IF anyone has any relevant document/piece etc. About MB 152, some DAsault engineers are trying to revive it. Their CATIA model is near done…

http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fportail-aviation.blogspot.fr%2F2013%2F12%2Fla-resurrection-du-mb-152.html&langpair=fr|en

Care to show a link that says that it has any capability above a standard IR MAWS? Just because it shows a picture does not mean anything as I can show you video of the F-22 MAWS yet it does not have any other function beyond MAWS.

Very soon, writing the story. To be precise, it is being rewritten atm.

There are few fighters that can out accelerate a block 52, namely Eurofighter, F-22, Rafale, Su-35 (and hard numbers are not easy to come by on any of these)

According to Pete Collins test, 30kts/sec acceleration with a centerline pod.
There are also interesting values about very heavy configuration in D.M. North and Chris Yeoh tests.

cherry picking (both of us) i meant reinforced tracks/track.
And this article is in fact an old one that was printed ages ago.
nvm 😉

OUch…

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20140202/NEWS04/302020005/Air-Combat-Command-s-challenge-Buy-new-modernize-older-aircraft

*
Air Combat Command’s challenge: Buy new or modernize older aircraft | Air Force Times | airforcetimes.com

The F-22, when it was produced, was flying with computers that were already so out of date you would not find them in a kid’s game console in somebody’s home gaming system. But I was forced to use that because that was the spec that was written by the acquisition process when I was going to buy the F-22.
That is why the current upgrade programs to the F-22 I put easily as critical as my F-35 fleet. If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22

Source: http://www.indiandefence.com/forums/indian-air-force/851-pak-fa-5th-generation-aircraft-163.html#ixzz2sHNBqZmc

Thx for the hint.
But writing (voicing) a recommendation about the fact that you shld pull 12 instead of 9G when you are in a critical situation pulling all that you can to avoid a close call makes no sens at all. The decision to pull precede the act and there is no time to draw it on a paper, recalculate your trajectory agree with the FCS decision that you should not eject.

Full auto system or nothing (mechanical just like an old Su27). Sometime when you can’t re-invent the wheel, it does not help to draw a triangle and call it a smooth circle.

Everybody as seen the vid of the Rafale near-missing a GC at sea. it’s a violent maneuver with only split seconds tempo. No time for a dialogue and a cup of tea with B**** Betty

Except that the automatic crash avoidance will be implemented in F3.4 std…

Sorry, your example doesn’t make sense Sens.

Your sensors will trigger mission-software alerts to the pilot(s) – who then take the appropriate course of action, via the Flight Control Software.

The pilot is the intermediary between the two. The aircraft (at least as far as flight is concerned) does not react automatically to new and evolving threats – it alerts the pilot who then reacts.

The fusion of various sensor feeds into one coherent picture for the pilot does not involve or require automated manipulation of flight controls.

True, but a good EWS will also propose reactions to the pilot, automatically launch (and adapt) decoys etc.