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.
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)
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
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…
