RCS OF Different Fighters

[Silk]

Please provide evidence that composites decrease RCS... I did not know that MKI was filled with composites.

 

[rockstarIN]

• I'm not quite sure what you meant by 'traditional', i see nothing wrong with a design like that becoming a 4.5 gen fighter

-Composites can be added

-I mean traditional in the sense, it looks like more of F-16 and M2K, offcourse there is roam for improvement. It is more like F-16 A/B than F-16 C/D, may be its just my thinking..

 

[rockstarIN]

Please provide evidence that composites decrease RCS... I did not know that MKI was filled with composites.

I don't think MKI has got composites.

We need to invent an RCS metre.lol

 

[Manticore]

so any aircraft which is not 5th gen -- has a 'traditional' design -- that includes rafale and eurofighter aswell

dsi reduced the frontal rcs by more than 30% in the case of jf17 --- i read it by some good poster in some forum awhile back -- the only other active 'traditional' fighter which has dsi is j10b

composites and ram coating are where the indians always point the deficiency of jft eventhough if the basic structure is good , these 2 options can very easily be incorporated in the next batches , when the design has been 'polished'

 

[Manticore]

some stealthy jf17 / fc20 changes being discussed on different forums

1]
the engines for the Jf-17 are planned to be 100 KN; therefore two engines would give at leat 200 KN

while the WS-15 engiine is planned to be used on the J-XX and have 180 KN per engine

a single engine WS-15 poowered fighter could be ascaled up Stealthy JF-17

if the same technology is applied to the JF-17's engine (engine thrust upgraded to about 120kn) and the JF-17 is made lighter with composites and controlled by the lighter (no hydralyic fluids) quad fly by wire, it could probably supercuise (a 5th gen essential)

gripen 2000 lb (~1 ton) less than the JF-17 and with a 98kn Engine (F414) it can supercruise -- the ability to fly supersonic without the use of afterburner which results in fuel savings and an increase in range.

if more composites were used and the hydralic replaced with a complete quad fly by wire, and the body slightly redesigned to accomidate it, the JF-17 could probably also supercruise (because the Ws-13 is being upgraded to 100kn range)

2]
If the gatling gun is removed from the bottom and moved to the top, and the central pylong is removed, that clears the underside except for the wheels--wheels away from the body, allow the weapons bay to be longer, and allow the stealthy JF-17 to carry 2 SD-10 or Ramjet BVr missiles, and 2 WVR Missiles

if the wheels are shifted forth out to the wings like in the x-32 and f-35

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/4175/f35wheelsbay.jpg


3]
The F-15SE (silent eagle) demonstated a retrofit to a fourth gen design with internal weapons bay; which brought israeli offers to purchase it (demonstrating not only the feasibility but the desire for an in between platform, to compliment not subvert true fifth gen platforms)

---------------------
4]
There is also a possibility that China could have a program for other 5th generation fighters, perhaps to include a medium-weight fighter to compliment its reported heavyweight fighter program. In early 2005 a Chinese industry source told the author that the Chengdu Aircraft Co. was considering a “F-35 like” fighter program. But its compelling feature was that it had one engine, an indication that there may be a medium-weight 5th generation fighter program as well. By mentioning the Lockheed-Martin F-35, there is at least the implication that a potential Chinese medium-weight fighter could be built in multiple versions, to include a short-take off and vertical landing model (STOVL), much like the F-35B.
International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > October Surprises In Chinese Aerospace

5] --DAS

6]
China Aviation Industry Corporation I self-developed, with full independent intellectual property rights of YFC-1E "Xiaolong" stealth all-state aircraft 05 aircraft in its prototype based on the 01.03.04, conducted aerodynamic, structural, and system optimization of the whole The new design, the use of advanced "shell" inlet and dual vertical tail stabilizers innovative technology and application of a number of integrated manufacturing technology, with the most advanced country with high integrated avionics and weapons systems, configure the world's leading The cockpit has a good user interface integrated display device, stealth-type "Fierce Dragon" fighter's overall performance and significantly enhance the comprehensive combat capability.

相对于此前已成功首飞的“枭龙”01架.03架.04架飞机属平台状态的“升级隐身版”，着重于对飞机机体 的研制，主要用于支持试飞、保障飞行安全而言，05架“枭龙”战机达到可实用交付的全状态，完 全可以称之为 “超级隐身完整版”。 The relative success of this first flight before the "Fierce Dragon" 01 .03 .04 aircraft platform is state of the aircraft "upgrade Stealth Edition", focuses on the development of the aircraft body, mainly to support the flight test to ensure flight safety, , 05 "Xiaolong" fighters to be practical delivery of the full state, can call it "super-stealth full edition."

7] gambit--
For reducing the JF-17's RCS, the first thing that must be eliminated is the single vertical stab.A clean F-16 is about one meter square at that distance and this is the unofficial standard. So if there is any attempt to make the JF-17 'stealthy', this is the goal.

8] stealthy designing of external weapons payload

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

some doubts.
if modern bvr combat is all about detecting first and fire the missile and escape.how often will we see bvr fight compared to WVR fight.i guess there is lesser chances for a fighter Jet to escape once a bvr missile locked on..even with 3D TVC.?
if chances of surviving bvr shot is less then the usage of short range missiles and heat seeking missiles will also be less ?

