claims do you want me to prove , jackjack ?
Cheers .
I don ‘t know the expression . Could you explain it to me , please .
Cheers .
I agree , TMor and Toan can be trusted .
Myself , well … I say what I mean and I do what I say ๐
Up to you to trust me or not , no worries ๐
Cheers .
the rafale reputation is improved by dismissing fanboy sillyness and not giving it oxygen
That ‘s for sure . ๐
To be honest , I haven ‘t read anything yet coming from a “fanboy” . The few French posters here on this board are knowledgeable and intelligent enough to avoid talking crap .
Cheers .
Ok , sorry , I did not get it right ๐ฎ
Thanks . ๐
Cheer .
jackjack :
[Bwhen BW dismisses the word changing of removable to droppable for the pixie dust rafale [/B]
Hang on !!
The probe is NOT dropeable .
I only pointed out that if it was , it could not be possible to drop it while flying upside down .
Cheers .
Thank you for your good and enlightening post TEEJ . ๐
*******************
You are probably thinking of the Mirage 2000 lost over Bosnia during Operation Deliberate Force in 1995?
Yep , sorry for the memory fart , ooops .
Cheers .
When I ‘ll see the F-35 doing half of this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv9MW0o32wc
I may change my mind , maybe …
Cheers .
pfcem , there is one thing you must understand once for all (this is also aimed at other posters) .
The F-35 is a brick with engine powerful enough to keep it airborne .
It can ‘t even do a proper roll without loosing altitude .
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june10/defense_04-21.html
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4df9k_f35-lightning-ii_tech
I can find many other videos showing the same behavior .
Then , people (like Beesley) are telling me that it can match a F-16 !?? ๐ฎ
They should go easy with the Jack Daniel ‘s No7 :diablo:
Cheers .
pfcem :
It does no such thing.
What it does state is “to counter potential wing drop in transonic turns” (amazing how they could possibly anticipate a potential issue &/or know before hand how to counter it) & that if said potential issue should manifest that it “can be resolved with flight control software changes”.
Note that this is only a potential issue for the F-35C & only at transonic speeds, not a concern for the F-35A or F-35B.
Nice bla-bla-bla and nice try , no offence but you come short . :p
Tell me again , why do they need a “spoiler” ? :diablo:
I don ‘t know any other aircraft needing such … device to fly properly at transonic speed …
Cola :
Well, coalition forces lost six Tornados indeed, but they busted an airfield
I am really sorry that the coalition lost six Tornados with their crews , but six aircraft lost for an Iraki airfield is poor and not worth it . We could have shot down the Iraki aircraft in the air for less than that .
Cheers .
Jessmo :
5 . You come off as desperate.
Lol ! AHAHAH !!!:D
You are a funny one , lol ! ๐ really !
Cheers .