ddint A-12 series have some kind of coating? i think they can make RAM capable of dealing with high speeds
A-12 series used basic RAM (iirc simply iron ball paint). These have to be also rehauled and reapplied.
Putting these on a2a missiles will increase their weight and diminish their performance. Other than that these are a bit expensive but still not that much.but after a flight, one would have to rehaul these missiles again with ram coating which would be a lot of work. Better make internal weapons bay than this
you only fire a missile once though
Irl 99% of the flights, the missiles are brought back. Air to air combat is rare these days
Yeah, that was it. Hexaferrite for actual measured/known RAM, and better ones in the ‘may exist’ territory. IIRC he also considered honeycomb structured RAS on his KF21 simulation.
Also yes, when the numbers are given it’s for the final product or a simulated prediction, but even if we give an overall -20db all around, it would still not fall at the -40db for the overall frontal arc, as the sub -20db are very localized.
I mean, technically even we as common ppl have access to crazy RAM/RAS that is capable of reducing more than that, but they fall within the category of stuff that you can’t coat a plane with (pyramid RAM, Salisbury screens, etc.).
For the carbon nanotube stuff, it was back in JSF times.
1 Like
how exactly do you bring back a missile that has slammed into the ground or its targets?
You go for patrol
99% of time you don’t see enemy
You came back home with corroded ram which has to be rehauled
And if you use the f35 grade ram on missiles, the missiles may end up costing more than the target.
what if they limit it to internal carry on stealth aircraft to further leverage its stealthiness, and keep the RAM safe
What’s the point then, argument was about external carriage of weapons with RAM for stealth
Let’s assume it anyways. It would most likely increase they weight and hence reduce its performance. Usage of structural RAM will also increase drag. Stealth for a2a missiles isn’t really needed. The range at which PD MAWS work is short enough that stealth is negligible. Other than that RAM can’t be put on radomes, otherwise they will also reduce the signal which the radar recieves
Yeah I was a bit confused when you were applying more -10dbsm to the bird like rcs (-15 to -25dbsm iirc).
I absolutely do not believe that f22 rcs is -40dbsm average frontally, far from it. This is a educated guess but it likely sits at -20 to -25dbsm. It may reach those -40dbsm values but those are minimum at very small angles that it practically doesn’t matter in combat, that too at untold frequency values.
Regarding the document, as you said it is for frontal, we still don’t know the frequency, considering how many random values are given by officials linking it too almost every thing possible in a kids encyclopedia, I don’t think it’s fair to assume it’s for X band, but still it is something to note, and that it’s absolutely not -40dbsm average.
Mind if I use these texts for a post, and the file you gave before? (I will credit your :D)
2 Likes
I don’t 100% remember what the discussion was about but I think the other guy claimed that China got earlier/ worse versions of the Irbis-E in their Su35s
1 Like
Naturally, China received the export version of the Irbis, it is worse in performance.
Would you happen to know how it is worse, specifically? Like what is worse on it?
2 Likes
I won’t say what exactly is worse in it.
There is no differential model for export of the N035… It’s exported as-is.
no one will export the radar as it is
They even have different indexes
Unless it’s a MiG-29 9-41 / 9-47, or in technicality an Su-30MK2 (which is hilariously better than the M2)
Such as? Both are an N035, both share the Irbis-E name. Unless you can mystically pull up a never-before-seen designation relegated to Chinese export models…
And how is it better?
N035 and N135
but are they different in their performance?
or are they the same in that regard
ECCM.
The N135 doesn’t exist. I’m sorry to say, but you fell for another Pankov myth of relevancy.