 

[rockstarIN]

so any aircraft which is not 5th gen -- has a 'traditional' design -- that includes rafale and eurofighter aswell

dsi reduced the frontal rcs by more than 30% in the case of jf17 --- i read it by some good poster in some forum awhile back -- the only other active 'traditional' fighter which has dsi is j10b

composites and ram coating are where the indians always point the deficiency of jft eventhough if the basic structure is good , these 2 options can very easily be incorporated in the next batches , when the design has been 'polished'

Debating anything about JFT is like touching some nerves here, i know that.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

some doubts.
if modern bvr combat is all about detecting first and fire the missile and escape.how often will we see bvr fight compared to WVR fight.i guess there is lesser chances for a fighter Jet to escape once a bvr missile locked on..even with 3D TVC.?
if chances of surviving bvr shot is less then the usage of short range missiles and heat seeking missiles will also be less ?

thats the idea of Euro fighter.. fire the BVR and then run away using its super speed.

 

[nightcrawler]

I can't recall perfectly; but those were Russian designs in which an alternative approach to the fitting of missiles under wings was discussed. As you already know about the Russian AWAC killer missiles like Kh-22 & its bulky ship antiship variant with an awesome range of more than 4000km thus those missiles greatly add to RCS value if not carried inside fuselage & be fitted at wing bottoms
However, an alternative way was to cover those missiles in a specially shape box [redesigned from Scifi materials] which will be hinged to the wingtips. Each box [as I say] can carry two of such missiles without relatively increasing RCS value & also not sacrificing payload for RCS benefits.

 

[rockstarIN]

I can't recall perfectly; but those were Russian designs in which an alternative approach to the fitting of missiles under wings was discussed. As you already know about the Russian AWAC killer missiles like Kh-22 & its bulky ship antiship variant with an awesome range of more than 4000km thus those missiles greatly add to RCS value if not carried inside fuselage & be fitted at wing bottoms
However, an alternative way was to cover those missiles in a specially shape box [redesigned from Scifi materials] which will be hinged to the wingtips. Each box [as I say] can carry two of such missiles without relatively increasing RCS value & also not sacrificing payload for RCS benefits.

Who cares about RCS if you can attack a target from as far as 4000km as you said here?

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

Their are three things now.

1 You don't know much or anything thing about JFT.

2 Those guys aren't fan boys.

3 You are definitely trolling.
QUOTE]

Dude can you believe this SR 71 guy??

He is a mechanical engineer, yet he post sh!t like this.

Good thing he is ban for ever!

 

[nightcrawler]

Who cares about RCS if you can attack a target from as far as 4000km as you said here?

Sir by the tone it seems you don't believe me..

Russia has Kh-55SM cruise missiles, with similar to U.S. AGM-129 range of 3000 km, but are able to carry more powerful warhead of 200 kt. They are equipped with a TERCOM system which allows them to cruise at an altitude lower than 110 meters at subsonic speeds while obtaining a CEP accuracy of 15 meters with an Inertial navigation system. They are air-launched from either Tupolev Tu-95s, Tupolev Tu-22Ms, or Tupolev Tu-160s, each able to carry 16 for the Tu-95, 12 for the Tu-160, and 4 for the Tu-22M. A Stealth version of the missile, the Kh-101 is in development. It has similar qualities as the Kh-55, except that it's range has been extended to 5,000 km, equipped with a 1,000 kg conventional warhead, and has stealth features which reduces it's probability of intercept.[4]

Cruise missile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kh-101/102 from Yefim Gordon Book on Russian Air Power

The flight testing of the Kh-101 has already been completed. This missile weighs some 2,200 - 2,400 kg , the weight of warhead is 400 kg. According to press reports, the Kh-101 has a maximum range of 5,000-5,500 Km a variable flight profile at altitudes ranging from 30 - 70m to 6000m , a cruising speed of 190-200 m/s and a maximum speed of 250-270m/s. It can well be classed as a low-observable flying vehicle because the radar cross section of the Kh-101 is 0.01 m2. The missile is equipped with an electro-optical system for correcting the flight trajectory and with a TV guidance system for terminal guidance. This ensures the hitting precision with a deviation of some 12- 20m.

The upgraded Tu-95MS can carry eight Kh-101 missiles on four wing pylons. The same missile will also equip the upgraded Tu-160 which will be able to carry six missiles in each of its two weapons bays total of 12 Kh-101 or 102 missile. The highly accurate guidance system of the Kh-101 and its combined HE/fragmentation/penetrating warhead will enable one modernised Tu-160 to fulfil tasks previously achievable with an entire regiment of bombers. The upgraded version of Tu-22M3 is capable of carrying four Kh-101 missiles or six to eight Kh-SD

 

[rockstarIN]

^^

Those are Air to ground/sea weapons, not A2A, Russian AWACS killer missile is Novator K-100

Novator K-100 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and the range is 200-300 km

Kh-22 is anti ship

 

[Chogy]

Those super long-ranged AA missiles are great in theory, but they need guidance. If launched at 300 km, the horizon may well interrupt a radar track. You can send it on its way with inertial guidance and have it go active for the last 30 km, but that's a lot harder than it sounds... there are great technical difficulties involved.

I can see forces drifting away from a centralized (and vulnerable) AWACS platform and instead using a battlefield digital datalinking methodology - each and every platform contributes its sensor data into a centralized image which is then shared by all. So 20 F-22 and 40 F-35 would cover a region of the sky better than any single AWACS could, and the loss of a single "node" would not degrade the image much.

Toss in surveillance from space as well.

 

[IND151]

its amazing to see that RCS of MIG 29 is so less.