2*MIG 35 >> RAFALE/EFT

[rockstarIN]

If we can bring the RCS of MKI further by adding Su-35 features why not?

 

[sancho]

The Su35 discussion has nothing to do with the topic, but to clear it up, it's a single seat fighter and IAF doctrine requires twin seat config, that's why we had gone for MKI and will go for FGFA.
Also there are not real features of the Su 35BM to reduce the RCS, that we can take for MKI as well. They simply removed some airframe parts that increases it (like the canards) and added composites and RAM materials. MKI is a twin seat fighter, what adds to RCS, we purposly had gone with canards, so that will add as well, what's left is composites and RAM and that will be done during this, or at least the MLU for sure. Bottom line is, upgraded MKIs will have a lower RCS and longer range radars and remain the most capable Su 30MK version.

 

[tvsram1992]

If we can bring the RCS of MKI further by adding Su-35 features why not?

It wouldnt make much difference if we reduce its rcs from 20 to 18m2(by RAM and other things).
That is the minimum rcs we can get at reasonable cost.
We cannot reduce further as we need to change its airframe and dimensions completely which would make it a new plane of flanker series.
still if u want to reduce rcs , make su35/37mki which wouldnt exceed the price of su30mki ie $105mln.
su37 has reduced rcs features.

 

[sancho]

It wouldnt make much difference if we reduce its rcs from 20 to 18m2(by RAM and other things).

Actually, you can expect a greater reduction by adding composites and RAM and to bring it back to topic again, look at Mig 29K / Mig 35!
The main differences to older Mig 29 versions is replacing metal parts with composites and adding RAM coatings, which resulted in a reduction up to 4 times and the same is said for US fighters as well! The main problem for medium, or light class fighters in this regard is however the addition of external loads, like fuel tanks, which increases the RCS again.

 

[tvsram1992]

Actually, you can expect a greater reduction by adding composites and RAM and to bring it back to topic again, look at Mig 29K / Mig 35!
The main differences to older Mig 29 versions is replacing metal parts with composites and adding RAM coatings, which resulted in a reduction up to 4 times and the same is said for US fighters as well! The main problem for medium, or light class fighters in this regard is however the addition of external loads, like fuel tanks, which increases the RCS again.

Rcs of traditional mig29 is 4.5sqmt
Rcs of mig35(newer mig29's) is 1m2.
Why are you seeing it as reduction of rcs 4 times.
U can say rcs of 4 has been subtracted.
So as su30mki rcs can be brought down to 17-18m2 by adding RAM and
it could be brought to 12m2 by adding composites.
That is too costly.(Thats why i mentioned at reasonable cost it will be 18m2)
Note that now price of su30mki is $105mln
It could further bang if composites are used.
Removing canards and lengthy stabilizers can bring rcs to 6m2.

 

[sancho]

Rcs of traditional mig29 is 4.5sqmt
Rcs of mig35(newer mig29's) is 1m2.
Why are you seeing it as reduction of rcs 4 times.

Often expected at 5m2 and the 4 times lower is what Mig officially says about Mig 29K, or Mig 35.

 

[Skull and Bones]

Rcs of traditional mig29 is 4.5sqmt
Rcs of mig35(newer mig29's) is 1m2.
Why are you seeing it as reduction of rcs 4 times.
U can say rcs of 4 has been subtracted.
So as su30mki rcs can be brought down to 17-18m2 by adding RAM and
it could be brought to 12m2 by adding composites.
That is too costly.(Thats why i mentioned at reasonable cost it will be 18m2)
Note that now price of su30mki is $105mln
It could further bang if composites are used.
Removing canards and lengthy stabilizers can bring rcs to 6m2.

now we have a mig-35 lobbyist among us
it's said that the RCS has been reduced by 4 times.

i found this informative article on mig-35.
- MiG-35/MiG-35D

 

[jagjitnatt]

Often expected at 5m2 and the 4 times lower is what Mig officially says about Mig 29K, or Mig 35.

now we have a mig-35 lobbyist among us
it's said that the RCS has been reduced by 4 times.

i found this informative article on mig-35.
- MiG-35/MiG-35D

I've heard this statement a million times now, that its rcs is reduced by a factor of 4. But have any of you intelligent minds ever thought, at what angle has the rcs been reduced by a factor of 4?????

It could be from behind, or top, or side. Maybe it has the same rcs from the front, as a regular Mig-29. So I want you all to stop cooking stories about Mig-35. Please don't claim something you don't know much about.

 

[tvsram1992]

I've heard this statement a million times now, that its rcs is reduced by a factor of 4. But have any of you intelligent minds ever thought, at what angle has the rcs been reduced by a factor of 4?????

It could be from behind, or top, or side. Maybe it has the same rcs from the front, as a regular Mig-29. So I want you all to stop cooking stories about Mig-35. Please don't claim something you don't know much about.

and do you know in which direction rcs is reduced by 4 times?
Do you know f22 will also have more rcs on rear view and side view than mentioned by its producer!
officially rcs is taken as front view rcs.

 

[sancho]

I've heard this statement a million times now, that its rcs is reduced by a factor of 4. But have any of you intelligent minds ever thought, at what angle has the rcs been reduced by a factor of 4?????

It could be from behind, or top, or side. Maybe it has the same rcs from the front, as a regular Mig-29. So I want you all to stop cooking stories about Mig-35. Please don't claim something you don't know much about.

The angle wasn't the point here, but that the manufacturer officially says that the new versions has reduced RCS by 4 times and that this was done mainly by adding new materials and coatings, so it's not just our opinion.
Btw, did you realised that the Mig 29Ks have sawtooth design around the nose section, probably made of RAM materials similar to what Dassault did around the Rafale airframe. So at least we can assume that there was a focus on reducing the frontal RCS.

 

[jagjitnatt]

and do you know in which direction rcs is reduced by 4 times?

No, no one knows. That is what I am saying. The statements made by the manufacturer are for marketing purposes. It will have reduced rcs by a factor of up to 4 at some angles. But that isn't necessarily the front angle.

Do you know f22 will also have more rcs on rear view and side view than mentioned by its producer!

The producers never mention the rcs of the Raptor. The rcs of the Raptor isn't 0.0001 sq m or whatever you here on the internet. I have valid reasons to believe that it is more than that.

officially rcs is taken as front view rcs.

No. There is nothing like official rcs. There are no official statements about an aircraft's rcs figures anywhere on the internet. Anything you hear about rcs are usually statements from other people on forums, and analysis. Also what exactly do you consider front? What angles qualify to be called front angle?
No one knows, because everyone is just repeating what they read on another forum. You need to understand how radars work and how material reflect radio waves in order to understand what rcs a body can have. That too one can not judge the radio waves absorbed by the material, so there is very little you can know about the rcs of an aircraft, unless you have sources, credible ones.

 

[luckyyy]

I've heard this statement a million times now, that its rcs is reduced by a factor of 4. But have any of you intelligent minds ever thought, at what angle has the rcs been reduced by a factor of 4?????

It could be from behind, or top, or side. Maybe it has the same rcs from the front, as a regular Mig-29. So I want you all to stop cooking stories about Mig-35. Please don't claim something you don't know much about.

RCS figures of a aircraft are always taken from front view ....

 

[tvsram1992]

No, no one knows. That is what I am saying. The statements made by the manufacturer are for marketing purposes.

Do you think we just buy aircraft by studying official characteristics made by its manufacturer.
We evalute them under so called trials.(at jaisalmer,bangalore,leh trails were completed)
We can know the rcs of opponents aircraft during such trials.

. I have valid reasons to believe that it is more than that[.

What are those reasons. I would like to know them as even i believe rcs of f22 cannot be similar to that of tennis ball as its manufacturers said. Is there any source?

No. There is nothing like official rcs. There are no official statements about an aircraft's rcs figures anywhere on the internet.

The latter sentence may be true but there is such a thing called official rcs, calculated during testing and trails of aircraft. It is generally taken as rcs of front view of aircraft ie the rcs of aircraft when the aircraft is heading towards the target.

so there is very little you can know about the rcs of an aircraft, unless you have sources, credible ones.

I think wikipedia is a credible source.

 

[Skull and Bones]

I think wikipedia is a credible source.

ok enough for today.

Where anyone and everyone can modify the contents, is not referred as a credible source

 

[tvsram1992]

ok enough for today.

Where anyone and everyone can modify the contents, is not referred as a credible source

then didnt you see any thing like this citation needed