It's wreckage of their Mirage-V arguably shot down by our Su-30MKI using Astra MK1(my guess).
Air Engagement of Operation Sindoor : Analysis
- Thread starter Parthu
- Start date
No.
And what do mean "all aspect" rcs?
There's no one "all aspect" rcs, it depends on what angles of aircraft are being exposed to radar waves and how many waves are returning back and being received.
The rcs I quoted Is for general idea of stealth/radar cross section from frontal aspect from -60° to +60° arc. Clean jets.
F16 blk50/52 normal:- 3-5m2.
New F16 models made up of composites with rcs reduction derived from have glass program:- 1-1.5m2.
Rafale:- 0.5-1m2.
Super hornet:- 0.1-0.3m2( has pretty Planform alignment for a non stealth jet).
At the same time there will be some optimal angles where rcs goes below these range and some angle that produce spike in rcs where rcs goes above these ranges.
The rcs you quoted, can only be achieved when stealth jet level RAM&RAS materials are used, which would be lot more expensive, lot more maintinence, lot less availability, and still carrying external weapons so benifit is minimal.
Dude, you're not aware of my post history here. I don't talk about things which I've no idea of. Here you can see a RCS simulation of F-16 with 1980s tech Have Glass RAP:
As you can see here, from 30° to 60° in azimuth, F-16 has 0.1m2 value against 10GHz frequency(10 GHz). Just think about its mean and median RCS value with Have Glass 5 paint
30° to 60° azimuth is not "frontal aspect"
According to the diagram, that 30°to 60° rcs is optimal angle, optical angluar range for rcs of f16 more so.
From 345° to 0°or 0°to 15°( frontal aspect) it's rcs is between 1-10+m2 according to this diagram.
Mean value would be more than 5.5m2 here.
As we can see from above post you just did.
I doubt you could find one post of mine, telling Rajput how clever he is. However he knows a lot more than you
It doesn't take much of an effort to google the current F-16 RCS
I don't get excited about any 4.5 gen aircraft's RCS. Although the Super Hornet is the smallest and the Rafale is the largest. As soon as you add tanks, bombs and pods, it all goes to
for all of themI saw they are rolling out a new EW
Viper Shield EW Suite Flies on F-16 for the First Time
The first flight of the new AN/ALQ-254(V)1 Viper All-Digital Shield Electronic Warfare suite was performed on an F-16C Block 70 of the Royal Bahraini Air
theaviationist.com
Last edited:
Knows Lot more wrong things too, just like you do.
He can't even conclude right info from a graph.
If rafale really had clean frontal rcs of 0.06-0.1m2, french would be building stealth pods to carry light payload in air superiority mode or to carry aasm hammer in them For sead, and would not be practicing making rafale fly low to get close.
Ah yes, "Google" harbinger of truth.
Fu*kin Retard
Nasty little piece of work, aren't you, You get very upset when you are shown to be wrong. All of us have public source. No one here has clearance to the actual numbers. If anyone does, they can't say, So it's back to public source
Once agan you're wrong. Rafale does have clean frontal (45° left-right azimuth) RCS of 0.06m2-0.1m2(in X-band). @Picdelamirand-oil has already explained why Ftench didn't design external pods for it. Rather than passing your opinion as fact, maybe you should consult someone who was part of Dassault/Rafale design team.
Humility goes a long way my friend, always argue hard but with an open mind and a gentle tone
It's RCS data of F-16 with1980s Have Glass paint. The current one brings down RCS by an order of magitude down compared to that. So you can figure it out. Frontal aspect covers 45° azimuth on both sides. Even fixed AESA radars can look 60° azimuth on both sides. Do you call them side looking radars? Nope. Only if they have a swashplate or a cheek mounted array that can look beyond 90° from the nose, then they can be considered side-looking ones.
Anyways, like I said in our Su-57 discussion, let's agree to disagree.
Last edited:
And how have you shown me to be wrong?
What fact did you provide? Your here just claiming things.
Once agan you're wrong. Rafale does have clean frontal (45° left-right azimuth) RCS of 0.06m2-0.1m2(in X-band). @Picdelamirand-oil has already explained why Ftench didn't design external pods for it. Rather than passing your opinion as fact, maybe you should consult someone who was part of Dassault/Rafale design team.
Humility goes a long way my friend, always argue hard but with an open mind and a gentle tone
It's RCS data of F-16 with1980s Have Glass paint. The current one brings down RCS by an order of magitude down compared to that. So you can figure it out. Frontal aspect covers 45° azimuth on both sides. Even fixed AESA radars can look 60° azimuth on both sides. Do you call them side looking radars? Nope. Only if they have a swashplate or a cheek mounted array that can look beyond 90° from the nose, then they can be considered side-looking ones.
