Money hai to Honey hai.
Warna maamla funny hai.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Money hai to Honey hai.
Following is a Russian R-77 with foldable fin. However, I have not seen any picture of R-77 hanging on a pylon of an aircraft in this configuration.
The R 77 uses thrust vector and that's one reason why the fin's are foldable. This simply outlines TVC based high maneuverability during flight as you can change altitude extremely quickly due to TVC. I don't think there is a huge RCS issue here with having fold-able and unfolded fins.
The fins fold for internal carriage or when being transported (not to be confused with being carried aloft by a fighter) only. They do not fold when carried externally. Any picture of a FLANKER or FULCRUM airborne with R-77's will clearly show that the missiles have their fins unfolded.The R 77 uses thrust vector and that's one reason why the fin's are foldable. This simply outlines TVC based high maneuverability during flight as you can change altitude extremely quickly due to TVC. I don't think there is a huge RCS issue here with having fold-able and unfolded fins.
Any picture of a FLANKER or FULCRUM airborne with R-77's will clearly show that the missiles have their fins unfolded.
Above statement is from a senior member 'SOC' from the Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums. This statement appears to be correct because I also found this "Folding fins indicate internal-carriage version ofR-77 is in development" from an article in Flight Global. Please read the article here: http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1995/1995 - 1983.PDF
Inner cavities for the fins with pop up possibility with springs, that should keep the missile as a smooth cylinder..There are three foundational rules regarding designing a radar low observable body:
- Control of QUANTITY of radiators.
- Control of ARRAY of radiators.
- Control of MODES of radiation.
Folding the fins falls under rule 2.
The idea is that if you control the quantity of reflecting structures, aka radiators, rule 2 would get progressively less problematic. So unless you are able to collapse the fins into a point where the missile would be a smooth cylinder, anything less and you would still be left with rule 1, which leads to rule 2.
ses thrust vector and that's one reason why the fin's are foldable. This simply outlines TVC based high maneuverability during flight as you can change altitude extremely quickly due to TVC. I don't think there is a huge RCS issue here with having fold-able and unfo
ability during flight as you can change altitude e
Block 52 -> no comparison, unless we have Aesa Radars on JF-17 and engine improvementOscar or Nabil Bahi,
please tell us in simple.
JF-17 Block-II will be better then current F-16 which we have. ?
Oscar or Nabil Bahi,
please tell us in simple.
JF-17 Block-II will be better then current F-16 which we have. ?
Say NO to extra judicial killing of cats ............. No pussy cats or remove catsNo. It will be comparable to the F-16 MLU in terms of Air to Air Avionics and certain ECM capabilities. But is inferior in payload and combat radius along with vertical manoeuvrability.
New Recruit
No. It will be comparable to the F-16 MLU in terms of Air to Air Avionics and certain ECM capabilities. But is inferior in payload and combat radius along with vertical manoeuvrability.
No. It will be comparable to the F-16 MLU in terms of Air to Air Avionics and certain ECM capabilities. But is inferior in payload and combat radius along with vertical manoeuvrability.