Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: 2009 displays of the F-22 and the Rafale
Bluewings12    6/24/2009 5:03:48 PM
Let 's watch them first :-) The F-22 h*tp://www.air-attack.com/videos/single/cAhL7lJCk4I The Rafale : h*tp://www.dailymotion.com/user/ministeredeladefense/video/x9ma8h_demonstration-du-rafale_news Both aircrafts are pulling nice stuff . Rafale only does it twice faster . Explaination and details to follow . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
gf0012-aust       8/4/2009 5:29:44 AM
Early RAM had three major drawbacks, weight, susceptibility to friction damage, poor heat conductivity, and oxidation, all defects, of course, which continue to plague many of the matrices tried by many of America's competitors down to the present. 

 
the early generation stuff was awful (it was literally equivalent to a blanket) - the fact that it did actually change the RCS of some of the unmanned assets it went on is testimony to the perseverance of the engineers....

     





 




 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    To supplyu an alternative to the American "slicks"......   8/4/2009 5:37:17 AM

That I can quote that the French tried and failed.
 

Tried and failed at what?

 

Most of your posts look like modern "art", lots of fluff, seemingly random items and the "artist" expecting everyone to share a vision he never clearly communicated in the first case.


Ruben. You couldn't make them as cheap. It was originally about markets, not effectiveness.
 
Sheesh, what an amateur.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Blue Apple       8/4/2009 7:22:03 AM
You couldn't make them as cheap
 
What is "them"?
 
Are you talking about all French stand off weapons in general? In which case DK already stated several posts ago that French weapons tend to cost more than their US counterparts and I don't see anyone here who disagrees.
 
I still don't see the point to linking to several missile designs as if there was some deeper meaning in such post.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    "Slicks" are Heinenman desugned GP bomb casings.    8/4/2009 7:31:36 AM

You couldn't make them as cheap
 

What is "them"?

 

Are you talking about all French stand off weapons in general? In which case DK already stated several posts ago that French weapons tend to cost more than their US counterparts and I don't see anyone here who disagrees.

I still don't see the point to linking to several missile designs as if there was some deeper meaning in such post.


Like I said, an amateur.
 
Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

Blue Apple       8/4/2009 7:59:23 AM
Jesus, if your post was only about the BL EUx program, why the links to exocet, Taurus, ASMP...?
 
And I don't think you'll find anyone who believes that the purpose of the BL EUx program was to produce bombs that are cheaper than US ones. Economies of scale will always favor US (or Russian) weapons.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Figure it out.   8/4/2009 1:15:26 PM

Jesus, if your post was only about the BL EUx program, why the links to exocet, Taurus, ASMP...?

 

And I don't think you'll find anyone who believes that the purpose of the BL EUx program was to produce bombs that are cheaper than US ones. Economies of scale will always favor US (or Russian) weapons.


Its not hard.
 
It goes directly to wrong choices which has been a continuous theme I have about most technological incompetence..
 
Herald
 
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    I was thinking of nosecones   8/4/2009 2:04:34 PM
"Early RAM had three major drawbacks, weight, susceptibility to friction damage, poor heat conductivity, and oxidation, all defects, of course, which continue to plague many of the matrices tried by many of America's competitors down to the present."
 
" and thats the issue - you don't "coat" the entire plane - it's one element in a set of signature/emissions tuning and management capabilities.  those who talk about "coating" (and usually they say "painting") the entire plane are absolutely clueless about LO management ...."
 
I was thinking more along the lines of really simple stuff, like putting radar absorbent material on a plane's nose cone.
 
Right in front of the radar where the fighter's outgoing radar waves will be absorbed. And where the radar's return signal will also be absorbed before it reaches the radar antenna. This is like putting sound proofing in front of your brand new very expensive HIFI speakers IMHO.
 
In my opinion what you want for a stealth fighter's nose cone, if you want to equip it with radar that is, is that your radar waves pass through the nose cone unhindered and your opponent's waves are absorbed by the nose cone.
 
That is quite a design problem. I wouldn't blame the F-117 designers if for that reason they went with an IR sensor only. If you don't solve this in some way then either all stealth planes will be without radar. Or you can only reduce radar cross section to the return of the plane's radar equipment behind the nose cone.
 
