Do you actually understand the technology? Do you have any basic grasp of physics? A 30%+ thrust degradation on the WS-10 between 6 and 9 km—do you seriously think that is possible? With thrust degradation of more than 30% in that altitude band, who would dare release such an engine from the factory? If you were talking about 30% degradation at 18,000/20,000 m, that would be understandable, but degradation that severe at 6–9 km would mean the entire team at the 618th Institute should be lined up and shot. This is a variable intake, and at high altitude it is continuously ram-compressing—which engine has such a high ram pressure ratio? Are we no longer observing even this level of basic physics? Also, do you think it is reasonable for the evidence you require to come from at least three sources? If I were to submit evidence, would I have to find three or four retired people from the factory, have them write memoirs, and then submit those as evidence? Am I supposed to bring in those retired comrades from the factory, have each of them write a memoir, publish them, and then pretend this is classified military secrets? You also want training manuals and technical manuals—who other than someone mentally deficient would leak such things? You still refuse to acknowledge material that clearly came out of a think tank—my God! First of all, tell me why the WS-10 would be continuously ram-compressing at high altitude. And as for that RWR, if the skin is made into smart skin with circuitry underneath, tell me why it cannot achieve all-aspect, no-blind-zone warning. That wretched Rafale has only three sensors and relies entirely on microarrays, yet its detection range is somehow made out to be 100 km—my God, the laws of physics no longer exist. With that wretched engine’s power supply capability, you are telling physics jokes. The F-15EX already has official images showing quad-carriage racks—where is the actual item? And for the Leopard 2A8, you calculated full-vehicle weight including the full survivability suite and the remote weapon station—so why add the weight without adding the components? If you do not want to provide the components, then subtract the weight back. If you do not understand the technology, you can bring in people who do. What has been produced now is obviously the work of a group with no technical understanding at all. Anyone who has even read a book on aeroengine principles could not make such elementary mistakes. Previously, there were even issues where a J-10S was misidentified as a J-10C, and then that was used as evidence for rebuttal—do you think a conventional inlet stiffened with ribs and a DSI inlet can possibly be the same? If I casually brought over any retired comrade living in the family housing compound to look at what you have done, he would laugh for quite a while before even saying anything.
I give this rant a weak 2.0 for being a TLDR wall of text an’t nobody got time for.
What else can be done? Otherwise, may I respectfully ask you to take a look? I am sincerely requesting you, if you are willing.You have seen so many issues, yet you do not step forward to refute them. You criticize me for writing so many words; what do you consider your behavior to be?
I ain’t readin allat
Good for you bro
Or sorry that happened
The production team has no understanding of these matters at all. Every point I have raised is obvious; anyone with a basic grasp of technical knowledge can see that it is wrong. I do not understand why outsiders are being allowed to direct professionals.
There is also the most classic issue with the Kh-38MT. Putting aside whether this thing actually exists, just from a technical perspective, can you tell me how that piece of junk manages to keep the infrared seeker cooled at Mach 2.2? See if you can just burn it through directly.