New videos produced by BAE for Farnborough show some of the things it anticipates being a reality by 2040:

http://theaviationist.com/2014/07/09/bae-futuristic-aircraft/

These include Transformer jets, DEW and self healing structures.

Some people have suggested the airframe used in the video resembles the Bird of Prey, but it looks more like a version of the FCAS artwork to me and the timeframe isn’t too far off right?;)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]229945[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]229946[/ATTACH]

ONERA researchers do expect plama on EFCAS…

Other than two sides that surrendered, who knows.

Better avoid that EELightning…

grounded

Always heard 315m/s for Eurofighter, but these measurements depend on altitude (not only lift, but engine and air intakes efficiency), climb profile etc. comparing planes assuming they have a similar Cd, No body lift , No canard effects on lift, no idea of wing profile etc. Is not very relevant. (no pun intended).

Example of variation of climb speed depending on several factors on a 80ies prototype :

[ATTACH=CONFIG]229893[/ATTACH]

I don’t understand the meaning of that Post Hallo. Unless you try to make post 4th July headaches more painful.

Ok. There is a Thesis from March 2014 dedicated to Radar registry and target recognition in the Civil Industry using BSR.

Registry is not really new with RAM. Even the Russians have developed analog filters to make the process faster and be less dependents of the Processing speed capability (Jõ ?). Those are to be used in every 5th Gen aircraft. Does it really need hundred of pages to says so ?

What I didn’t see is a stat for the target recognition giving a positive indication of the number of detected contacts on Very low RCS targets .But probably I missed something here or I am of bad mood.

Not really, i just wanted to give an up to date info. Seemed to me an interesting source for people who would like to read it. Nvm. There were indications of positive identification vs F-117 but only on modelized model. And The RCS/tomography model is new.

For Radar geeks only…

http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/96/36/01/PDF/Pisane_Jonathan_Thesis_French_VF.pdf

PhD thesis about aircraft classification using bistatic radars.

Halloweene, one cannot dispute a statement/claim from one manufacturer yet take another from a competitor for gospel.

During Red Flag 14-1, RAF Typhoons were launching BVR [simulated] shots at Mach 1.6+ at heights in excess of 36,000ft and claiming kills to the great surprise of USAF jockeys. At what point the engines were selected for reheat is unknown but one can imagine they reached quite a significant Mach number.

It’s an RAF(?) claim, so feel free to call it a dubious statement as well.

I haent read the article, so i dunno the origin of the statement. Nothing bad in it i said dubious. For ex i know a plane that can sustain 4.3G at Mach 2, 36Kfeet. Ok, but i wont say it is the only one apart from F-22

Tell me, how do they know that? From BAE i guess. Did they ask other contstructors (Dassault SAAB, Sukhoi)? Dubious statement. At best.