As a non-expert, that's one of the problems I would expect to run into when designing a stealth plane. But then, non-experts like me often get it wrong so maybe it is not a problem.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       8/4/2009 2:45:11 PM

"Early RAM had three major drawbacks, weight, susceptibility to friction damage, poor heat conductivity, and oxidation, all defects, of course, which continue to plague many of the matrices tried by many of America's competitors down to the present."

 

" and thats the issue - you don't "coat" the entire plane - it's one element in a set of signature/emissions tuning and management capabilities.  those who talk about "coating" (and usually they say "painting") the entire plane are absolutely clueless about LO management ...."

 

I was thinking more along the lines of really simple stuff, like putting radar absorbent material on a plane's nose cone.
 To make things worse, there is the PILOT. That helmet he wears is a huge radar signal return issue in a LO aircraft. Naturally, you want to do something to the transparent canopy to either block radio waves from striking the pilot, or to RAM that feature.  Now I await some fanboy's claim that you ram the helmet, but the fact still rrmains that you have the ejector seat and a lot of other hard metal in the cockpit, that the pilot sits in, that also is a radar signal return problem (nightmare).
 
You signal manage it as best you can by using surrounding shape, and whatever materials you can devise to SCATTER, or redirect  the signal return in a direction away from the receiver FoV of the originating propogator. I assume you know what I mean, FJV. Its QM.           

Right in front of the radar where the fighter's outgoing radar waves will be absorbed. And where the radar's return signal will also be absorbed before it reaches the radar antenna. This is like putting sound proofing in front of your brand new very expensive HIFI speakers IMHO.

Baffles. 

In my opinion what you want for a stealth fighter's nose cone, if you want to equip it with radar that is, is that your radar waves pass through the nose cone unhindered and your opponent's waves are absorbed by the nose cone.

Or redirected. 

That is quite a design problem. I wouldn't blame the F-117 designers if for that reason they went with an IR sensor only. If you don't solve this in some way then either all stealth planes will be without radar. Or you can only reduce radar cross section to the return of the plane's radar equipment behind the nose cone.
Or you remember what a photon absorption event actually is. And remember that light has some very unusual properties known to the physicists. 
 
As a non-expert, that's one of the problems I would expect to run into when designing a stealth plane. But then, non-experts like me often get it wrong so maybe it is not a problem.
 It is a problem. In a weird universe where light is absorbed, polarized,  where the photovoltaic effect is a known one, where photons can be absorbed and re-emitted at different frequencies, how would you handle it?  
 

RAM principle and shaping to scatter return is not the re-radiation or rubber ball bounce analogy at all.
 
Herald
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       8/4/2009 4:15:27 PM
Or you can only reduce radar cross section to the return of the plane's radar equipment behind the nose cone.
 
Exactly.  This is why you see AESA radars on U.S. aircraft that look like this:
 
APG-79 on Block II F/A-18E/F:
 http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k90/in_a_coma_dial_999/strategypage/apg-79.jpg" />

APG-81 on F-35 (seen here installed on a flying testbed):
http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k90/in_a_coma_dial_999/strategypage/ngapg81.jpg" /> 
 
The radome has to be permeable to the wavelength used in both directions.  If you're going to take advantage of an AESA as an electronic warfare system, that means a reasonably wide frequency which threat radars will likely use.  So you can't block the signal.  But what you can do is orient your array so that it doesn't present a giant reflective slab from a head on aspect -- electronic beam-steering allows a certain flexibility in that regard.
 
Here is an example of an AESA which is not optimized in that regard:
 http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k90/in_a_coma_dial_999/strategypage/10003143.jpg" />
 
This is the RBE2-AA slated to go into production for the Rafale.  Seen from head-on, the RBE2's perpendicular array obligingly reflects emissions right back at the sender.  The APG-79, APG-81, and APG-77, which are designed to minimize RCS, do not.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       8/4/2009 4:35:31 PM
Or you can only reduce radar cross section to the return of the plane's radar equipment behind the nose cone.

its one of the factors as to why some arrays are slanted....  even the array will act as a signal reflector.  granted there's also another reason why aircraft with small diameter nose sections slant their radar, but, there's also good engineering and management reasons which influence that as well.

 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics