Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

[wangrong]

 

[SBD-3]

dont worry su-30 blips on pakistans border radars will become a common thing now as they will be placed near the western border ...Bet tHose guys at PAF will be thinking of clearing IOC right now ,not facing flankers LOL

lets they dont bilp on SAMs

 

[Haanzo]

The RCS of the flankers cannot be reduced

LOL if your sam systems have decent radars MKIs certainly will be painted ( you understand whats painted right ;-)

 

[Sapper]

LOL if your sam systems have decent radars MKIs certainly will be painted ( you understand whats painted right ;-)

I am confused ... do you intend to say that Su30 is difficult to detect using radar ???

 

[Haanzo]

^^ no dude im just trying to have a laugh here, i dont wana talk in a way that my words have two meanings LOL----you should remember one thing radar systems always grow faster than aircraft tech ---look at russian l-band stealth killing radars so understand that ---i was just trying to have a laugh (i dont wanna say i was making fun of those radars )

 

[gambit]

^^ no dude im just trying to have a laugh here, i dont wana talk in a way that my words have two meanings LOL----you should remember one thing radar systems always grow faster than aircraft tech ---look at russian l-band stealth killing radars so understand that ---i was just trying to have a laugh (i dont wanna say i was making fun of those radars )

Give me a break...The Russians are at least one generation behind US, in BOTH aviation and radar technology.

 

[Haanzo]

i never said russian aircrafts or radars are superior than americans please point out that in my previous post ...have you herd anything called sarcasm

 

[Storm Force]

Nice picture of thunder

[

 

[PakShaheen79]

I think Flankers have reached their limit in upgradation in MKI program. I don't think any serious upgrades other than radars and Engines, like Stealth, internal weapon bay etc.

 

[AVIAN]

I think Flankers have reached their limit in upgradation in MKI program. I don't think any serious upgrades other than radars and Engines, like Stealth, internal weapon bay etc.

Stealth and Internal weapon bay, how can you even think of incoroporating such features in non-stealth aircraft, such features are reserved for PAK-FA. Regarding limits of flanker upgradation, this is incorrect idea, still it can house AESA in place of its Current PESA, next generation avionics, Air-to-Air Missiles, Air to ground weaponery.

 

[PakShaheen79]

Stealth and Internal weapon bay, how can you even think of incoroporating such features in non-stealth aircraft, such features are reserved for PAK-FA. Regarding limits of flanker upgradation, this is incorrect idea, still it can house AESA in place of its Current PESA, next generation avionics, Air-to-Air Missiles, Air to ground weaponery.

I said except radar and engine. Next generation avionics?? What is these?

 

[MZUBAIR]

JF-17 destroying IAF

 

[gambit]

Stealth and Internal weapon bay, how can you even think of incoroporating such features in non-stealth aircraft, such features are reserved for PAK-FA. Regarding limits of flanker upgradation, this is incorrect idea, still it can house AESA in place of its Current PESA, next generation avionics, Air-to-Air Missiles, Air to ground weaponery.

Very possible and Boeing did it with the F-15 Silent Eagle. In order to understand HOW is it possible, all we have to do is go back to the basics -- of a radar signal's behavior on surface...

Do not mind the antennas, they are of a separate issue. But focus on the behaviors of a signal on the right side of the images. Both behaviors (above) increases a body's overall averaged RCS value. Where the vertical stab meet the fuselage is a 'corner reflector'. So Boeing slightly angled the F-15SE's twin vertical stabs. But nothing can be done for any single stab aircraft. In fact, when General Dynamics was in competition for the current 'stealth' fighter contract, their design was so aerodynamically poor that they had to resort to a single vertical stab body and GD effectively eliminated itself from the competition. That left Lockheed's YF-22 and Northrop's YF-23 with the YF-23 had no vertical stab at all.

Pylons attached to the wings are electronically GINORMOUS corner reflectors. When pylons are attached with ordnance, fuel tanks or assorted peripherals, each assembly become even greater electronic beacons. Where the cockpit canopy meet the fuselage, the gap created by these two items can become corner reflectors. That is why we see sawtooth patterns on the F-117 and others. Same for weapons bay doors. Same for landing gear bay doors.

So by covering up missiles and bombs, and Boeing did it by converting conformal fuel tanks into weapons bay. Boeing eliminated a lot of corner reflectors from the aircraft. Any corner reflectors remaining belongs to the aircraft itself and may be sometime in the future some more may be eliminated by some creative modifications that does not adversely affect flight characteristics. Remember how an Israeli F-15 that in a mid-air collision that sheared off its right wing and the pilot managed a landing? That is robust extraordinaire. So it is very possible that Boeing can eliminate some more corner reflectors to make the F-15 even more low observable. We simply do not know at this time.

Internalizing weapons does not necessarily mean putting them inside the body. As far as us EW specialists goes, covering them up with some curvy features is just as good. Now whether those coverings are aerodynamically stable or not is up to the 'windy' gents over at the 'big fan' facility.

 

[gogbot]

Very possible and Boeing did it with the F-15 Silent Eagle. In order to understand HOW is it possible, all we have to do is go back to the basics -- of a radar signal's behavior on surface...

Do not mind the antennas, they are of a separate issue. But focus on the behaviors of a signal on the right side of the images. Both behaviors (above) increases a body's overall averaged RCS value. Where the vertical stab meet the fuselage is a 'corner reflector'. So Boeing slightly angled the F-15SE's twin vertical stabs. But nothing can be done for any single stab aircraft. In fact, when General Dynamics was in competition for the current 'stealth' fighter contract, their design was so aerodynamically poor that they had to resort to a single vertical stab body and GD effectively eliminated itself from the competition. That left Lockheed's YF-22 and Northrop's YF-23 with the YF-23 had no vertical stab at all.

Pylons attached to the wings are electronically GINORMOUS corner reflectors. When pylons are attached with ordnance, fuel tanks or assorted peripherals, each assembly become even greater electronic beacons. Where the cockpit canopy meet the fuselage, the gap created by these two items can become corner reflectors. That is why we see sawtooth patterns on the F-117 and others. Same for weapons bay doors. Same for landing gear bay doors.

So by covering up missiles and bombs, and Boeing did it by converting conformal fuel tanks into weapons bay. Boeing eliminated a lot of corner reflectors from the aircraft. Any corner reflectors remaining belongs to the aircraft itself and may be sometime in the future some more may be eliminated by some creative modifications that does not adversely affect flight characteristics. Remember how an Israeli F-15 that in a mid-air collision that sheared off its right wing and the pilot managed a landing? That is robust extraordinaire. So it is very possible that Boeing can eliminate some more corner reflectors to make the F-15 even more low observable. We simply do not know at this time.

Internalizing weapons does not necessarily mean putting them inside the body. As far as us EW specialists goes, covering them up with some curvy features is just as good. Now whether those coverings are aerodynamically stable or not is up to the 'windy' gents over at the 'big fan' facility.

Plausible but there are limits considering the design limitations.
So it would never be a true stealth fighter.
but an added bonus no doubt if facing similar aircraft.

 

[gambit]

Plausible but there are limits considering the design limitations.
So it would never be a true stealth fighter.
but an added bonus no doubt if facing similar aircraft.

There is no such thing as a 'true stealth fighter'. There are no accepted official criterias that said so-and-so RCS value would make a design a 'stealth' aircraft. The correct term is 'low observability'. However, the unofficial accepted standard, as far as RCS goes, would be the F-16 threshold. Below the F-16 and an aircraft begins to intrude into the low observability region where radar operators begins to get nervous.