And that would probably be with the old M-Captor radar. Germany is upgrading to the Captor Mk1, and the UK is getting mk2 which is even more advanced.
2 Likes
low observable technology or “stealth” is not cheaper to produce, nor will it ever catch up or match the pace at which radiolocation/detection technology is moving.
Higher resolution, greater tracking ranges and higher frequency agility as well as data processing and electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) for protection will continue to upgrade and advance in ground-based radars while “stealth” technologies such as RAM will eventually reach a dead end. There is only so many elements that can be applied to the surface of an aircraft.
RAM only works well at a specific radar frequency (i.e. for a specific radar) but not necessarily for all frequencies. Advanced radars have the ability to manipulate multiple frequencies at once and quite literally bend them with the processing/filtering power to generate data to detect and track any flying objects. Stealth will eventually reach a dead end unless some sort of other revolutionary technology emerges such as plasma fields.
Negative. The reason you are seeing less “flight performance” is because the F-35 is not an air superiority/air dominance fighter. The F-35 is limited on flight performance because 1) Its not assigned for the air superiority/dominance role. 2) The RAM that is applied is of a cheaper quality to that of the F-22 and easily degrades at high Mach numbers. Therefore, the jet is capped at Mach 1.6
The “primary feature” of the J-20 is not that its stealth.
The Chinese did not prioritize stealth in the J-20. If that were the case the Chinese would have never given it gigantic canards which greatly increases RCS and would have removed the canopy bow. The J-20 is an air superiority fighter that was designed to have a large missile payload and combat radius for air dominance missions over the South China Sea. Having low observability technology is nothing more than a standard of 5th generation fighters but not its “primary design feature”.
Air Dominance is the primary feature and that is why the Chinese sacrificed several “stealth” features for high agility and high thrust to weight.
6 Likes
My man is back on the fields.
Welcome home.
2 Likes
Sry to bring this up again so late but obsolete is the wrong word to use here.
Additionally comparing Mirage 2000 to Mirage III because it looks similar is just as reasonable as comparing other delta wing configuration aircraft or delta canard configured aircraft with each other.
Us laymen doing such comparisons is extremely flawed anyway.
1 Like
It wouldn’t surprise me if they have made the flares useless by doing this. I like that they included a source.
1 Like
Well, they’re doing SOMETHING at least.
Hey, if it’s accurate I’m not complaining really… Was there a bug report for this? I find it odd that they’d use 8 flares for each pop IRL? seems excessive? Of course they use different CM systems too, but still
After this change F15 now has more pops of flares than the Gripen
1 Like
Appears to be a balance decision, but I haven’t read into it at all.
British tax mate
6 Likes
Actually I just realised I’m using flares reinforced, if you just use single flare it’s 4 flares per pop, nonetheless it’s consumption is doubled
1 Like
If it deploys from all rails equally that would make sense in my opinion. They should really fix the BOL rails to not deploy until the missile is off the rail, though.
Come check out this thread:
3 Likes
Essentially BOL “Flares” are actually clouds of pyrophoric material. Think chaff that burns. So the intensity nerf is a maybe. But it should have come with other changes to make it realistic. just nerfing intensity is a nerf, plain and simple
1 Like
Have you got a source for that? I have read a lot of things about BOL and have not seen anything suggesting chaff cannot be deployed while the missile is still on the rail.
1 Like
Of course he doesn’t.
Could you imagine them designing a countermeasure system that requires you to dump your weapons to use them.
7 Likes
I dont think its historical even in that Gripen E and C video by Saab a few weeks ago each release a singular countermeasure at a time.
If you used reinforced before then just use regular and itll be the same for you :p
1 Like
That might be the gripens built in CM though and not the BOL pod
2 Likes
In fact didn’t they have issues with the last packet just falling out on take off?