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: F-35 vs. Eurofighter
IAFbestinworld    8/13/2004 11:49:07 PM
Lockheed says that besides the f-22, the f-35 will be the best air to air fighter in the future, is this true? Could an f-35 take a Eurofighter? My opinion says yes since f-35 contains more stealthy characteristics.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46   NEXT
Bluewings    RE:F-35 : a unsatisfactory compromise to preserve F22??   1/28/2005 2:25:45 PM
Ok rgr that . Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    stealth external carryage   1/28/2005 2:41:30 PM
Stealth caracteristic come from shape AND RAM. To design a smart bomb to be carried externally with stealth caracterics does not imply a costly bomb.But a bomb with adapeted shape and low/medium cost stealth material on it. It is perfectly possible to have pods carrying non stealthy weapon in it, and which would add almost nothing to RCS. In fact computer power allow to calculate 3 dimensions computer simulation of RCS in way not possible 10 years ago and to design external stealthy carriage where multiple reflections of wave between adjacent bodies, will be computed in an realistic way.More other cold plasma riblets or active cancellation would be applied to these pods probably.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:stealth external carryage   1/28/2005 7:11:28 PM
I have to disagree with you there. Even if you design a bomb to be stealthy to begin with you still have to apply a level of materials and production technology not needed on your standard bomb. So stealthy ordanance will almost certainly be more costly than traditional non stealthy bombs. Also using pods to house non stealthy weapons is still not the optimum solution to carrying weapons in stealth. It is far less aerodynamic than internal weapons carriage and could limit an aircrafts maneuverability when attached. To reiterate, it would seem as though stealth bombs and stealth pods are used as a second choice to interal weapons bays. For example the Rafale and FB-22. The Rafale requirement for low observability was probably set after the initial design concept had been finalised causing it to be prohibitively expensive to modify the design to include an internal weapons bay. The FB-22 is a similar case. The idea of a wide winged FB-22 with large underwing weapons pods that has been floating around is I think a result of the restrictions of the initial design and the cost associated with enlarging the the bomb bay.
 
Quote    Reply

SpudmanWP    RE:Stealth bomb costs   1/28/2005 8:31:51 PM
Since each JDAM kit costs $56k(US), a few thousand per bomb for a new shell mold and angled fins is not going to cause anybody to not go for it.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Stealth bomb costs   1/29/2005 4:33:34 AM
Thats not the point though. The point is that stealthy bombs and stealth weapons pods are second best to internal weapons bays both from a performance standpoint and a stealth one (although the FB-22 is suppose to be more stealthy than the F-22 so well designed pods may not effect RCS significantly).
 
Quote    Reply

B.Smitty    RE:Stealth bomb costs   1/29/2005 8:06:18 AM
SpudmanWP wrote: "Since each JDAM kit costs $56k(US), a few thousand per bomb for a new shell mold and angled fins is not going to cause anybody to not go for it" The figure I've often seen for JDAM kits is more like $18k each (US).
 
Quote    Reply

919    RE:stealth external carryage   1/29/2005 9:39:19 AM
Cold plasma riblets? What kind of sauce comes with those? The traditional definition of plasma is a gas where the number of positive ions and electrons is equal. Has this changed? Regardless, I googled 'Cold plasma riblets' and found some research papers on boundry airflow control in supersonic jet engines. Not quite sure what it has ro do with stealth. Maybe there is a misunderstanding of what stealth is. Stealth is the idea of Shortening detection range untill it's inside weapons range. Basicly, you can kill them before they can find you. How many degrees per second you can change your heading by has nothing to do with air to air combat. It hasn't since snoopy climbed down off his doghouse. Since Day 1, Air to air combat meanst sneaking up on your opponent and shooting him in the back. Hollywood changed the perception of a fighter pilots job so they could sell more tickets. Yhe reality was the same for Cunningham as it was for the Red Baron. Locate the enemy before he locates you. Get into attack position. Kill. Run like hell. Dogfighting is stoopid and will get you killed. Pilots that spend a lot of time going around in little circles end up geeting moved into another line of work. Not that anybody goves a sh*t if they get killed, but why not give that expensive aircraft to someone that knows what it is for?
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    RE:stealth external carryage   1/29/2005 10:15:16 AM
Plasma absorbe EW wave on a large spectrum and this new technology of nineties enable to product external cold plasma in boundary layers to control flow and/or absorb EW. Search more.
 
Quote    Reply

SpudmanWP    RE:stealth external carryage and bomb cost   1/29/2005 11:27:25 AM
Re: $56k(US).. My bad... I was looking at "Acquisition unit cost". Re: cold plasma stealth.. check out this link on a good primer for plasma stealth. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread89869/pg1 I also realize that stealth pods and bombs are not the optimal solution, but their utilization fits the current need in several ways: 1.The FB-22 is meant to be an “interim” solution until the US develops it's follow-on to the B-2. As such, the bombs and pods provide the most cost effective solution to the need. 2.As aircraft stealth technology progresses, ADA assets may start targeting the bombs themselves as they fall in order to protect hi-value targets. A stealth bomb will give them much less react time to engage. 3.The F-35 will benefit from stealthy bombs as this will allow it to carry under-wing stores without giving up to much RCS.
 
Quote    Reply

Hellfire    RE:stealth external carryage and bomb cost   1/29/2005 2:40:05 PM
I guess these "pods" can be made significantly more stealthy than bombs, because: - they can be shaped optimaly - a more expansive RAM can be used since they are reusable.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics