JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 7]

[TNT]

Hi,

Really---. And dyou don't know what the thick coat of paint does for the F-22---.

Any idead how thick the paint is on the F-22---you need to take it off with a chiesel.

I posted a picture on this forum a few years ago. Find it and you will learn something different.

Yea its thick, so? Still the best coating can at most reduce rcs by 10℅ hardly. My point is the majority of rcs reduction is achieved via design.

 

[messiach]

Aspect ratio does'nt necessarily mean larger wing. They can change with expansion of wing rootlets. Centre of lift has definitely not changed wrt to tail.

Thanks my friend for your advice, I try to ignore him, but sometimes

Anyway ... concerning @messiach's note of the "the dihedral angle of the main wing", this indeed may be, but I still see no hints towards a different aspect ratio or anyway larger wing?!

You are a good kid. I know.

Pardon, but so far any request to show us these changes you noticed or explain a bit more in detail were ignored! All you did, was posting a request that someone with CAD capabilities might do a better job … and by the way regardless what certain grumpy old man tells you - and I‘m sure it is not too difficult to find out who I am - I‘m not a spy, but only a critical enthusiast with an eager interest to learn, but I‘m not willing to accept everything only since someone says so. For example claims - supported by this genius with huge "engineering background & is not clueless of metal and material" - like an Italian engine being ready for Block 3 or fuel tanks in the cockpit walls are IMO unlikely or plain impossible.

 

[Deino]

Aspect ratio does'nt necessarily mean larger wing. They can change with expansion of wing rootlets. Centre of lift has definitely not changed wrt to tail.

You are a good kid. I know.

Funny ... the last time one called me a kid was probably about 40 years ago! So thanks ... but may I ask how old are you?

 

[Akh1112]

Yea its thick, so? Still the best coating can at most reduce rcs by 10℅ hardly. My point is the majority of rcs reduction is achieved via design.

This is in line with what I know too, maybe the 10% number is off, however, the majority of reduction is done via design and not an add on coating.

 

[GriffinsRule]

This is in line with what I know too, maybe the 10% number is off, however, the majority of reduction is done via design and not an add on coating.

I think that is correct, and even with design, it's not just the external shape but how the inner airframe structure is and what materials are used in it as radar will penetrate through the skin where composites are used.

Composites are less reflective then metals and other conductive materials. Then there is a hierarchy within composites as well on strength, weight, ease of manufacturing and whatever other trait one is looking for in aerospace or automotive industry.

Instead of me rewriting what I read, here is a very informative link for basic understanding for interested parties.

Going stealthy with composites - Materials Today

Plans for wind farms are often opposed by defence organisations and air traffic control services on the grounds that they interfere with radar, making it d

www.materialstoday.com

 

[Bossman]

Aspect ratio does'nt necessarily mean larger wing. They can change with expansion of wing rootlets. Centre of lift has definitely not changed wrt to tail.

You are a good kid. I know.

It is fairly easy to distinguish between the smart ones and the stupid ones irrespective of age. Keep it up

 

[CriticalThought]

This is in line with what I know too, maybe the 10% number is off, however, the majority of reduction is done via design and not an add on coating.

Rafale uses a combination of design and composites to lower its frontal RCS.

 

[MastanKhan]

Yea its thick, so? Still the best coating can at most reduce rcs by 10℅ hardly. My point is the majority of rcs reduction is achieved via design.

Hi,

For a stealth design---in the general information domain---the general informant is clueless what is the difference between the stealth design alone and stealth design with stealth enhanced paint.

 

[Gripen9]

 

[The Raven]

Aspect ratio does'nt necessarily mean larger wing. They can change with expansion of wing rootlets. Centre of lift has definitely not changed wrt to tail.

You are a good kid. I know.

Last time I checked, LERX are not considered part of the wing when calculating wing aspect ratio.

Although they do have a small lift component, they're mostly designed to induce vortices at high AoA to re-energise control surfaces for better high aspect manoeuvrability. If you have a look at pics of the JF-17 performing high AoA manoeuvres, the vortices travel along the inner wing to the elevators to sustain better pitch authority. In any case, the LERX on the Block III do not appear to be any different to previous blocks.

 

[TNT]

Hi,

For a stealth design---in the general information domain---the general informant is clueless what is the difference between the stealth design alone and stealth design with stealth enhanced paint.

Lolz i see u doing this in every discussion, sidestep and make a claim of urself being informed. Doesnt change the fact that low observability depends on design. Also there is no such thing as stealth design lolz, stealth enhancing paint? How can stealth be enhanced? That's an oxymoron. Goes to show how much informed is the supposed informant who been wrong abt every claim made n now is sarcasm for the forum. Have a nice day.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Thanks my friend for your advice, I try to ignore him, but sometimes

Anyway ... concerning @messiach's note of the "the dihedral angle of the main wing", this indeed may be, but I still see no hints towards a different aspect ratio or anyway larger wing?!

She never said that changes were going to be major. when I did my (admittedly flawed) comparison of Block II & Block III, I too did not hint on any major changes. For all we know the changes may be imperceptible but consequential. Moreover, unless a more powerful engine is confirmed, we can not expect any major changes. A few pages ago, I questioned whether RD-93 MA is actually available for current batch of Block III order of 30 aircraft. Perhaps any further changes are not possible unless we have a more powerful engine. This points to a potential Block change down the road which may incorporate hypothetical changes that some of us keep speculating about. This hypothesis hinges on a current lack of a more powerful engine which we'll have to wait to find out.

Anyways, I have taken some flak & am not willing to stick out my neck anytime soon. So, I'll just wait for more information. Please do help keep us honest here at PDF

 

[messiach]

Rootlets extends behind the LERX.

Last time I checked, LERX are not considered part of the wing when calculating wing aspect ratio.

Although they do have a small lift component, they're mostly designed to induce vortices at high AoA to re-energise control surfaces for better high aspect manoeuvrability. If you have a look at pics of the JF-17 performing high AoA manoeuvres, the vortices travel along the inner wing to the elevators to sustain better pitch authority. In any case, the LERX on the Block III do not appear to be any different to previous blocks.

View attachment 776797

 

[MastanKhan]

Lolz i see u doing this in every discussion, sidestep and make a claim of urself being informed. Doesnt change the fact that low observability depends on design. Also there is no such thing as stealth design lolz, stealth enhancing paint? How can stealth be enhanced? That's an oxymoron. Goes to show how much informed is the supposed informant who been wrong abt every claim made n now is sarcasm for the forum. Have a nice day.

Hi,

Just because you have flawed understanding of a system---does not mean that I have to follow thru.

I am writing what I know---you write what your unlce or abbaji has told you or the gossip that you have heard on the forums---.

So---don't blame me for your shortcoming---.

You are such a simpleton--son you you lack understanding of engineering design---.

Stealth design is no secret once the original picture came ut. Anyone or everyone who have a sound engineering technology base and machines can design and fly an aircraft with the design of F-35 or an F-22.

The aircraft can be identical in shape and form---but not in stealth characteristics---why---because stealth design is just one step amongst many in the levels of stealth capability of the aircraft---.

She never said that changes were going to be major. when I did my (admittedly flawed) comparison of Block II & Block III, I too did not hint on any major changes. For all we know the changes may be imperceptible but consequential. Moreover, unless a more powerful engine is confirmed, we can not expect any major changes. A few pages ago, I questioned whether RD-93 MA is actually available for current batch of Block III order of 30 aircraft. Perhaps any further changes are not possible unless we have a more powerful engine. This points to a potential Block change down the road which may incorporate hypothetical changes that some of us keep speculating about. This hypothesis hinges on a current lack of a more powerful engine which we'll have to wait to find out.

Anyways, I have taken some flak & am not willing to stick out my neck anytime soon. So, I'll just wait for more information. Please do help keep us honest here at PDF

Hi,

What most people don't understand is the term " multiplier effect f the change "---.

What does that change bring---a 50% more capability---??? or more---.

Modern technology has brought on monstrous changes in capability from one generation to an other generation of an aircraft.

 

[Keysersoze]

Funny ... the last time one called me a kid was probably about 40 years ago! So thanks ... but may I ask how old are you?

I think its fair to say most of us are 40 plus but somehow keep being referred to as kids..

Lolz i see u doing this in every discussion, sidestep and make a claim of urself being informed. Doesnt change the fact that low observability depends on design. Also there is no such thing as stealth design lolz, stealth enhancing paint? How can stealth be enhanced? That's an oxymoron. Goes to show how much informed is the supposed informant who been wrong abt every claim made n now is sarcasm for the forum. Have a nice day.

He has done this a lot. I was going back through the earlier posts in the forum (About 10 years ago now) and its amazing how little this "engineer" knows...Furthermore he clearly hasn't learned any wisdom in his old age.

"True wisdom is knowing you know nothing"