Anyways, like I said in our Su-57 discussion, let's agree to disagree.
Same can be said about your opinion here.
There's no mention in the chart, about any coating .
Oh, alright let's go by that, infact I was ignoring that at centre the rcs peak was not 10m2, but lot higher.
At 0° rcs seems peak, seems to been in middle of 10m2 and 100m2 ring, middle value would be 55m2 in this case.
Let's take whole frontal aspect of 180°, from 0° to 90° on both sides.
At 0° 55m2, at 10° its 10m2, at 15° 1m2, at 20° 0.7m2, at 30° 0.1m2, from 40- 45° 0.01m2 according to chart, but at 40° there Is a sharp spike of ~7m2, at 50° 0.5m2, at 60° 0.7m2, at 65° 1m2, at 70° 5m2, at 75° 10m2, at 85° 100m2, at 90° sharp peak rises to 1000m2.
Now, put these no. In AI and
" How Big It Would Look on a ground based Radar viewing it from front, covering 180° frontal arc (0° to 90° on both sides), Considering All Factors & data provided :
This object's radar signature is now dominated by its extremely high peaks, meaning it would generally appear quite large on radar, despite having specific angles of low observability.
* Its Overall Average Visibility:
On average, across the entire 180^\circ frontal-to-broadside arc, the object would "look" on radar like a large passenger car, a small truck."
Based on general figures for radar cross section (RCS), the RCS number associated with a passenger car typically ranges from approximately 1m2 to 10m2.
More narrow range would be 3-5m2.
Doesn't look better than "su30mki and it's rcs of a bus".
The super hornets have the lowest RCS out of all the teens
Another AI.
Even though the jet is stealthy from some angles, the overall radar visibility (when scanned over the whole 180° arc) is:
> Like a car or truck when head-on, briefly like a bird, but then flaring up to a large truck or passenger aircraft from the sides.
If the aircraft maneuvers or banks, or the radar gets a look at it from ~75° to 90°, it will light up like a Christmas tree, showing a massive radar return,
Another AI.
" A high-power X-band ground radar 100 km away would see this fighter as a small, low-observable target, roughly the radar equivalent of a small car most of the time. However, brief angular exposures or movements could momentarily make it appear as large as a jetliner, due to the sharp RCS spike at side aspect (90°). Stealth works best only when the aircraft maintains strict angular discipline."
Public source.
Have Glass: Making the F-16 less observable
You can’t turn an F-16 into a stealth fighter, it will always show up on enemy radar, but by reducing its radar signature, you can make it a lot less visible. We explain how the USAF has set about
This original Have Glass I/II phase was estimated to reduce the RCS of an F-16 by about 15%(
), but more was to come. Since 2012 (and possibly a little before), USAF F-16s have started to receive a new, single-tone, dark-gray color scheme, similar to that applied to the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. The new, single-color paint scheme marks a departure from the two-tone gray scheme long associated with the F-16, and the new ferromagnetic paint, which can absorb radar energy, may be more robust and less prone to deterioration than the previous Have Glass I/II paint. Some Have Glass V aircraft may appear to have a different colored nose.But while there are clear similarities with the F-35 color scheme, Have Glass V is not an attempt to match the F-35’s low-observability characteristics – which would be impossible without a ground-up redesign. It will, however, deliver a significant boost to the F-16’s survivability and operational capability, and it promises to deliver a performance advantage over competing fighter aircraft, with several reports suggesting that a Have Glass V F-16 will, on average, have a 1.2m²(
) radar cross section, compared with about 5m²( seems to match the data from the chart, it seems the data is infact not of a ram treated f16, but general rcs of f16 based on its shape) for an ‘untreated’ F-16, straight off the line." So according to this " public source " The have glass V f16's have clean frontal rcs of 1-1.5m2, reduced from 3-5m2 of untreated f16s.
Sweetie's banned ? No wonder I didn't see any posts recently. Must've been on account of love expressed for us Indians.
All Chinese online are Wumaos , pops. Who wants their propaganda here when all we've to do is visit any SM & check the comments section on any Indian achievement or short comings.
Precisely. Why would you want them spamming weibo content on the forum when all you need to do is head over to tik tok or X? They are ahead of everybody in everything as per the Chicoms. If the Aussie needs his dosage of 'advanced' 'cutting edge' chinese weapons/aircrafts, he can head on over to Pakistani forums. The Pakistanis simp harder for the chinese weapons than chicoms themselves.
Theoretically, 2700 TR module may offer 2.5% performance improvement over 2400 TR module AESA. Not much difference.
The best attribute of AMCA will be extensive use of AI. So many things will be automated.
Far far less in the Rafale case. The guy in charge of Rafale, Guy Revellin Falcoz, spoke of " a sparrow RCS from front".